Make or Break for Labour

The former government have a new leader: will he be the icon that they need? Olly Smith looks at what the future holds for the Labour Party.

Last year I described Ed Miliband as the brother with “less experience”, however he has now quickly overtaken his older brother in the party hierarchy. David Miliband’s younger, ‘geeky’ brother has beaten him to the lead role in the Labour party following a hard fought leadership campaign, one of the closest ever in a party leadership contest.
But who is “the other Miliband” and what are the views of this political figure who constantly played second place behind his more popular and successful brother?
Ed entered the Labour party as a researcher and speechwriter for Harriet Harmen and subsequently Gordon Brown in 1994, gaining the branding of a ‘Brownite’. Whereas his brother entered the party as Tony Blair’s head of policy, a ‘Blairite’ if you like. This divide placed the two brothers on the opposing sides of what would become one of politics biggest soap-operas over the next decade. However these turf-wars helped develop Ed as a skilled diplomat, earning him praise in the ways in which he defused rows between the Treasury and Downing Street.
Eventually Ed made it to the cabinet under Gordon Brown’s short premiership eventually taking the position of Secretary of State for the Department of Energy and Climate Change in 2008. In this role Ed developed a green following as he pushed for an almost radical stance on environmental policy, promising an 80% reduction in greenhouse gases and opposing a third runway at Heathrow.
And then came the leadership contest: the main pillars of Ed’s campaign revolved around the idea of a ‘living wage’ of more than £7 an hour, higher than the minimum wage of £5.85 an hour. Scrapping tuition fees to make university more affordable and available, but replacing them with a graduate tax, developing further environmental policies and protecting civil liberties. Because of his seemingly centre-left leadership promises many of the tabloid press has nick-named him ‘Red Ed’ and political commentators warning of a “lurch to the left” which Ed rejected in his first speech as the new Labour Party leader.
With the press favouring David Miliband as the front runner in the leadership struggle Ed’s chances looked slim, however after managing to secure the backing of the three biggest trade unions (GMB, Unison and Unite) and their voting members he just managed to beat his brother in the final round of voting.
So what does this mean for Politics and the Labour Party in general?
Whilst David Miliband’s leadership would probably have meant a continuation of New Labour, the Labour Party’s future under Ed Miliband is far less certain. All indications suggest that he will take it more towards the center-left than it was previously, this is probably the reason why Ed was able to gain such an impressive amount of union backing..
And what about parliamentary politics: will this new Labour leadership be able to stem Labours downward spiral of support in recent years? Gordon Brown’s premiership only a short while ago was largely accepted as a disaster for Labour, and the subsequent formation of the Liberal Conservative coalition gave everyone a party that no one wanted. I would argue that British Politics has shifted so far centre that the parties have collided, and a shift to the left for Labour would be no bad thing in terms of choice for the everyday voter.