The first principle of public speaking is flatter your audience. Today I want to talk to you, appropriately enough, about progress. The subject of this conference is how we win the next election. Progress is the answer.

At every General Election, the fundamental question is this: who can take the country in the right direction? Our task at the next Election is to convince the country to vote for progress again.

My argument today is that they will vote for progress if we meet three tests:

• First, the test of progress in this Parliament.
• Second, the test of vision for the next one.
• Third, the test of change to achieve that vision.

Only Labour can pass those tests. Because we are in government, and in government you can do. You can show that change works.

And by doing showing that change works, we can win the optimistic argument for our country: that we can succeed in a global economy, as long as we continue to modernise. And we can show the Conservatives are just that: conservative, afraid of change, wanting to take the country back.

This is where I think we are now.

In 1997, we inherited public investment that was disgracefully low. Standards were dreadful. We came at the end of a long period of high unemployment and neglect of the poor.

Over the last ten years, sound economics has been the hand-maiden of just social policy. We found the money. We dealt with long-term unemployment. We established a method for change in all our services. We summoned the courage to see it through, against all the slings and arrows. Throughout we have retained the consent of the British public.

Today, 800,000 fewer children live in poverty today because of what we did. 87,000 more children leaving primary school this year can read and write. School results are the best they have ever been. Waiting lists will soon be a forgotten memory. Employment has never been higher and economic growth never so stable, never so long-lasting. We are engaged partners in Europe, not isolated wreckers.

But at the next Election, that record will not be enough. Ten years is too long a time in politics. Lots of voters were children ten years ago. The folk-memory of every election campaign is a lot shorter than that.

So, that is our test over the rest of this Parliament: to demonstrate further progress. That means not retreating to the comfort zone. A decisive shift to the Left would be a deliberate leap into Opposition. Government is harder than Opposition because it means difficult changes. But the changes are worthwhile and necessary because they deliver the progress

If we don’t change councils’ approach to housing, we won’t help first time buyers. If we don’t continue to reform welfare, the talent of hundreds of thousands will be wasted. If we don’t reform GP services, health inequality will continue. If we don’t deal with failing schools, children’s lives will be blighted. If we don’t raise the retirement age, we can’t restore the earnings link. If we don’t raise the school leaving age, too many will fall through the gaps in the system.

If we can go into the next Election with education, health, housing, crime getting better, then people will be confident that further progress is possible.

These are not changes made for their own sake. We have a vision of the good society that that the Conservatives cannot match. We are making progress towards the Prime Minister’s vision of a genuine meritocracy, where we give everyone a real chance to develop their talent. This is our second test: to win the argument for that progressive vision.

Progressive politics always springs from an emotional source. It begins with the idea of injustice. There is a gap between the country which is possible and the country which is. It is into this gap that we place our politics. Everything we do refers to our sovereign idea: a genuine meritocracy built on a platform of social justice.

Wasted talent offends a very deep moral intuition: it’s not fair. As long as people don’t get what they deserve then the job of progressive politics is not over. This idea – if you put something in then you deserve something out – is an idea we share in common with the vast majority of British people.

A progressive meritocracy means concerted action to tackle child poverty. It means a reinvigorated strategy to ensure that standards of literacy continue to rise. It means a high floor below which wages are not permitted to fall. It means all companies helping their employees save for a pension. It means fair taxation to ensure that unfair privilege is contained.

We are ten years into a great journey towards that progressive meritocracy. The priorities we have had in government are those that only a Labour government would ever have. A minimum wage; eradicating youth unemployment; Sure Start; a child poverty target; an assault on failure in schools.

And those priorities have a clear goal: to give everyone the chance to develop their talent. To create a higher floor so that life chances aren’t blighted by poverty. And to help everyone climb as high as their aspiration takes them.

That progressive society is within our reach. And it is a vision that the Tories cannot match. They don’t believe in it – they are still elitists, as their attitude to grammar schools shows. But they cannot match us for another reason. They are failing the third test: of understanding the need for change.

We’ve seen their strategy unfold now. It’s obvious what they are up to. They saw New Labour was popular. They didn’t understand why but they worked out that it was. So they decided to associate themselves with it. If the Tory brand was full of poison, then borrow another one for a while. And then, when you think you’ve drawn the poison, just resume where you left off.

So, on the environment, Zac Goldsmith told Cameron that the kids liked it. But there’s not a single policy he can actually think of and stick to. He’s sort of in favour of the environment in general – trees, glaciers, that sort of thing. He just can’t think of anything in particular that he wants to do. It’s not the blue-sky thinking that he likes, just the blue sky.

On tax cuts we heard time and again that there wouldn’t be any unfunded promises. As soon as they think we’ve been hoodwinked, here come the unfunded hand-outs to the wealthy. There is a black hole in their plans – a £6 billion gap. Their proposals are unfair, unfunded, and unthought through. And who would pay that deficit? The user of public services.

On Europe, he told us he’d stop banging on about it. And now? He’s banging on about it. Every day we can see the difference between what Cameron told the Guardian then and what they are telling right wing columnists now.

Here’s the message for David Cameron. It’ll take more than six months of feigning nice to convince anyone that you mean it. You can’t pretend to be in a position you never were.

So, I don’t fear the Tories. I think they will be unmasked by the time we get to the election. Because still they don’t have a vision for progress, or the courage to change.

Never forget the historical significance of what we have achieved. In the long history of the Conservative Party only three of their leaders have failed to become prime minister. They are: William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard.

And we can do it again. The next Election is there for us to win. But it’s not enough to say we want to keep progressing. The harder question to answer is how we achieve it. Neil Kinnock often used to say that every speech needs a vision and an instruction. So what is the instruction? What do we have to do?

We have to match our vision with a method to achieve it. That is the third test: having a method for change. Because if we are not satisfied with the world as it is, then we have to be restless radicals.

At times reform can be very uncomfortable. The interests of the staff and the interests of the citizens are not always identical. We respect and value the staff but we side with the citizens. That is a harder choice than it sounds; it can bring down criticism on our heads, sometimes from our own natural supporters. That is what being in government is like.

And that is what the Conservatives do not have the courage or beliefs to do: take their vision for the NHS. No more change. If you don’t believe in the potential of progress, then it’s easy to cast change aside. But if like us you are passionate that things can get better, then you have to make change your ally.

“Oh! The brave music of a distant drum”. That was how Bevan used to pour scorn on anyone who wanted to escape from an awkward conflict. Bevan shows us that the finest idealists keep their feet on the ground. His vision and sense of purpose was always coupled with an iron determination to see it happen. We believe that power should be transferred, wherever possible, to people. That will sometimes mean they have a direct choice, sometimes a say in the design process, sometimes control over a budget, sometimes a vote. The method will differ but the point will be the same: control should pass to the people.

We want to orient public services towards prevention and away from cure. The early years are critical for child development and educational attainment, a just social policy helps to prevent crime. We can reduce both suffering and cost by tackling incipient health problems.

We value the contribution that people can make and we are humble about our own role in government. We do not start with the assumption of the old social democracy that central power is usually the best answer. We want, for example, to personalise the public services. We know this cannot be done by central fiat. We will need to tap into the mute wisdom of the people, the users of the service. Then, if changes need to be made, we can do the heavy lifting.

I say all this not because there is any great virtue in reform just for its own sake. I say it because, in all the public services, you can date the serious improvements exactly to the moment that our reform programme kicked in. The improvements to our labour market, to monetary policy, to public services have all been the upshot of our willingness to take risks, to act, to be bold. Conservatism is better in the Labour party than in the Conservative party, but not by much.

If we apply our foot to the brake now, then progress will not be maintained. And if progress is not maintained then, I promise you, people will give up on our vision of an enabling state. Reform has always been necessary to get consent for investment. And if we get on the wrong side of that argument then the electoral coalition on which our three victories have rested will start to come apart.

So, that is our instruction. Continue to change. Continue to make progress. Win the argument for our vision.

And make sure that David Cameron joins that exclusive club, the fourth Tory leader never to win an Election.