Ed Miliband is angry. Reports that the former Labour leader has been ditched as Andy Burnham‘s chancellor have apparently turned Red Ed a peculiar shade of puce.
‘His office has been preparing to make the move to the Treasury,’ one cabinet source told me, ‘and all the briefing has been that he’s been lined up for the job. If he loses out now he’s going to be really p****d’.
Another source explained: ‘Ed’s spent the best part of a year talking to Andy about his economic strategy. In the past fortnight he’s been the main person in with him and James [Purnell, Burnham’s chief of staff] over putting together a package to reassure the markets.
‘It’s not that he was specifically promised the job. But he basically assumed he was nailed on. So the reports he’s been ditched have made him pretty angry.’
Miliband should curb his ire a little longer. According to sources close to Team Burnham no decision has yet been taken. ‘The choice genuinely hasn’t been made yet,’ one told me. ‘Andy isn’t going to be bounced into anything. Nothing is going to be finalised until he’s inside No 10.’
If the rumours of a U-turn by our incoming prime minister before he’s even entered Downing Street are true, it will presage chaos when it comes to the appointment of his new government.
The role of chancellor is so pivotal, a change of heart would ripple across the whiteboard being used to chart the alterations. ‘There are some roles you can swap in and out pretty painlessly,’ another cabinet minister told me, ‘but Chancellor is too fundamental. If you reverse your decision on that, the whole plan goes out the window.’
Yesterday, people were casting around for reasons for the possible reversal. Some pointed to opposition from the unions, worried that Miliband’s anti-North Sea drilling, net-zero obsession would find its way into the Treasury. Others claim that, having put discreet feelers out to the City, word had been sent back that Miliband’s appointment would push the markets closer to the edge.
Ed Miliband is angry. Reports that the former Labour leader has been ditched as Andy Burnham’s chancellor have apparently turned Red Ed a peculiar shade of puce
But I was presented with a third theory. ‘Andy knows he’s got a woman problem. He can’t chuck out the most senior female politician in the party [Rachel Reeves] from her job, and replace her with a bloke who already had a run out as leader a decade ago. The women in the PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party) won’t put up with it.’
This is why much of the speculation about Reeves’s replacement is now focused on current Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood. Yesterday, Mahmood’s supporters were in overdrive, briefing that she was ‘nailed on’ as Reeves’s replacement. Another told journalists: ‘I won’t steer you away from that.’
But again, the briefings may be a little premature. The other contender for the post, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, has let it be known she would prefer to remain in her current brief.
But I understand that while Mahmood is regarded highly by Burnham and his inner circle, there are some residual concerns over her lack of economic experience.
One thing is clear, though. The recent speculation that both Miliband brothers could be handed major portfolios – with Ed in the Treasury and David Miliband returning, Cameron-like, to run the Foreign Office – is wide of the mark.
As one Burnham ally said: ‘He’s not mad. Having as many men in the great offices of state from the same family as there are women would see him hung by his privates from Big Ben.’
Burnham recognises he is vulnerable on the thorny issue of gender representation on three fronts. First, since its inception in 1900 Labour has had 19 leaders. And when Burnham is formally appointed the 20th on Friday he will also be the 20th white man to hold the position.
The second is what Burnham’s lot acknowledge as ‘The Demon Eyes’ issue. This was the name of the football team he and James Purnell played for during the Blair years. As one minister explained, ‘All the high-profile New Labour boys were on the team. And it was seen as a big clique. The women were all excluded. There’s a danger that No 10 starts to look a bit like the Demon Eyes dressing room.’
Andy Burnham recognises he is vulnerable on the thorny issue of gender representation
The third major problem is the hang-up from the Starmer era. Rightly or wrongly, among Labour’s women a perception has developed that the No 10 operation run by Sir Keir’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney developed into a ‘Boys’ Club’ from which women were at best ostracised, at worst the subject of aggressive and negative briefings.
As one MP close to Burnham metaphorically observed, ‘when Andy goes into Downing Street the lads’ mags and cans of Red Bull are going in the bin’.
But Burnham has one difficulty. He is still a man, and he will be squaring off against the Tories’ fourth female leader in Kemi Badenoch. So his strategy for counteracting her inevitable gender jibes is simple. He’s going to pack his cabinet with as many women he can lay his hands on.
Mahmood and Cooper are nailed on for senior roles. As is Rachel Reeves, if she can be persuaded to accept her withdrawal from the Treasury firing line. Lucy Powell, a key ally – and the party’s deputy leader – will replace David Lammy as deputy prime minister.
Louise Haigh, who masterminded Burnham’s leadership coup, will also be rewarded with a plumb position. Although I’m told she will have to watch her back. Other members of Burnham’s inner circle were apparently irritated with her candour at a question and answer session last week, when she admitted she had been in cahoots with the former Greater Manchester mayor about replacing Starmer for at least a year.
She is also in the sights of Starmer’s vengeful former staffers. ‘Morgan [McSweeney] has some stuff on her,’ one told me darkly, ‘and he’s going to wait for the right moment to drop a bomb on her’.
Other women who are said to be in line for significant portfolios are Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, who worked with Burnham during her time as an adviser for London Mayor Sadiq Khan, and made the politically astute decision to nominate him for all three of his leadership contests.
And Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson who, though a Starmer loyalist, benefited from being harangued by Kemi Badenoch as a ‘spiteful class warrior’ at a recent PMQs session. ‘Kemi’s made Bridget unsackable,’ a cabinet colleague told me.
A place will also be found for Angela Rayner. Though her influence is seen to have waned as a result of her own manoeuvring during the anti-Starmer plotting. As one member of Burnham’s inner circle revealed, ‘Andy thought he had a deal with Angela. Then found out she was working against him behind her back. So he’ll pay his respects to her. But she’s not going to be a major part of his plans moving forward.’
All of this may seem trite and tokenistic. But inside Labour, where tensions are simmering over the party choosing to anoint yet another male leader, the gender balance – or imbalance – of Andy Burnham’s cabinet is regarded as a defining issue.
Which may mean Ed Miliband is ultimately robbed of the role he covets. But that could be the price Labour pays for finally having a leader who at least knows what a woman is.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login