Ed Miliband is starting fires again. Andy Burnham can’t put them out (Image: Getty)
Red Ed is a one-man political firestorm, and Burnham is the latest colleague to get singed. If the PM hoped he could stop Miliband starting fires at the heart of government by appointing him Foreign Secretary, he’s quickly been proved wrong. This has simply unleashed the madness on a much wider scale. Miliband seems to have got it into his head that his new role gives him a say in absolutely everything. And he’s igniting rows with one Cabinet colleague after another.
Miliband did it under Keir Starmer too, when he acted like he was running the Labour Party, and in many ways he was. He clashed with Rachel Reeves by rejecting her plan to reduce green taxes on energy bills. He infuriated half the cabinet by blocking North Sea drilling, destroying jobs, tax revenues and the balance of payments. Starmer made a feeble attempt to reshuffle Miliband, but gave up when he refused to leave. Miliband then turned on Starmer, who went down in flames.
Miliband was salivating at the prospect of Burnham making him Chancellor, but for once didn’t get his way. Instead, he’s thrown himself into his new job, with his customary wild-eyed gusto. He’s always been a man on a mission, and now he seems to think he’s cabinet minister for the entire world. He’s been lighting fires in the most politically charged areas: attacking Israel, apologising for slavery and sneakily reversing Brexit. Burnham, who’s proving just as feeble as Starmer, is letting him run riot. Now a huge internal row is brewing.
Miliband is no longer energy secretary, but net zero remains close to his heart. And he’s once again going beyond his remit to make sure Labour policy reflects his own personal agenda, while flicking matches at anyone who gets in his way.
A bitter Cabinet row has broken out over the Heathrow Airport expansion. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, Chancellor John Healey and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds are said to back the £49billion project. Miliband and his protege, Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh, who’s keen to light a fire under her own career, oppose it.
Cabinet members are aghast at the sight of Miliband barging into their territory. That’s our man. The latest flashpoint isn’t just about Heathrow. North Sea drilling, foreign policy, economic growth, AI and data centres are all getting sucked into Miliband’s firestorm.
So what is Burnham doing? Nothing much. Being in charge of a whole country is proving a shock after only having Manchester to play with. This is a much bigger train set, and he’s struggling with the controls. And that allows the likes of Miliband to decide the direction.
There’s a reason Burnham likes talking about his 10-year plan. It’s because he doesn’t have one for next week, next month or even next year. Miliband is full of plans though, as Cabinet colleagues are learning to their cost. This fire is only going to spread. Left unchecked, it could burn Andy Burnham down. Because that’s what Red Ed does.
Miliband as Foreign Secretary Was a Mistake – Now He’s Burning Labour Down
Ed Miliband’s appointment as Foreign Secretary was supposed to strengthen Andy Burnham’s government and give Labour a heavyweight political figure capable of shaping Britain’s position on the international stage. Instead, the decision has reopened divisions within the party and raised questions about whether Miliband’s political ambitions are becoming a problem for the Prime Minister.
Since taking over at the Foreign Office in July 2026, Miliband has demonstrated that he intends to play an influential role far beyond traditional diplomatic responsibilities. From Britain’s relationship with the European Union to climate policy, the Middle East and international development, he has become one of the most visible figures in the government.
Supporters describe him as an experienced politician with a strong sense of purpose. Critics, however, argue that his approach risks creating unnecessary disagreements with colleagues and distracting the government from its most urgent domestic priorities.
The latest controversy surrounding his involvement in the Heathrow Airport expansion debate has brought these tensions into sharper focus.
A Controversial Appointment From the Beginning
When Burnham appointed Miliband as Foreign Secretary in July, the decision attracted considerable attention.
Miliband had previously served as Labour leader between 2010 and 2015 and had spent two years as Energy Secretary under the previous government. His experience in government, international affairs and climate policy made him an obvious candidate for a senior Cabinet position.
However, his appointment also raised questions about Britain’s relationship with the United States.
Miliband has previously been highly critical of Donald Trump, describing aspects of his political behaviour in strongly negative terms. These comments attracted attention in Washington following his appointment.
The Independent reported in July that Trump’s administration had expressed concern about Miliband’s return to a prominent government position, particularly because of his previous criticism of the American president.
For Britain, maintaining a constructive relationship with Washington remains strategically important, particularly regarding NATO, Ukraine, defence cooperation and international security.
Miliband’s challenge is therefore to maintain his political principles while ensuring that personal and ideological disagreements do not damage Britain’s diplomatic interests.
The Heathrow Battle Exposes Cabinet Divisions
One of the most recent disagreements concerns the proposed expansion of Heathrow Airport.
The £49 billion project has attracted support from several senior government figures, including ministers responsible for transport, business and economic policy.
Supporters argue that expanding Heathrow could improve Britain’s international connectivity, increase airport capacity, attract investment and create employment.
However, Miliband and his allies have raised concerns about the environmental consequences and the government’s wider climate commitments.
The disagreement reflects a fundamental tension within Labour’s economic strategy.
On one side are ministers who believe Britain needs major infrastructure projects to encourage economic growth and strengthen its international competitiveness.
On the other are politicians who argue that economic development must be consistent with climate objectives and the government’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions.
Neither position can simply be dismissed. Heathrow expansion involves important questions about employment, transport capacity, aviation emissions and the UK’s ability to compete internationally.
The real issue is whether the government can develop a coherent position that balances these competing priorities.
Net Zero Continues to Divide Labour
Miliband’s commitment to climate policy has been one of the defining features of his political career.
As Energy Secretary, he championed the government’s ambition to decarbonise Britain’s electricity system by 2030 and accelerate investment in renewable energy.
His supporters argue that this approach could reduce Britain’s dependence on imported fossil fuels, create new industries and provide greater long-term energy security.
However, critics have questioned the financial and economic consequences of pursuing ambitious climate targets.
Concerns have focused on energy bills, industrial competitiveness, the future of North Sea oil and gas production and the cost of developing renewable infrastructure.
These disagreements have created tensions between different sections of Labour.
Some ministers believe that economic growth requires greater flexibility over energy policy, while others argue that weakening climate commitments would undermine Britain’s long-term economic and environmental interests.
Miliband’s move to the Foreign Office has not removed him from this debate. Instead, climate policy has become part of his wider international agenda.
Foreign Policy Creates Another Political Challenge
As Foreign Secretary, Miliband has also sought to establish a more distinctive approach to Britain’s international relationships.
One of his priorities has been strengthening cooperation with European countries.
He believes Britain should develop closer strategic relationships with European partners, particularly on climate change, international development and global security.
His approach has attracted support among politicians who believe Brexit weakened Britain’s influence and that closer cooperation could strengthen its international position.
However, there are concerns about how this strategy will affect Britain’s relationship with the United States.
The challenge is particularly complicated under Donald Trump, whose administration has taken different positions from the British government on climate policy, international trade and several geopolitical issues.
Britain cannot afford to ignore the importance of its American alliance.
The United States remains a central partner in intelligence sharing, defence cooperation and NATO. Any British foreign secretary must therefore balance European cooperation with the need to maintain a functioning relationship with Washington.
Miliband’s previous public criticism of Trump makes this diplomatic responsibility particularly sensitive.
The Middle East Has Become Another Flashpoint
Miliband’s position on Israel and Palestine has also attracted considerable political attention.
At the Labour Party conference in September 2026, he acknowledged that the party’s previous approach to the conflict had fallen short and promised a more assertive foreign policy.
He defended the government’s decision to impose sanctions relating to illegal Israeli settlements and argued that Britain should work with other countries to protect international law.
The position has been welcomed by some Labour members and campaigners who have demanded stronger action over the humanitarian situation in Gaza and developments in the occupied West Bank.
However, a more confrontational diplomatic approach also carries risks.
Britain must maintain relationships with important international partners while ensuring that its foreign policy remains consistent with international law and humanitarian principles.
The challenge is to turn political statements into effective diplomatic action.
Is Burnham Losing Control of His Government?
Perhaps the most significant question raised by the controversy is the relationship between Miliband and Burnham.
A successful government requires ministers to work towards shared objectives, even when they disagree over individual policies.
Cabinet members are entitled to express different views, and serious policy disagreements can improve government decision-making.
However, when disagreements become public political battles, they can create the impression of a government lacking a clear direction.
The recent disputes over Heathrow, energy policy, North Sea production and international relations have raised questions about how effectively Labour is coordinating its priorities.
Burnham must establish clear responsibilities and ensure that individual ministers do not undermine decisions agreed collectively by the government.
At the same time, he must allow senior ministers sufficient freedom to carry out their responsibilities.
The Foreign Secretary’s role is particularly demanding because international diplomacy often overlaps with domestic economic and security priorities.
The Prime Minister therefore needs a clear understanding of where Miliband’s responsibilities begin and end.
Labour Cannot Afford Another Period of Internal Conflict
Labour has already experienced years of political disagreements over economic policy, Brexit, energy, immigration and the Middle East.
The party came to power promising stability, economic growth and a more effective approach to government.
Voters will expect ministers to concentrate on delivering those objectives rather than becoming consumed by disagreements inside the Cabinet.
The Heathrow controversy illustrates the difficulty of reconciling economic growth with ambitious environmental targets.
Similar tensions exist over North Sea production, industrial investment, energy prices and Britain’s international responsibilities.
These are complicated issues that require serious debate. However, Labour must demonstrate that it can reach decisions and implement them consistently.
If disagreements continue to dominate political coverage, the government risks losing public confidence in its ability to deliver a coherent programme.
Conclusion: A Difficult Test for Miliband and Burnham
Ed Miliband’s appointment as Foreign Secretary has brought considerable experience and a distinctive political outlook into the Foreign Office. However, it has also created difficult diplomatic and domestic challenges for Andy Burnham’s government.
His positions on climate change, European cooperation, the Middle East and international development have helped define Labour’s direction, but they have also exposed disagreements over economic growth, energy security and Britain’s relationship with major international partners.
The Heathrow expansion dispute is another example of the competing priorities that the government must reconcile.
Ultimately, the question is not whether Miliband should have strong political convictions. It is whether those convictions can be translated into a consistent government strategy that serves Britain’s national interests.
Burnham must demonstrate that his Cabinet can debate difficult issues without allowing internal disagreements to overwhelm the government’s wider objectives.
For Miliband, the challenge is equally significant: he must show that his international ambitions can strengthen Britain’s position without creating unnecessary divisions at home.
The success of his appointment will therefore depend not on the number of political battles he enters, but on whether he can deliver meaningful diplomatic results while helping maintain unity within the government.