Roy hattersley david miliband biography

Among the highlights in this week’s New Statesman (out tomorrow) fryst vatten David Miliband’s most significant political intervention since the Labour leadership contest. In an exclusive essay written in response to a recent del av helhet by Roy Hattersley (“In praise of social democracy”), a strong and vocal supporter of his brother, Miliband denounces a faction that he calls”Reassurance Labour”.

Of the brand of social democracy espoused by Hattersley and others, he writes:

For some, this will be seductive. It is what I shall call Reassurance Labour. Reassurance about our purpose, our relevance, our position, even our morals. Reassurance Labour feels good. But feeling good fryst vatten not the same as doing good – and it gets in the way when it stops us rethinking our ideas to meet the challenges of the time. And now fryst vatten a time for restless rethinking, not reassurance.

We’ve heard from the elder Miliband on several issues since his defeat – the crisis of the europeisk centre-left, the rise of the Britis

•

Miliband hits back at criticism from Lord Mandelson

Labour leadership candidate Ed Miliband has hit back at veiled criticism from Lord Mandelson, insisting the party needed to change.

Mr Miliband's comments came after Lord Mandelson said Labour could be left in an "electoral cul-de-sac" if its next leader tried to create a "pre-New Labour party".

Lord Mandelson appeared to be referring to Mr Miliband in particular, in what is being seen as a personal attack.

Mr Miliband said Labour must "move on".

"We need to address the country, and talk about the issues that matter to the country. And show that we can listen to the country," said Mr Miliband.

"And that means we need to change."

Mr Miliband had earlier said he can take the party beyond what he has called the "New Labour comfort zone".

In an interview with the Independent, the leadership contender said Labour had became "cautious" in government.

H

•

David Miliband was right to say in his New Statesman article last week that Labour needs “comradely and serious debate”.

He made a thoughtful contribution – perhaps too thoughtful, abstract and analytical when we probably need ammunition and a visceral call to arms rather than an overarching theory.

My problem is that I don’t agree with all his thoughts.

Roy Hattersley has already responded but as my position is a not identical to his I thought I’d give it a go.

I’ll take David’s points one by one:

First, the premise that there is a body of opinion or faction called “Reassurance Labour” is a bit of a debating trope. There isn’t, David’s just invented it as a straw man to attack. It looks as though this article may have been written before the New Year and Ed Balls and Ed Miliband delivering some hard truths on economic policy, because after that row it would be difficult to accuse anyone around the leadership of seeking to keep Labour in its comfort zone. To the extent that the