Half way, and how are they shaping up?

The Paul Richards column

As the Famous Five head towards the lull of August before the final push in September, they can reflect on their performances so far. More importantly, we can judge how the contest is shaping up.

First the bad news. None of the candidates is cutting through to the voters. There is little excitement being generated by the contest. Nor is there a sense that any of the policy debate is engaging with the great issues of the day. Insofar as the public is following politics, the novelty of the coalition has not worn off. The political energy is with them. Lansley is pushing ahead with the break-up of the strategic health authorities and primary care trusts in the NHS, Gove is pursuing (albeit cack-handedly) his plans for schools, Pickles is removing future generations’ chance of getting an affordable home, and Cable is being regularly humiliated by his lack of influence. Clegg gets to make speeches, and mess up PMQs. Cameron is enjoying his honeymoon, and looks assured in the job. Labour’s leadership contest is not even a sideshow, it’s a private members-only event. Whoever wins will face a huge uphill climb to make Labour relevant.

Then, the worse news. There are signs that many in the Labour Party want to retreat into the comfort zone. Ed Balls‘ campaign lacks any zing. He languishes at the bottom of the table of constituency supporting nominations, behind Diane Abbott. Her campaign was derailed before it started by her inability to stand up to scrutiny around her public proclamations and private choices. It seems unlikely that Unite, the last big union to declare, will back Ed Balls next week. Most of the Brownites (what Kevin Maguire calls the Talibrown) are not supporting him. The former team around Brown at No10 – Stewart Wood, David Muir and others – are supporting, not Balls, but Ed Miliband. I know at least one MP who nominated Ed Balls in return for services rendered, but has no intention of voting for him. It is entirely possible that Ed Balls will come last.

Andy Burnham has made some impact. His idea of ‘aspirational socialism‘ is a sound one – connecting traditional values with the demands of a modern society – would take Labour some of the way back to winning the C2s once again. He is right to say that the NHS should not be immune to spending cuts when it is so unproductive and wasteful, and it took guts to say it during a leadership contest. But despite an energetic campaign, he will not win.

Ed Miliband has some solid backing from the unions (which can be a curse as well as a blessing as their support never comes without conditions), and is picking up a healthy number of constituency nominations. My concern with Ed Miliband’s campaign is that his appeal is based on a belief that he would be a safe, unchallenging leader, popular with the party faithful, but unable to reach beyond those who already vote Labour. Peter Mandelson’s book The Third Man makes the point that the 2010 manifesto, which Ed Miliband authored, read as though it had been road-tested more with Guardian columnists than key voters:

“There were lots of different policy ideas and little stories here and there, but they did not add up to a coherent or compelling for the future that would set pulses racing.”

That approach proved ineffective earlier this year, and Ed Miliband has shown no signs of offering anything substantively different. It is possible that Ed Miliband could win, even if his brother is ahead on the first round, as people place him second and third on the ballot paper. He may find himself a Neil Kinnock figure, whose desire to modernise and move forward is trammelled by his own history and alliances. With Harriet Harman as the deputy leader, Labour’s leadership team would be drawn from narrow terrain, with little evidence that people in the south of England would be attracted back to Labour.

David Miliband, whom I support, is the frontrunner, but his victory is by no means assured. Neither Nick Clegg nor David Cameron were the frontrunners, but they went on to lead their parties. He must maintain his momentum by proving that he is willing to talk to the country, not just the party. He must show that leadership in opposition is not about endless calibration and ‘dividing lines’ with the Tories, but about an alternative vision for the country. He must prove that he has the courage to take on vested interests in the party to improve its standing with the electorate.

The worst outcome for Labour would be a leader who was most members’ third choice, whose platform was ‘safety first’, and who lets this so-called ‘coalition’ with a deputy who doesn’t speak for the government, and a Prime Minister who doesn’t know when America joined WWII, off the hook.