In a fortnight, what John Prescott called ‘the tectonic plates’ of politics have moved decisively. New Labour has shown once again that its home ground is the centre ground.

But Cameron, in a twist that has become the hallmark of the Tory bid for definition, has ended any bid to stick to the centre in favour of an approach that can only be described as ‘rolling back the years’, back to the 1980s. Cameron’s new Labour moment is over. The Tories have reverted to type. They have left themselves with no plan for the downturn – and crucially no plan for a fairer society when an upturn comes.

Cameron can sound different to Thatcher. He draws on different Conservative traditions. But both Thatcher and Cameron’s stories have the same ending; roll back the state; accept as inevitable unfairness today and social division tomorrow.

Cameron’s one time concern for a broken society may have stood the focus group test last year but it doesn’t seem to be standing the “money where your mouth is” test this year.

This rolling back the state now looks more and more like rolling back the years, to the uncaring, ‘nasty party’ we came to know so well. While Tory backbenchers see Cameron on the right side of dogma, the world sees him on the wrong side of history. In this global recession, he stands isolated confronting market failure with a ‘do-nothing’ attitude and a plea for a return to Victorian ‘self help’.

On the downturn, Tory policy has oscillated between initiative-itis, inaction and sheer confusion.

First, they set themselves against rescuing the banks or regulating the mortgage market. When the banks were in trouble Mr. Osborne went to great lengths to tell the world “I am not in favour of nationalisation, full stop”. He then opposed the Banking Bill giving the Government the powers to nationalise Northern Rock. Last year he welcomed a report from one of his policy commissions which included the immortal words ”mortgage regulation. We see no need to continue to regulate the provision of mortgage finance” and shrugged off short-selling as merely “a function of capitalist markets”.

Now their position on borrowing is confusion itself. On 1 October David Cameron said “we will rein in borrowing”. Twenty days later he said ”Borrowing goes up. That is inevitable and you have to allow that to happen”. Seven days after that, the shadow chief secretary was saying ”increasing borrowing is not a strategy for dealing with the recession”.

But what’s also become clear in recent weeks is that the Tories have no plan for an upturn either, especially when it comes to the core question about the role of the state.

Continuous public service reform is crucial and must be founded on a clear purpose for what government should deliver. We’re clear. We want government to help create a strong economy, a country of strong communities tied together by fair rules and a country of fair chances. That frames our agenda for government – and what we want it to look like. And delivering fairness alongside prosperity is the key to the holding and winning the new centre ground.

A few weeks ago the Cabinet Office published an academic evidence paper called Getting On, Getting Ahead – which reviews the evidence about the trends and drivers of social mobility in Britain.

It seems hard to believe now, but the global economy is going to double in size in the next twenty years creating up to one billion skilled jobs. That’s a big prize – the chance to create new opportunities for millions of British people to get on in life – just like the era after 1945, when a similar surge of highly skilled jobs (professional and clerical) created the room at the top for a record breaking surge in social mobility.

The wave of globalisation that’s coming should therefore set the terms of our strategy for an upturn – which is why the Prime Minister is right to talk about a new settlement required for new times. And the evidence indicates that giving people a fair shot to get on life, no matter their background, requires action and investment at every stage of the lifecycle. Action the Tories won’t take and investment they would dramatically cut.

Let’s start with youngsters. We now know high-quality pre-school education is a vital leg-up to doing well in the years to come. Toddlers who enjoy high quality pre-school education enjoy reading results nearly twice as good as those with only home care by age 10. US studies show a nine-fold payback across a life time for every dollar on preschool interventions for disadvantaged kids, and in Scandinavia, links between parental and child achievement weakened – in some cases massively – for generations enjoying access to universal childcare.

Good effects are multiplied by parents who take an interest in their kids: parental aspirations have an impact equivalent to four additional school terms on pupil progression , and parental interest in education has four times as much influence on attainment at 16 than socio-economic background.

This is why we spend over £5 billion on early years and childcare (four times the amount in 1997), doubling the number of childcare places. Childcare tax credits now pay 80 per cent of formal childcare that eligible families pay, and parents now get nine months paid maternity leave, and two weeks paid paternity leave.

The Tories however, dismiss the value of high-quality pre-school education. David Willets in the Sunday Times suggests the government is too concerned with early years and contrary to now widely accepted evidence suggests that “children are resilient and the early years need not determine their destiny” . If only that were true for all our children. But worse is their policy to curtail Sure Start. They want to slice £79 million we’ve budgeted for new Sure Start outreach workers – vital to giving young kids a good start in life – and £121 million from core Sure Start budgets.

Then, at school we know that qualifications remain the best guarantor of future success. School qualifications at 16 account for some 20pc of intergenerational mobility. Kids with five GSCE’s of any grade will earn 10 per cent more than those without. And missing education, employment and training between 16 and 18 is the best predictor of being unemployed at 21.

But the Tories have a programme of cuts for schools. This totals an incredible £4.5 billion – that’s an amazing one in seven re-build projects; or 360 school rebuilds across the country cancelled. On post-16 education, David Cameron himself says he can’t give a straight answer on whether he would support the education maintenance allowance (EMAs) that have encouraged 16-18 year olds to stay in education. He told Sky News when asked about his commitment to EMAs “I can’t give you a straight answer on that”. Worse, the Tories oppose raising the age for education and training provision to 18. On ITV lunchtime news, Michael Gove called it ”a stunt” and on 14 January this year, they voted against that part of the Education & Skills Bill. At 18, Mr Cameron refuses to support a target to let 50 per cent of youngsters go to university; telling the Guardian it was “not for the Government to set some target”.

Finally, workplace training. We know that 70 per cent of the workforce of 2020 is already in work. Analysis shows that those who get trapped on low skills stay low paid for life and have little access to training: less than 10 per cent of those without qualifications had any workplace training in the last three months – where over a third with Level 4 qualifications did.

The Tories would make vast cuts to successful workplace learning programmes. On 22 July, they proposed to cut £1 billion from the government’s pioneering Train to Gain service that channels money to firms to train employees. They were immediately attacked by the CBI, the IoD and Lord Lietch.

At every stage of the ladder of opportunity, the Tories are found wanting.

Where the Tories have alternative proposals, they typically propose letting the market run its course (education) or fail to tackle vested interests (NHS). But they refuse to countenance government intervention to halt inadequate standards. They believe the market should be allowed to run its course. In other words, while our approach to public services is a ‘high floor and no ceiling’, theirs is ‘no floor and no ceiling’.

And all this was before George Osborne’s new promise to spend even less than before. I’m all for reducing government waste – the Cabinet Office and Treasury will unite in the months ahead to champion these measures – but I’m not for reducing life chances. This removal of the ladder of opportunity sits ill when a global financial crisis threatens to hit hardest those who need the ladder most.

The pre-budget report sets out a clear plan for the downturn. Over the next few months, we will set out new proposals for real help now, and for the kind of country we want to see when the upturn comes.

Crucially, you will see us stick like glue to the centre-ground – globally applauded economic management alongside absolute determination to deliver a fairer Britain. That’s always been new Labour’s way. Enduring values applied to changing circumstances. We believe that the life chances of every family and every young person can’t be put on hold. We did that in Tory recessions and we lost a generation.

Tory plans would see us once more lose a generation of opportunity as an ‘inevitable price worth paying’. Talk about rolling back the years…