Wednesday, 8 September 2010

David Miliband: Labour Leadership Special

David Miliband has the most substantial ministerial experience of all the leadership hopefuls. The Shadow Foreign Secretary was previously the Head of the Number 10 Policy Making Unit and has frequently been identified as the New Labour candidate. David has been the favourite throughout the campaign and received the most supporting nominations from MPs.

David is being supported by 38 year old single Mum Liza Harding:
I decided to support David after seeing him on BBC Question Time. I'd never seen a politician as sharp and articulate. Throughout the campaign, David has offered vision for a broader Labour Party. We need to reach out to everyone - young, old, those of various incomes, the unemployed, the sick, all races, religions, left, centre, disillusioned Lib Dems, those never been interested in politics before. David can and WILL relate to all - with the exception of the Tories whose ideology and “values” he hates.

David's biggest campaign throughout the leadership contest is the Movement For Change. 1000 Future Leaders are being trained – myself included – on community organising techniques. This is an excellent opportunity to go back to the grassroots and reinforce relationships. The Movement For Change has gained momentum and there is no stopping it. There's already real commitment from members of the public up and down the country. David's not leader yet, but he's already showing great promise by empowering people not just at the top, but from the roots upwards.

With David Miliband I see a united yet diverse Labour Party – that is where our strength lies. We need credible long-term solutions to the problems we face today and our first hurdle is getting back into Government. David has the brains, focus, compassion, commitment and experience to get us there – and the Tories clearly fear him.

David is not just the now, he is the future. He is exactly what the Labour Party needs. It’s vital we get this decision right not just for our Party, but for our country.
Do you agree with Liza? Is David’s Movement For Change an honest attempt to democratise the party? Is he the heir to Blair? Does the fact he failed to challenge Brown’s premiership suggest he lacks the backbone to lead? Let us know what you think below.

Tomorrow we’ll be looking at Diane Abbott.


R said...

Miliband is the only candidate you can actually envisage being PM. He's certainly the most statesman like. Everyone else is an electoral liability

Micha said...

I do agree with Lisa. David is the only one, capable of leading our con leading our country as PM. I do love his training of future leaders, unfortunately he left out Brighton, as we have fantastic new and young people here, ready for work.
I sincerely hope he will have a training day in Brighton soon. London is just too far away for people who have job commitments.

Liza said...

Hi Micha,
Due to popular demand, more training sessions have been added see not sure about Brighton as yet, but if you email they could probably set one up if there's sufficient interest (around 30 people per session I would say).

debord said...

The idea that David, who not only was an intrinsic part of the worst of New Labour but in fact continues to defend it, is not an 'electoral liability' is laughable. We'll soon see how valuable he is when he's called to appear before the torture enquiry and, as he has done in every interview on the subject, evades questions and tells outright lies.

anthillel said...

Liza, i thought it was a great article- i see a candidate empowering people through the movement for change and he is very prime ministerial- the stongest one to bring the con-dems to book!

Pinko said...

Miliband has helped cover up the torture of an innocent man. If that doesn't put him out of the race in your eyes then you need to take a long hard look at your value system.

Anonymous said...

Milband is the contunuity candidate. He continues all the unpopular elements of New Labour. His Future Leaders are just paying lipservice to activism. He was head of the No. 10 Policy Making Unit for godsake - what could be more undemocratic than unelected 'experts' making decisions? His continuing defence of Iraq is obscene. Does he expect us to genuinely believe he thought that Iraq had WMDs? If he does, he's an idiot and the Labour Party don't need another idiot in charge

Anonymous said...

He's Labour's version of Cameron, attractive and media friendly but ultimately hollow.

Liza said...

As David Miliband says himself, don't let the lies get half-way round the world before you know the truth!
Do you actually know the full facts @debord @Pinko?
I doubt it - he has absolutely nothing to hide as we were informed, one of the first things we questionned him on right at the beginning of his campaign.
I don't know all the facts of the case either but I'm sure if there was anything to hide, it would've been out by now! The Home Secretary was one of those in charge not David btw.
He has way too much integrity - he's proved it countless times throughout the campaign and would never condone, as any of us would, torture!

I also believe that David, as many others did so in the Party, really did believe there were WMD's in Iraq based on whatever evidence/intelligence they had at the time - which has obviously been proved wrong now, with hugely unfortunate consequences with the many sadly losing their lives. But please remember Saddam Hussein was a nutter and his regime tortured and killed many in his country for years and years so shoot me if you think I'm bad but back then I actually agreed he needed to be brought down.
The only thing David defends about Iraq is his belief that there were actually WMD's there, otherwise none of them would have agreed to go to war at all.
@Anonymous I can tell you that I have never used that word to describe David Miliband in all the blogs I've written (and there have been many!) consistent sometimes perhaps but not continuous - however he's learned from what worked in the past and learn from what didn't - hardly rocket science is it!
Blair and the New Labour Party did lose the plot in the end cos they gave up listening to us - David knows this and never tries to defend it either, in fact he's probably said "we stopped listening" everyday of his campaign to date!
Plus David Miliband is his own person in his own right now, with his own ideologies free from Blair and free from New Labour - new politics, yes, and a better broader Labour Party united in values and ideologies - that's why I'm voting for him.

Also I do really wish people would stop disrespecting all the Future Leaders who've done the training for the sole reason of helping their communities in the most constructive way that they can. I was so inspired about the fact that I really could make a difference after being trained regardless of who I was, and so were my CLP - why knock something that can do no harm other than to help our society and create better relationships within our communities.

debord said...

"I don't know all the facts of the case either but I'm sure if there was anything to hide, it would've been out by now!"

What an absurd statement. Not least because Miliband was trying to prevent documents which implicated the government from coming out!!

I've heard from several Miliband supporters that he's not 'guilty' because he has told them so. Which is quite frankly laughable.

It is a FACT that Miliband tried to block the release of evidence implcating the UK in torture in the Binyam Mohamed case. No less a body than the UN named the UK as complicit in the US torture of British (and other) citizens. Amnesty International asked Miliband to set up an enquiry (which he failed to do) and states that there is 'overwhelming evidence' that the UK was complicit in torture. Documents released by the coalition government reveal that Blair and Straw were at best unconcerned with what was happening.

David Miliband has flat out lied when confronted about the issue, as you can read here:

His claims since that the UK was unaware of what was happening fly in the face of every single bit of evidence and are an insult.

So please, don't condescendingly ask if we 'know the full facts' when David Miliband could easily have set up an enquiry and enabled the release of the 'full facts', but has instead sought to obstruct the truth at every available opportunity. But I don't expect this to change your mind at all, as Miliband supporters seem to regard his word as gospel (even when it is demonstrable that he has lied) and, worst of all, regard his complicity in torture as an inconvienient policy point akin to supporting ID cards and not an inhumane and indefensible act which makes him unfit to be an MP, let alone Prime Minister.

debord said...

Oh, and there are so many things wrong and misinformed with what you state about Iraq that I could be here all day. But I don't think it's worth the bother. But suffice to say that it's an absolute lie that the government had any reason whatsoever to believe that Saddam had WMDs which posed a threat, and weapons inspectors at the time were saying this.

Labour Left said...

@debord - Well bloody said!

@Liza - your post is confused and ill-concieved, just like New Labour. The justification for Iraq is murky and desperate. WMDs - especially ones which could threaten the UK - were NOT in Iraq. And arguing that Saddam was a tyrant and deserved deposing is a complete none-starter - if that was the actual reason then we would be getting rid of despot after despot. But we're not, only the ones that have oil

Kerri Prince said...

David Miliband was NOT the Foreign Secretary when we invaded Iraq. He had to take Blair's word for it, and under the whip system, if he didn't obey, he could have been sacked. It seemed as if he had them. Many people thought he did. They may have been struggled out of the country. Nobody will ever know because Saddam is dead.

ITS NOT ALL ABOUT OIL!! The terrorists did 9/11. Blair offered full support to Bush. America and the UK retaliated. Some agree with the war, some don't. But democracy won. People voted for it, including the Tories.

Ben Lyons said...

Completely agree with Liza. MPs voted on assurances that Iraq had WMD. At the time, there was no real debate about it. Everyone, from MI6 and the CIA to the security services of countries which opposed the war, like Germany and France, and the UN's Hans Blix thought Saddam had WMD.

Luke said...

New Labour was electable. There are over 8 countries involved in Guantanamo Bay. Look, when its a case of security, the possibility of loss of life should always be put first.

If you are vilely against David Miliband, then the attributes he posses will mean that Labour will never win again.

Binyam Mohamed is now released and all charges dropeed.

In politics, you shouldn't dwell on the past, you should learn from your mistakes of the past.

I take it that you're in favour of the BSF programme which David introduced.

The Tories /fear/ David's decisive and strong leadership. It would be completely illogical to 'give in' to the right wing press and select a candidate that isn't strong enough to face the coalition and Cameron every week in PMQs.

Luke said...

I agree with Ben: When it's a question of national security, you have to believe that the evidence you are presented with is 100% true.

debord said...

How convenient it is for you all - David Miliband was told to go to war by nasty Blair. Ignore the fact that several other ministers, including cabinet ones, resigned over the war. Ignore the fact that hundreds of MPs opposed the war. Ignore the fact that millions of ordinary people opposed the war. And ignore the countless testimonies since then which have shown that the government was being told from practically every reputable source that Saddam was allowing inspections, they should be allowed to continue, and they had found no evidence of WMDs. Only 2 years before the invasion, the US GOVERNMENT was saying that Saddam had no WMD and no capacity to make them.

"The terrorists did 9/11"
"Everyone, from MI6 and the CIA to the security services of countries which opposed the war, like Germany and France, and the UN's Hans Blix thought Saddam had WMD"
"There are over 8 countries involved in Guantanamo Bay. Look, when its a case of security, the possibility of loss of life should always be put first. "

These statements just demonstrate the staggering ignorance and lack of regard for human rights Miliband's supporters show in abundance. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. The head of MI6 is on record as stating that 'the intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy (of going to war)'. The director of the CIA, George Tenet, told Bush that Saddam had no WMDs a year before the war. Saying that Hans Blix believed in WMDs REALLY takes the biscuit when he's on record as saying they had NONE and he believed the war to be illegal.

And the implication that 'security' is worth torture is just pathetic.

As I said, I don't expect my words to change anyone's minds - but you really have no idea what you're talking about, and it's clear you're fixing your opinions to try and suit your support for David Miliband, and not supporting David Miliband because of your opinions. And that's just sad.

Labour Left said...

@Kerri Prince – Miliband didn’t have to vote for the war, in fact many Labour MPs didn’t. Saying “if he didn’t obey, he could have been sacked” fills me with great sadness. Is politics now about career rather than principle? And he couldn’t have been sacked as an MP – ultimately his constituents decide if he’s re-elected.

And democracy did not win – if it was, we would be invading every undemocratic country. What about the millions of people marching against the war? They were completely ignored – is that democratic?!

And there’s no way that WMDs could be smuggled out the country – we’re talking about biological/chemical weapons!

@Ben Lyons – some MPs voted on assurances that Iraq had WMDs, but some saw through this. Also, Hans Blix didn’t have any evidence that there were WMDs – in fact he wanted more time to find them and a second UN resolution.

@Luke – there is perhaps a small argument that “when it's a question of national security, you have to believe that the evidence you are presented with is 100% true” (although I wouldn’t subscribe) – but that doesn’t explain the whitewash of enquiries since. There is no reason to take the allegations as 100% true now. The whole process should be examined to reflect, strengthen and ensure it doesn’t happen again

Liza said...

Just spent an hour responding to comments and lost it when I tried to post - gutted!
Have just about lost the will to live now, so will attempt again tomorrow evening!

If David Miliband is to be solely blamed for Iraq and the Torture Case for the rest of his political career whether he was right/wrong involved or not - you can't move on with the better Labour Party already emerging now as we speak, inspired by himself.

debord said...

Who said he was to be 'solely blamed'? No-one. But the Labour Party is a big organisation. To move on we need someone who isn't so compromised by morally indefensible actions. I find it very sad that you can so easily brush them aside.

debord said...

What a timely article:

Liza said...

So it was a collective responsibilty and there's no need to keep having a go at David Miliband about it just because he, along with Andy Burnham, stood by their decision they made at the time. David has much more skill than any of other leadership contenders to build a better Labour so if you can't get past this then more fool you!
I am not brushing it aside either - unfortunately it did happen and there were sadly many lives lost but we can only learn by mistakes made back then and move on with better hindsight.
You seem to find everyone sad who supports David Miliband, I doubt we'll be the sad ones in the end.

Anonymous said...


Good evening, starting us off tonight is the second in a trilogy from the Labour Party.

You will undoubtedly recall last years release starring Tony Blair in; The Messiah Identity - Untouchable In Teflon.

Well, especially for the Ladies that like them with hair, we have this years small budget follow-up; The Messiah Supremecy - The Family Divided. It stars a copybook teflon character by David Miliband - but to be honest completely misses the marx-ism.

If I were you though, film buffs, save your hard earned cash in this era of austerity and lets hope they bring forward the final instalment; The Messiah Ulimatum - Smells Like Turpentine Spirit.

We've heard that great things were to come from this underling but years of playing 2nd fiddle to an overbearing sibling put him in the gutter on drink and male prostitutes.

It makes a great story in 3D I'm told.

Thats all for now folks, I'm off to share a drink with my mate John Terry now that Christines has given him twin boys. However, they have a remarkable resemblance to that retired footballer, Wayne Roooney. Any idea's anyone?



debord said...

@Liza Yes you're right, it's terribly immature of me to be bothered by David's continual lying about his support for a disastrous war which has resulted in untold deaths, and about his involvement in the TORTURE of British citizens. Please, don't write platitudes about the dead because it's very clear that you don't care and regard them as inconveniences in the way of Saint David becoming leader. You've made zero effort to investigate the issues we've discussed. Ignorance is bliss.

Post a Comment