Yesterday’s London Evening Standard had David Miliband as clearly ahead in all senses in the Labour leadership contest. As a member of the Labour Party, and well aware that if he wins, he is likely to win the next election if the Coalition become as unpopular as feared, I am genuinely worried that David Miliband’s reputation has been overinflated. I have found him far from impressive in live hustings, and in fact found his answers rather uninspiring, flat and synthetic.
In his favour, he voted strongly for equal gay rights. That I applaud, but I think we have to make some unpleasant priorities over judgments of people’s voting record. For example, I have had people brand Andy Burnham as anti-gay on account of his strong Catholic conscience. I happen to believe with him firmly on regulation of online media, mental illness and the criminal justice system, and his criticisms of the proposed reforms in the NHS.
There are specific aspects in David Miliband’s voting record that I have problems with. For example, he voted strongly for introducing ID cards. The issue of iD cards, for which Jacqui Smith became the lightning conductor, was one of the many reasons why we lost the General Election. For David Miliband’s information, we did not simply because of ‘lack of connection’ and ‘lost opportunities’ under Gordon Brown. I note that Tony Blair has not been in a rush to indorse David Miliband, knowing that this will be the ‘kiss of death’ for some members of the Labour Party, like me.
David Miliband’s performance at the Foreign Office continues to concern me. For example, he voted very strongly for the Iraq war. OK, each to their own, but, most alarmingly, He voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war. I find is a real problem. For example, Tony Blair’s evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry that toppling Saddam Hussein helped make Britain safe from terrorists was dramatically undermined by the former head of MI5 yesterday. Giving evidence to the same inquiry, Lady Eliza Manningham-Buller revealed that there was such a surge of warnings of home-grown terrorist threats after the invasion of Iraq that MI5 asked for – and got – a 100 per cent increase in its budget. Lady Manningham-Buller, who was director general of MI5 in 2002-07, told the Chilcot panel that MI5 started receiving a “substantially” higher volume of reports that young British Muslims being drawn to al-Qa’ida.
Furthermore, David Cameron’s current visit to Washington is indeed living proof that the Meghari issue is still a problem. David Cameron has in the past called for an independent inquiry into the release of the Lockerbie bomber following claims that the Libyans were told that Gordon Brown did not want Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to die in jail. It is alleged that documents released on the Megrahi affair state that the Foreign Office minister Bill Rammell had told the Libyans early this year that neither Brown nor foreign secretary David Miliband “would want Mr Megrahi to pass away in prison”. The disclosure worryingly appeared to confirm suspicions that the prime minister has not commented on the controversial compassionate release of Megrahi on 20 August because he privately agrees with the Scottish government’s decision.
It only goes from bad to worse. Lord Neuberger MR, head of the judiciary and an extremely well-respected judge, went to my school. However, I have conflict of interest. Britain’s top three judges have provided that MI5 officers have a ‘dubious record when it comes to human rights and coercive techniques’. In issuing the judgment by Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, it has been alleged the Appeal Court faced down an unprecedented ‘bullying’ campaign by the Home and Foreign Secretaries demanding that the allegation be withdrawn. In their defence, Alan Johnson and David Miliband have dismissed as ‘ludicrous lies’ suggestions that MI5 had a ‘culture of suppression’ over torture.
It has struck me latterly that I do not really know what David Miliband ‘stands’ for on home affairs. One of the only nuggets of information that I have is that he voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals. Foundation hospitals such as Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust? I do not want the next PM to be a ‘single issue politician’, but this criticism can be made equally of Andy Burnham, Ed Balls or Ed Milibamd, if one so wants. However, the issue of Foundation Trusts is not one I would wish Labour to defend to the hilt. To remind you, Stafford had unqualified receptionists being allowed to carry out initial checks of patients in A&E, and staff at the emergency assessment unit switching off heart monitors which they did not properly understand how to use. Furtherrmore, In an attempt to meet the target four-hour A&E waiting time, patients were sometimes “dumped” in a ward without nursing care, an insufficient number of nurses at the hospital, the trust’s management took part in no routine discussion on quality of care.
I would like my colleagues to justify why David Miliband is such a ‘clear frontrunner’ in light of all this baggage we will taking to the 2015 election, or possibly before.
