The defeated brother delivers a winning speech
Peter Hoskin 11:32am
David Miliband's address to the Labour conference ended as it began: with a
standing ovation. Sentimentality and sympathy, perhaps – but it was also deserved. This was a speech that his younger sibling will be hard pressed to match tomorrow. Indeed, I doubt even
MiliD has matched it himself before now
It began, of course, with an attempt to massage out the tensions of the past few days. There were some gags about how Miliband had draft speeches for Saturday and Tuesday on his computer - "so I've got a couple of speeches to draw on." And he implored Labour to unite behind his brother – "we have a great new leader and we've got to get behind him." He added, by way of a fraternal backslap, "I'm incredibly proud of my brother". So far, so smooth.
From there, though, Miliband segued into what was the most impressive part of the speech. "We need to come out of this conference united," he said, "and nowhere is that more important than in the war in Afghanistan." What followed was an impassioned tribute to our troops, and a full-throated defence of their operation against the Taleban. "We are not an occupying army, we are trying to prevent an occupation," he added, before calling for a "political settlement" to the crisis.
There was even a dash of cross-party bonhomie, as Miliband said of David Cameron, "when he takes risks for peace, we will be the first to congratulate him every step of the way."
Miliband did weave some dividing lines, though; the most significant of which was his call for a more humanitarian foreign policy. This was a two-step shuffle: first, it involved caricaturing the coalition's policy as one focussed only on trade, and then it demanded more vocal action in places such as Burma, Sri Lanka and the Middle East. Miliband's definition for this was "hardheaded internationalism". It delivered, he claimed, the independent Republic of Kosovo in place of "slaughter" in Eastern Europe.
Then, to the conclusion, where the cuttings from his leadership speech made their most prominent appearance. He quoted J.R. Clynes to the effect that, "we come into politics not to practice class war, but to end it." Yes, this was a speech designed to draw a line under Labour's own internal war. But it may have left the audience wishing that this Miliband brother – or, indeed, this hitherto unseen version of David Miliband – had been elected party leader.
Previous
Tim W
September 27th, 2010 11:40am Report this commentI still can't understand why they didn't pick him. After watching the Lib Dem conference last week I was surprised how daft Lib Dem members are. This week Labour have proved even crazier. I just hope the Tories don't follow with some protests over Europe etc.
Frank P
September 27th, 2010 11:47am Report this commentTransparent cant and crap, to boot!
se1man
September 27th, 2010 11:51am Report this commentThere must have been an outbreak of buyer's remorse in the conference hall, but then again, Labour Party members & MPs in the hall actually voted for David rather than Ed.
Chuck Unsworth
September 27th, 2010 11:55am Report this commentDisingenuous position from Miliband. Has anyone actually said that our Foreign Policy is not to give aid? What everyone ought to understand is that UK plc is not a bleeding charity. We should give aid only where it is entirely in our national interests. Why should the taxpayers' cash be given to the despotic dictators in Africa and elsewhere?
Rescomania
September 27th, 2010 11:56am Report this commentTranslation: "Yes, I will accept the Shadow Foreign Secretary's job if offered".
victor jara 67
September 27th, 2010 12:11pm Report this commentIn response to Tim W
They did not pick him becuase he was an apologist for the Iraq debacle and up to his neck in collusion with the US over torture.
I see he is still pedalling the fiction about Afganistan being a noble enterprise rather than the futile bloody colonial crusade that it is.
David Bouvier
September 27th, 2010 12:26pm Report this commentNo victor jara 67 - they didn't pick him because he was the only candidate who maintained a sustainable party line rather than kow-tow to the unions on ignoring the deficit and pretending we can keep on spending on the public sector.
Which is why union members, in denial and scared of losing their public-sector jobs voted for others.
The MPs and Activists knew what was necessary, but they gave the swing-vote to a narrow sectional interest. They will reap the whirlwind.
lescam
September 27th, 2010 12:28pm Report this commentFull marks to DMili for putting such a brave face on things. He must be a good actor, because he must be feeling absolutely wretched at the moment, but doesn't allow it to show. I really feel for him, it is bad enough losing, without the necessity to pretend to the world that you don't really care.
Will J
September 27th, 2010 12:36pm Report this commentTHEY DID PICK HIM! It was the unions which rejected him.
Chris lancashire
September 27th, 2010 1:03pm Report this commentSo the bloke who was Foreign Secretary five short months ago now wants "more vocal action on Burma, Sri Lanka and the Middle East". Er, what was he doing?
The Cat in the Hat
September 27th, 2010 1:32pm Report this commentMy dear Edward, just look what you’ve done?
It’s as though I’ve been shot with a gun
I was fated to lead
But you succumbed to your greed
And forgot you’re the youngest son.
The future would all have been mine
Everything was going so fine.
But you had to step in
And go on to win
And all I can do now is pine.
Don’t think though that this is the end
Of my quest for real power, my old friend
One day I’ll be back
When they’ve knocked you off track
And I WILL BE BRITAIN’S PM
Tiberius
September 27th, 2010 5:02pm Report this commentDoes anyone remember the salivating media when Portillo was knocked out of the 2001 Tory leadership contest by one MP's vote?
Why is there no equivalence here, with one brother stuffing the other with the luddite vote, and by only 1.2%?
victor jara 67
September 27th, 2010 5:28pm Report this commentIn response to D Bouvier.
As opposed to David kow towing to the Murdoch and news international corps who were backing him like his buddy Tony.
Incidently the Unions are made up of working people who had an individual vote who backed Ed by a fair majority.
Ed will not ignore the defecit. He just does not think the poor should have to bear the brunt of the cuts unlike the conservatives
JS
September 28th, 2010 12:00am Report this commentYou got that right, Cat in the hat!
Back to top