DAN HODGES: What Labour insiders are telling me about Ed Miliband’s ‘furious’ reaction to Burnham’s ‘U-turn’ on Chancellor

Ed Miliband is angry. News of the former Labor leader’s sacking as Andy Burnham’s chancellor has apparently turned Red Ed into a distinctive powdery hue.

‘His office is getting ready to move to the Treasury,’ a cabinet source told me, ‘and the whole briefing was that he was getting ready for the job.’ He’ll be really angry if he loses now.

Another source explained: ‘Ed has spent the best part of a year talking to Andy about his economic strategy. He was the main person who had been with her and James over the past two weeks. [Purnell, Burnham’s chief of staff] About preparing a package that will give confidence to the markets.

‘This does not mean that he was specifically promised this job. But he basically assumed he had it nailed. So reports of her abandonment made him quite angry.’

Miliband needs to rein in his anger a little more. According to sources close to Team Burnham, no decision has been made yet. “The election hasn’t actually been held yet,” one of them told me. ‘Andy won’t be thrown into anything. Nothing will be finalized until he gets into No 10.’

If rumors are true that our new prime minister will make a U-turn before he even enters Downing Street, this will herald chaos over the appointment of his new government.

The chancellor’s role is so important that any change of heart is reflected on the whiteboard used to chart changes. ‘There are some roles you can change quite painlessly,’ another cabinet minister told me, ‘but the Chancellor is very basic. If you reverse your decision in this matter, the whole plan will be in vain.’

Yesterday people were investigating the reasons for the possible return. Some have noted opposition from unions, worrying that Miliband’s anti-North Sea drilling and net zero obsession will rub off on the Treasury. Others claim that after secret notices were sent to the city, word was sent back that Miliband’s appointment would push markets closer to the edge.

But I was presented with a third theory. ‘Andy knows he has a women’s problem. Can’t kick out the most senior female politician in the party [Rachel Reeves] He will be fired from his job and replaced by a man whose leadership burned out a decade ago. Women in the PLP (Parliamentary Labor Party) will not stand for this.’

Much of the speculation about who will replace Reeves therefore focuses on current Home Affairs Minister Shabana Mahmood. Yesterday, Mahmood’s supporters went into overdrive, briefing that he was “tethered” to replace Reeves. Another told reporters: ‘I won’t stop you from doing this.’

However, briefings may still be a little early. The other candidate for the post, Foreign Minister Yvette Cooper, announced that she would prefer to remain in her current position.

However, although Mahmood is highly respected by Burnham and his inner circle, I understand there are some concerns about his lack of economic experience.

But one thing is clear. Recent speculation that both Miliband brothers could be given major portfolios (with Ed in the Treasury and David Miliband returning to run the Foreign Office, like Cameron) is off the mark.

As one Burnham ally said: ‘He’s not angry. ‘If there are as many men from the same family in high positions in the state, it will cause her to be hanged from Big Ben by her private parts.’

Burnham recognizes that she is vulnerable on three fronts on the thorny issue of gender representation. First, since its founding in 1900, the Labor Party has had 19 leaders. And when Burnham is officially appointed the 20th on Friday, he will also be the 20th white man to hold the post.

The second is what Burnham regards as the ‘Demon Eyes’ issue. This was the name of the football team on which he and James Purnell played during the Blair years. As one minister explained, ‘All the high-profile New Labor boys were in the team. And it was seen as a big clique. All women were excluded. There’s a danger that No 10 could start to look a bit like the Demon Eyes dressing room.’

Andy Burnham knows he’s vulnerable on the thorny issue of gender representation

The third big problem is the hang-up from the Starmer era. Rightly or wrongly, there has been a perception among Labour’s women that the No 10 operation, run by Sir Keir’s former private secretary Morgan McSweeney, has become a ‘Boys’ Club’ where women are excluded at best and subject to offensive and negative briefings at worst.

As one MP close to Burnham metaphorically observed, ‘When Andy goes to Downing Street, young people’s magazines and Red Bull cans go into the bin’.

But Burnham has a problem. He is still a man and will be running against the fourth female leader of the Conservative Party in Kemi Badenoch. So her strategy for countering inevitable gender strife is simple. He’ll fill his closet with as many women as he can get his hands on.

Mahmood and Cooper are candidates for senior roles. So does Rachel Reeves, if she can be persuaded to agree to step out of the Treasury’s line of fire. Lucy Powell, a key ally and deputy leader of the party, will replace David Lammy as deputy prime minister.

Louise Haigh, who planned Burnham’s leadership coup, will also be rewarded with a prominent position. Although I was told he would have to watch his back. Other members of Burnham’s inner circle were apparently offended by her outspokenness when she admitted in a question-and-answer session last week that she had been collaborating with the former Manchester mayor for at least a year about replacing Starmer.

He is also the focus of attention from Starmer’s vengeful former employees. ‘Morgan [McSweeney] ‘He’s got some stuff on him,’ one told me darkly, ‘and he’s going to wait for the right moment to drop a bomb on him.’

Other women rumored to be in the running for key portfolios include Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, who worked with Burnham as an advisor to London Mayor Sadiq Khan and made the politically astute decision to nominate her for all three leadership contests.

And Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, who, although loyal to Starmer, benefited from Kemi Badenoch’s rant as a ‘vindictive class warrior’ at a recent PMQ session. ‘Kemi has made Bridget unplunderable,’ a cabinet colleague told me.

There will also be room for Angela Rayner. His influence appears to have diminished as a result of his own maneuvers during the anti-Starmer conspiracy. As one member of Burnham’s inner circle put it, ‘Andy thought he had an arrangement with Angela. I later found out that she was working against him behind his back. So he will pay his respects to him. But it won’t be a major part of their plans going forward.’

All this may seem trite and pretentious. But in the Labor Party, where tensions have increased after the party chose to appoint another male leader, the gender balance – or lack thereof – in Andy Burnham’s cabinet is seen as a defining issue.

This could mean Ed Miliband is finally being robbed of the role he covets. But that may be the price Labor eventually pays for having a leader who at least knows what a woman is.