Ed Miliband projecting his customary calm, reassurance and judgement (Image: Getty)

Miliband is in power today and, although he’s not in Number 10, he might as well be. He’s exerting far too much control over this government, just as he did under Keir Starmer. It could end just as badly for Andy Burnham as it did for Sir Keir. Or Ed’s brother David Miliband for that matter. Anyone or anything that gets too close to Miliband’s combustible orbit gets badly burned. Now it’s happening again.

Raised by Marxists, indulged by Labour and adored by Leftie activists, Miliband is Parliament’s very own Baldrick, of whom Blackadder once said, “chaos and disaster follow like a faithful hound”. His first major political intervention was to block a joint US, UK and French raid on Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad’s chemical weapons stockpile in 2013, which allowed murderous attacks against civilians to continue for another five years. Even Ed’s brother David said his actions had contributed to the chaos.

His first act was to block new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea, destroying jobs and tax revenues, and forcing us to import even more gas from Norway, the US and Qatar.

Miliband also threw tens of billions at pointless quangos such as Great British Energy, and carbon capture and storage technology that’s never worked anywhere. While paying wind farms billions more to produce electricity the grid cannot use. All taht did nothing to cut global warming, but left taxpayers feeling hot under the collar. Chancellor John Healey is now unwinding all he can at top speed.

The economy dodged a volley of bullets when Burnham decided not to make Miliband chancellor. He’s now inflicting chaos and disaster as foreign secretary instead. Of all jobs, this requires diplomacy and hard-headed pragmatism. Miliband is bringing his usual mix of North London posturing and virtue-signalling.

His first big act was to pacify Gaza-obsessed lefties by turning his ire on Israel. Now he’s waded into the slavery debate, embrassing the King. Two interventions, two disasters. Israel is backing Argentina’s claim to the Falklands, while Burnham is chucking taxpayers’ cash at net zero vanity projects in the Caribbean.

Miliband is also pushing our intellectually lightweight PM to go back on his word by re-running Brexit, while pushing the disastrous Chagos Islands deal and trashing our reputation in Washington. At least Hamas is happy with him.

He did it to his brother. He did it to Keir Starmer. And now he’s doing it to Andy Burnham. If the PM isn’t careful, he’ll end up looking like Baldrick. Burnham gave a pretty good impression of him yesterday, while playing cricket. The PM needs to put Miliband in his box before it’s too late. Sadly, I fear it already is.

Ed Miliband Just Went Haywire Again – This Could Spell Curtains for Andy Burnham

Ed Miliband has plunged the Labour government into another political controversy after making a series of interventions that have raised serious questions about Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s leadership and the direction of the party.

The Foreign Secretary’s latest comments have reignited disagreements over Britain’s historical responsibilities, international relations and the government’s approach to controversial political issues.

For Burnham, the problem is becoming increasingly complicated. He appointed Miliband to one of the most important positions in government, expecting his experience and political influence to strengthen Britain’s international standing. Instead, critics argue that the Foreign Secretary is creating political distractions that could damage the Prime Minister’s authority.

The growing controversy has prompted questions about who is really setting the government’s political direction.

Ed Miliband Sparks Another Political Storm

Miliband has become an increasingly prominent figure in Burnham’s government.

Since becoming Foreign Secretary in July 2026, he has taken a leading role in several controversial international policy discussions.

One of the biggest disputes concerns the government’s willingness to discuss a formal British apology for the transatlantic slave trade.

Burnham has proposed structured dialogue with Commonwealth countries about the historical legacy of slavery and the possibility of a formal apology.

Miliband has strongly defended this approach, criticising Tony Blair’s previous attempt to address the issue in 2006.

He described Blair’s position as a kind of “sorry not sorry” apology, arguing that previous governments had failed to confront the issue properly.

His intervention attracted considerable attention because it reopened disagreements about Britain’s colonial history and the responsibilities of modern governments.

However, Miliband also made an important distinction: he insisted that Britain was not offering financial reparations and that the government’s position on compensation had not changed.

Despite that clarification, the political argument has continued.

Why Andy Burnham Is Facing Growing Pressure

The controversy is not simply about Miliband’s individual comments.

It raises a wider question about Burnham’s authority over his Cabinet.

A Prime Minister must ensure that senior ministers communicate a consistent government position, particularly when dealing with sensitive international issues.

Critics argue that Miliband’s willingness to make prominent political interventions risks overshadowing Burnham’s own agenda.

The Prime Minister wants the public to focus on economic growth, household finances, public services and improving Britain’s international relationships.

Yet repeated controversies involving senior ministers can make it difficult for the government to maintain that focus.

Opposition politicians have questioned whether Burnham has sufficient control over his Foreign Secretary or whether Miliband is increasingly shaping the government’s political direction.

These are political criticisms rather than established evidence of a breakdown in the relationship between the two men.

Nevertheless, they have become an important part of the debate surrounding Labour’s leadership.

The Slavery Apology Controversy

One of the most sensitive issues involves the government’s discussions with Caribbean and Commonwealth countries about slavery.

Supporters of a formal apology argue that acknowledging historical injustices is important for building stronger international relationships.

They believe Britain should confront its history honestly and recognise the lasting consequences of the transatlantic slave trade.

However, critics question why the government should reopen historical debates when Britain faces significant domestic economic challenges.

Nigel Farage has been particularly critical of the prospect of additional public spending connected to reparatory justice.

Miliband has attempted to address these concerns by insisting that the government is not offering financial reparations.

He has argued that cooperation can take other forms, including education, development and cultural initiatives.

The distinction between an apology, development assistance and direct financial compensation is central to understanding the government’s position.

Miliband’s Previous Energy Controversies Return

The Foreign Secretary’s political difficulties are also connected to his previous role as Energy Secretary.

His ambitious approach to renewable energy and net zero has attracted both support and criticism.

Supporters argue that Britain needs long-term investment in clean energy to improve energy security, reduce emissions and create new employment opportunities.

Critics, however, have questioned the financial costs and whether the government’s targets can be achieved without placing additional pressure on households and businesses.

North Sea oil and gas policy has been another major source of disagreement.

Some Conservatives and industry representatives have accused Miliband of making it harder for domestic energy companies to invest in Britain.

These disagreements have not disappeared simply because he has moved to the Foreign Office.

Indeed, critics believe his influence over the government’s wider political direction continues to be significant.

Is Miliband Becoming More Powerful Than Burnham?

Perhaps the most damaging criticism concerns the balance of influence within Downing Street.

Conservative MP Esther McVey previously suggested that Miliband had become a powerful figure behind the Prime Minister, describing him as a political influence on Burnham’s decisions.

She questioned whether the Foreign Secretary was exercising influence beyond his official responsibilities.

Such claims remain political allegations, not independently established facts.

However, they illustrate the concerns opposition politicians are raising about the relationship between the two senior Labour figures.

Burnham has the ultimate responsibility for government policy, but Miliband’s experience and prominence mean that his interventions can attract considerable attention.

If disagreements become more visible, the Prime Minister could face increasing pressure to demonstrate that his Cabinet is operating under clear leadership.

Britain’s Relationship With the United States Adds Another Challenge

Miliband’s foreign policy approach has also attracted attention internationally.

His positions on the conflict in the Middle East and relations with the Trump administration have created disagreements with some American political figures.

The United States remains one of Britain’s most important international partners, particularly in defence, intelligence and trade.

Maintaining that relationship requires careful diplomacy, especially when the two governments disagree over international conflicts.

Critics have questioned whether Miliband’s approach risks creating unnecessary tensions with Washington.

Supporters argue that Britain should be prepared to express independent views on international law and foreign policy.

For Burnham, maintaining a productive relationship with Washington while allowing his Foreign Secretary to pursue Britain’s diplomatic priorities will remain an important challenge.

Labour Cannot Afford Endless Political Distractions

The government faces major domestic challenges.

Households want action on the cost of living, housing, energy prices and public services.

Businesses want stability, investment and clear economic policies.

Meanwhile, Labour must demonstrate that its promises can be translated into practical results.

Every major controversy risks taking attention away from those priorities.

Burnham therefore faces pressure to ensure that his ministers remain focused on delivering the government’s programme.

Miliband’s supporters may argue that difficult international issues cannot simply be ignored because they are politically controversial.

His critics, however, believe that the government needs greater consistency and discipline in communicating its decisions.

Conclusion: The Political Stakes Are Rising for Burnham

Ed Miliband’s latest interventions have reopened important disagreements within British politics and placed additional attention on Andy Burnham’s leadership.

From the debate over a formal apology for slavery to disagreements about energy policy and Britain’s relationship with the United States, the Foreign Secretary has become a prominent figure in several politically sensitive discussions.

The central question is whether these interventions are helping the government establish a clearer international direction or creating additional difficulties for the Prime Minister.

Burnham must demonstrate that he remains firmly in control of government policy while allowing experienced ministers to carry out their responsibilities.

Miliband, meanwhile, must show that his diplomatic approach can deliver practical results without creating unnecessary political uncertainty.

For Labour, the coming months will be an important test of Cabinet unity and political discipline.

The government was elected to address Britain’s problems. Voters will ultimately judge it on the results it delivers, not simply on the arguments taking place inside Westminster.