“Everything will be very tightly costed and there won’t be big spending commitments.”

David Miliband has just confirmed to Sky News that there will be no spending major committments in Labour's manifesto.

Due out tomorrow,the Foreign Secretary told the programme that it would be more like the 1997 manifesto than a 2001 or 2007,

“Everything will be very tightly costed and there won’t be big spending commitments.”

Quote of the day

Comes from Simon Jenkins in the Guardian and he is talking about the Binyam case

Something is wrong. A ­sensible, clean-living chap such as David ­Miliband wants nothing more ­sinister than to lead the Labour party, yet he finds himself consorting with spies, lawyers, rendition merchants and torturers.

Miliband protests his innocance

No one in the Government was involved in this letter last week,” he said. “The unanimous view is that we’ve got to focus on providing a clear alternative to the Tories.”

The words of David Miliband in the Times as he rigoursly defends his position this time last week as the coup that wasn't sprung into action

He firmly rejects the view that he dithered for 7 hours though on has to ask the question if he was so behind Gordon Brown,why did he not rush to the microphone during the afternoon?

My radical plan

Fraser Nelson documents the remarkable exchange that took place this morning on the Today programme.
David Miliband is talking of the need for "radical change"to James Naughtie and appears to suggest that the nationalisatioN of the banks was part of this radical plan

DM: Last year I wrote an article saying that ‘we needed a radical new phase in Labour policy’.

JN: But we haven’t had that. That’s the point.

DM: If I had come on this programme last August and said ‘The best example of a radical new phase is the Labour Government to own two thirds of Lloyds Bank, that’s real radicalism’ you’d have said ‘you must be absolutely barking;

JN: But you were forced into that. The idea that this was a choice on the part of the government is absurd, Mr Miliband.

DM: No no no. I’m sorry. It is absurd to say that the government did not choose to own two-thirds of Lloyds Bank

JN: (laughing) It ‘chose’ to own it in the context of the biggest financial crash for 80 years.

DM: And we did the right thing.

JN: (scoffing) really.

DM: Hang on. And on the economy, we have shown what a radical new phase means. We’ve proved that it was the right thing to do. Yesterday Lloyds Bank paid back £2.6bn. Now we’ve had the coldest electoral shower imaginable. We have to ask ourselves in other areas – on political reform, on public services and on international policy – what’s the equivalent of unconventional thinking? What’s the equivalent of owning two-thirds of Lloyds Bank?

Your can listen to the whole interview HERE

Miliband was never after Brown's job

Whilst on the subject of challengers to the Prime Minister,the New Statesman this week interviews David Miliband currently on a fact finding tour of Afghanistan but last year propelled into the leadership speculation by his article in the Guardian.

The foreign secretary is

a politician of unusual integrity - and that can be part of his trouble. He believes that, in diplomacy, "you do not say one thing in private and another in public. You do not say one thing to one group and something else to another."

And this may have led to the events of last August when

A grave problem for him is that his high intelligence, and sarcastic wit, can be mistaken for arrogance.

Talking to Jason Cowley he maintains that he was not making a bid for the leadership

People were very worried. We'd just lost a by-election, and the whole party wanted the government to pull together and pull through. What I did was about cabinet ministers fulfilling their responsibility to speak for the whole government and to speak for the party.

A Congolese connundrum for Miliband

The Congo has fallen off the front pages as have most stories in the past couple of days.
Over at First Post,Will Self writes a provocative assessment of our policy there in which he calls the Foreign Secretary’s trip to Africa an act of hypocrisy

Miliband has never made any secret of his devout belief in the advancement of democracy and human rights through the barrel of a cut-rate gun. For him there is still a Rousseau-like State of Nature, in which left to their best instincts, representative humans would invariably choose the system of government that results in the election of leaders exactly like… David Miliband

According to Self it is only the Western countries that are haunted by the events of the 1990's in that part of Africa as they stood idly by whilst

Miliband might care to consider the reigning in of the British multinationals whose grotesque exploitation of Congolese natural resources (aided and abetted by a rogues gallery of local warlords and dictators) has resulted in an armed meltdown that's seen millions die

A damp squid except for the Heseltine moment

I don't know whether you agree but the Labour party conference is turning into a damp squid.Perhaps after the excitement of last week's financial markets,the global economy has made the party realise that after all,Gordon is the best person to be in charge.
His speech later today from being the make or break is now being trailed as the "I am in charge" and it seems that apart from apologising for the 10p tax debacle and announcing a new initiative on internet access for the less well off,there will be little to report.

Perhaps the most exciting bit of the conference was David Miliband's remarks in front of a BBC reporter in a lift last night which the later editions of the papers have picked up on this morning.Miliband was alleged to have said that he toned down his address(which universally was seen as a disappointment) so that he didn't create a "Heseltine moment"

Students of politics may wonder what a "Heseltine moment" is.Well after storming out of Mrs Thatcher's cabinet in 1986 over a disagreement about where our helicopters were made,Michael Hesletine was a thorn in the side of the Prime Minister for the next four years and ultimately the incident led to her downfall.

Whether Miliband intends to storm out of cabinet is unclear but most pundits seem to think that he was referring to the continued sniping through the media that accompanied Michael's retirement to the backbenches.

Air turns blue on the Moscow hotline

Over at Three Line Whip,Andrew Porter claims that David Miliband had to undergo a torrent of abuse when speaking to the Russian foreign minister Sergi Lavrov.

According to Andrew's sources

Such was the repeated use of the "F word" according to one insider who has seen the transcript, it was difficult to draft a readable note of the conversation.
One unconfirmed report suggested that Mr Lavrov said: "Who are you to f------ lecture me?"
He also asked Mr Miliband in equally blunt terms whether he knew anything of Russia's history?

Where is Miliband?

Good post over at Open House where Mary Dejevsky wonders where our foreign secretary is at this time of International crisis

The closest we came to a sighting was word from Mr Murphy on Newsnight that he "and David Miliband" would be attending a Nato ministerial meeting on Wednesday (i.e. tomorrow). The word is that Mr Miliband is holidaying on one or other of Spain's Balearic islands. Now everyone deserves a holiday, but when a foreign crisis of this order blow up, the foreign secretary is the minister you most expect to hear from.
Can it be that, with his sights set on higher things, he has already "moved on" - as Blairspeak might have it - from his foreign affairs portfolio?

Hague to Miliband-You're a geek like me

A warning from William Hague to David Miliband in this morning's Times no doubt basesd on his own bitter experiences.

He tells him that

he thinks this is the wrong moment for Mr Miliband, who is 43, to challenge Gordon Brown. “He is very clever, there is no doubt about that, but he has not yet developed the weight that is necessary, and cleverness cannot make up for that,” he said. “I respect him, but he's an unknown quantity. On the basis of my experience, the best thing for him to do would be to sit it out for a decade.”

Quite and some more advice from the former Tory leader

“People want normal politicians and David Miliband is more geeky, more like me,David Cameron could wear a baseball cap, whereas Miliband would find it harder to appear normal. I must have a word with him and give him some advice - don't try to be normal when you aren't. As I never want to be leader of my party again, I don't have to try to be normal any more.”

Read the article don't pontificate over its consequences

A rather unconventional approach to David Miliband’s Guardian commentary would be to discuss the argument which he actually makes. Those of us who would like more open debate in our politics might at least try to attempt that. A public debate about the Labour party’s future direction, and how to forge an effective response to the Conservatives, could prove both more important, and rather healthier, than the fevered anonymous briefings about possible plots

Good point with all the filibuster over the articles implications for leadership challenges the text of the article apart from the fact that is doesn't mention Gordon Brown has not been discussed.

Sunda Katwala,who is head of the British Fabians, takes a closer look at what the Foreign secretary actually said and argues that he addresses three issues.Firstly what progressive account of Britain in 2008 will voters recognise,What, after 11 years in power, is Labour’s case as to what it wants another term in office for and What distinctively Labour argument could yet challenge the Conservatives

For her

Labour must now define its own positive centre-left argument. It didn't do this in 1997 and the legacy is a growing weakness. This is not a matter of simply being more 'left-wing' in a shopping list of policies. Indeed, the temptation to become inward-looking is not a monopoly of the left.

And that is the point.If Labour wants a fourth term it is not about who is bast to lead it,it is about its vision and policies

Is Miliband clearing his desk?

The Times is reporting on rumours that David Miliband may be on the way out from the foreign office.

According to the paper he has cancelled

a four-day foreign trip, and was holding what was interpreted as a 'farewell' meeting with his staff.
The Foreign Secretary suddenly announced this morning that he was calling off the trip to India, scheduled for the start of September. It had been designed to promote Britain's trade and investment interests in the country, and was considered important to encourage investment in one of the world's fastest-growing economies.

So has Gordon Brownn been listening to the likes of Bob Andrews Marshall who called for the Prime Minister to sack him.

Or is he simply clearing his desk to set up campaign headquarters

Folly or political art ?

Steve Richards in the Independent is becoming one of by favourite columnists and continues this morning reflecting on the Miliband article.

Yesterday morning, Miliband proved he has a ruthless streak, one that can change the political landscape. The article in which he focused on the future of Labour without mentioning Gordon Brown ensured that the noise around the leadership question got a lot louder. More significantly, he would have known that this would be the consequence of his intervention. For the first time, the tumultuous speculation about Labour's future had acquired deadly definition

Has this sealed the fate of Gordon Brown?

He writes almost as if Brown had already moved on, perhaps permanently locked away on a holiday in Southwold. The tone was modest, the themes were familiar and the future direction was only vaguely mapped out, but the contrast between substance and impact makes it a minor work of political art

Of cause some think that it has sealed Miliband's fate,the front of the Telegraph says

Miliband's actions triggered angry retaliation from supporters of the Prime Minister, who accused him of disloyalty and undermining the party in the wake of last week's disastrous Glasgow East by-election defeat.
Some of the Prime Minister's allies believe that Mr Brown must make an example of his minister, demoting or even sacking Mr Miliband.

But I tend to agree with Steve Richards

The act gets all the attention, not what is being written or said.
This is why Brown is now in such danger. Will anyone pay attention while he is in charge? As he has admitted privately, no one is listening to him at the moment. In such circumstances, he needs the big figures below him to put the case. But they are not being heard either because their actions are seen solely in the context of the leadership speculation

Miliband makes a charge

Is this David Miliband setting out his stall to be Labour leader?

After the last few days of rumpou and plotting,this morning's Guardian carries a piece by the foriegn secretary entitled Against all odds we can still win, on a platform for change

In it Miliband claims

The starting point is not debating personalities but winning the argument about our record, our vision for the future and how we achieve it.

But surley in a critisism of Brown's message he says

When people hear exaggerated claims, either about failure or success, they switch off. That is why politicians across all parties fail to connect.
To get our message across, we must be more humble about our shortcomings but more compelling about our achievements.

There are reflections too,he says that Nhs reform should have been quicker,that their should have been more planning before Iraq

We should have devolved more power away from Whitehall and Westminster. We needed a clearer drive towards becoming a low-carbon, energy-efficient economy, not just to tackle climate change but to cut energy bills.

But perhaps most tellingly in the piece,he attempts to place clear blue water between Labour and the Conservatives

The Tories overclaim for what they are against because they don't know what they are for. I disagreed with Margaret Thatcher, but at least it was clear what she stood for

he says but

The problem with David Cameron is the reverse. His problem is he is a conservative, not a radical. He doesn't share a restlessness for change. He may be likable and sometimes hard to disagree with, but he is empty. He is a politician of the status quo — even a status quo he consistently voted against — not change.

Is Purnell the man to take Labour forward?

This week's Spectator magazine looks to the future for the Labour party with Fraser Nelson suggesting that James Purnell and not the fancied David Miliband could be its next leader.

Why not Miliband then?

....the Foreign Secretary’s fan base is starting to fracture, not least because he has conspicuously failed to woo the Parliamentary Labour Party. The accomplished egghead still frowns with impatience in interviews and select committee meetings when he thinks he is dealing with fools

Miliband belongs to a group of Blairite ministers,including Liam Byrne, Jim Murphy, and James Purnell.Nelson argues that the group's priority has changed to one of stop Ed Balls at all costs.

And this has put Purnell in the limelight

To tip the 38-year-old Work and Pensions Secretary for the leadership now may seem as absurd as tipping the then 38-year-old Mr Cameron seemed three years ago. Yet since he succeeded Peter Hain at the Department of Work and Pensions, his name has started to be factored routinely into the what-if scenarios being played around Westminster. Many laugh this off instantly, regarding him as a smooth lightweight who prefers tailoring to politicking. But those who do know him well regard the prospect as eminently plausible — and believe that he may leap over Mr Miliband’s head, just as Mr Blair overtook Mr Brown in the early Nineties.

Nelson argues that he has two charactoristics,firstly that he has an unusual grasp of detail(unlike his hero) and secondly that unlike many members of the cabinet he is"not a political obsessive.

There is a strong feeling that the party needs to get away fron the career politician view and Purnell may well be that person

Labour home are not agreeing.Asking how people rate the cabinet members,Miliband comes top with Purnell down in 8th place

Stalking horses are let loose

It didnt take long.

The Tory paper are reporting on challenges to a Brown leadershipthis morning.The Mail on its front page saying

Left-winger John McDonnell has told friends he is ready to try to topple Mr Brown following Labour's disastrous showing in Thursday's local elections.

The Express meanwhile has on its front page that

DAVID Miliband was last night being urged to challenge Gordon Brown for the Labour leadership to save the party from meltdown in a general election.
The Foreign Secretary, reported to be holding a weekend “summit” with allies at his country retreat in Chevening, Kent, is seen by many as Labour’s best hope of heading off David Cameron’s resurgent Tories.

The paper claiming

The source said: “David’s going for it – he will challenge.”
Labour MP Graham Stringer said senior ministers were actively considering whether to mount a coup. He added: “These conversations are going on.”

An all round performance is required for Labour

There is a good piece in this morning's Independent by Steve Richards.

He argues that it is about time that other cabinet members started to contribute a little more pointing out that

For the first time since Labour came to power cabinet ministers have a chance to breathe, to become fully developed political personalities

And for the Prime Minister

Suddenly it is in his interests to allow stars to shine, rather than smother alternative shafts of light in darkness. It does not help Mr Brown to be seen alone raging in the storm. On the contrary his chances of finding at least some fleeting shelter are enhanced if he is seen as leading a more vibrant team

I think that Steve is correct but I just wander who these people are that are going to come to the rescue.Yes as he points out David Milliband put in a good performance on Andrew Marr but outside of him?

I worry that as with the Tories it may require a skipping of a generation before the party gets back on track with Milliband being the fall guy with the potential aka Hague

Britain's future in the World

Foreign Secretary David Miliband will set out Britain's position in the world acording to a report on the front page of Today's Guardian.

He is due to

set out the clearest exposition yet of Labour's recast foreign policy when he will argue that mistakes made in Iraq and Afghanistan must not cloud the moral imperative to intervene - sometimes militarily - to help spread democracy throughout the world

according to political editor Patrick Wintour.

Interesting enough in the comment section of the Independent this morning,Mary Dejevsky writes on Britain's declining role on the diplomatic stage.

In the good old days

There was a time, long after the sun had set on the Empire, when the British still strutted the world stage. If they had the grace not actually to monopolise the very topmost jobs, they commanded respect as the policy-makers, drafters and negotiators who helped the world go round.

but today

the absence of senior Britons from international gatherings is becoming conspicuous. At the Munich security conference last weekend – perhaps Europe's premier defence gathering – it was noted that this was the first time in 40-plus years that no Briton spoke from the platform.

The replacement of Tony Blair with Gordon Brown may well have marked the decline of Britain's inflated role in the world.Maybe Miliband's new direction will alter Britain's place in the world.

Patrick Wintour suggests that he will

· encouraging economic openness as a means of tackling corruption and increasing transparency, including in China;

· a new round of provincial elections in Iraq, to help to bind in former insurgents who want proof of their local influence, and the chance to join the Iraqi security force;

· organisations like the UN or Nato should consider offering "security guarantees" to new but fragile governments, conditional on them abiding by democratic rules;

· support for "civilian surges" for democracy led by "literate, better-educated people able to access information and communicate with others".