Would David be willing to serve under Ed?
An interesting aspect of the Labour leadership election - as ever in these things - is which candidates would be willing to serve under each other.
In particular would David Miliband be content to serve under his younger brother Ed?
The talk among many Labour people at the moment is that if David were to lose to Ed then the elder brother might leave politics altogether.
I don't imagine Ed would have any trouble serving under David, but the other way round?
It's a matter of ordinary human psychology.
How many people in life would be willing to work in such a public role under the command of their younger sibling?
I certainly wouldn't.
And what would make it even more humiliating for David Miliband is that for many years he was the heir apparent, and then his younger brother took the bold and unusual decision to challenge him.
I'm Michael Crick, and I'm Newsnight's political editor. My guiding rule is that in any story there's usually something the politicians would prefer the world not to know. My job is to find that out. Follow me on 
Comment number 1.
At 16:49 14th Jun 2010, DebtJuggler wrote:Crick...you seem to have developed and unhealthy obsession with the Milibands and the Labour leadership contest.
However, it's not David's reaction, should Ed pip him to the post, that's of concern, ...it's what will the reaction of the UK Muslim voting population be to a Jewish Labour leader, should either of them win!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 00:19 15th Jun 2010, barriesingleton wrote:LIKE CHICKEN AND EGG
In the final analysis, headlessness is just that.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 07:31 15th Jun 2010, JunkkMale wrote:I am sure it is the same across the entire political infirmament, but the possible psychology of those who would seek to rule... er.. represent... gets ever more troubling.
From Ed Balls taking out on the country the biter memories of school swirlies, to Millibands D. & E. 'coping' with their relative statuses (in all ways), much is explained, if not excused. Or very edifying.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 09:12 15th Jun 2010, jauntycyclist wrote:would ed be able to control david ? would he be able to sack him? works both ways. never work with family.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 10:28 15th Jun 2010, barriesingleton wrote:THE TROUBLE WITH POLITICIANS (#3 and #4)
Spot-on Junkk and Jaunty. The political ninny serially fails to realise that if you choose for PERSONALITY, good POLICY emerges.
The Milibands have 'compromised personalities', by blood. This could have a serious effect on policy. Just think - we might even get caught up in some dumb war!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 12:53 15th Jun 2010, stevie wrote:there are more fights within families than out of them...why complicate things further with relatives arguing around a cabinet table....should they ever get that far...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 21:54 15th Jun 2010, barriesingleton wrote:"I LOVE BROTHER DAVID DEARLY"
That sentiment from Limited Ed, should be warning enough. I am reminded of Sideshow Bob and his brother Cecil.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 09:51 16th Jun 2010, JunkkMale wrote:'7. At 9:54pm on 15 Jun 2010, barriesingleton wrote:'
Just for us... 'Grrr' (though, sadly, copyright has prevented us from savouring Mr. Grammer's sublime V/O and his liquid mix of anger and despair):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFc9Buyul6w
Rakes' progress?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 19:00 16th Jun 2010, Paul Tinnion wrote:Pitt the Younger's elder brother served under him.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)