by Kevin Meagher

It’s not fair. That seems to be the message from Blairite veterans at how the nascent Labour leadership contest is shaping up. A seemingly co-ordinated attempt to appeal for offside is underway, with complaints about the leading candidates’ campaigning efforts and the role of the trade unions in the process.

Former health secretary, Alan Milburn, was at it on Newsnight the other day, saying that for “one or two candidates being assumed to be the font of all wisdom in this race is just not right.” He wants an open field, which is code for anyone but Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper.

Lady Sally Morgan, Tony Blair’s former political secretary, also weighed in, claiming it’s both “arrogant and plain wrong” for there to be only two candidates in the frame.

Barry Sheerman, the Huddersfield sage, has come over all Inspector Renault and is shocked – shocked – that “Unite’s merry men” have the temerity, as an affiliated organisation for the past 100 years, to have their say in the process.

Meanwhile John Hutton, former DWP secretary, is equally sniffy about union involvement, pointing out that only a ”tiny proportion of the population are in trade unions.” (Not, though, in the Barrow shipyard he used to represent in Parliament, presumably?)

Moaning that Labour MPs – who are free to back whomsoever they wish – are currently breaking cover in greater numbers for either Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham is like complaining that rain is wet. Indeed, for a wing of the party committed to consumer choice, it’s a strange gripe to have.

The Blairites – if, indeed, such a description still has any coherence – should perhaps have been better prepared for the possibility that Labour might have ended-up having a leadership contest in the latter half of 2015.

‘Ah, but it would have been disloyal to even countenance defeat’, comes the reply. (Truly, if Labour politicians have stopped endlessly game-playing how they will benefit if their party leader falls under a bus, then we must have entered the realm of ‘the new politics’).

The real problem for the Blairite clan in recent years has been their lack of succession-planning. Their ranks were hollowed-out by the mass exodus of their talented brethren in 2010, with Milburn, Byers, Hoon, Hewitt, Reid and Hutton all choosing to abandon politics (usually in preference for corporate lolly). Charles Clarke fought on, (but the voters had other ideas). Alan Johnson remained, but has opted to stay out of the top flight.

They chose to relinquish their influence over the party and now resent the fact they are struggling to regain it. This helps explain why they are such hopeless plotters and fixers. The CIA was more adept when it came to trying to kill Fidel Castro.

It’s a pattern of ill-preparedness than stretches back to at least 2007 and Blair’s resignation. Back then, none of them had the courage to stand against Gordon Brown in the leadership race, if only to make an alternative argument in the hope of shaping his agenda.

Fast-forward to James Purnell’s resignation from Brown’s cabinet in 2009. There was a momentary sense this would trigger David Miliband’s resignation too and set off a chain-reaction that would see Brown toppled. Predictably, it ended with a whimper. As did the attempted coupled by Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt in 2010.

Then came David Miliband’s leadership campaign. Despite having heavyweight endorsements and more money than all the other candidates, he lost. Yes, he won more MPs and party members, but he didn’t perform strongly enough in the trade union section of the electoral college. So came the narrative of The Great Betrayal. It wasn’t fair because the trade unionists preferred his brother and their votes should have counted for less!

Selective memory is another problem. For today’s camp followers to shed crocodile tears about trade union influence is epically disingenuous. There were no complaints when Ken Jackson was general secretary of Amicus, (Unite’s predecessor) and the fixing and finance and selection battle nominations flowed in the Blairites’ favour.

So we are where we are. Liz Kendall, said to be the main Blairite standard bearer, was first out the traps in announcing she was standing and thinks she has the 35 MP nominations she needs to get on the ballot paper. Fair play to her. Ditto Mary Creagh, who may struggle to make the shortlist but should still set out her analysis, make her pitch and see what happens.

Tristram Hunt, meanwhile, has finally ended his lumbering candidacy-that-never-was by backing Kendall, (proof, perhaps, that Blairites have remembered the need for a Granita deal?)

So the grumbling grandees should take a step back. All that has happened is that the two most experienced candidates in the field – Burnham and Cooper – seem, at the moment, to be accruing more support from MPs. If anyone has a problem with that, surely they should take it up with the individual MPs? Or are candidates not supposed to try and win an election?

Indeed, for a bunch of once super-smart operators to cry foul because they are not as good at politics as they used to be, is pretty desperate stuff. Once again, the Blairites have turned up with a knife to a gunfight.

When will they learn?

Kevin Meagher is associate editor of Uncut

Tags: Andy Burnham, Blairites, general election 2015, Kevin Meagher, Labour defeat, Labour leadership election, Yvette Cooper