After Labour’s fourth consecutive defeat in 1992, the challenge for the party was to develop a new political identity, showing that it could stand up for individual freedom and tackle public and private sector vested interests. It had to show that Labour would be on the side of those who wanted to get on, making responsible tax and spending commitments, and promising to manage capitalism more efficiently than the Conservatives. Southern Discomfort, a landmark series of publications exploring Labour’s weakness in the south of England, proposed the rewriting of clause IV as a symbol of change, a reform which Labour adopted in 1995.

In 2010, it is inevitably easier to assess why Labour lost than to provide immediate solutions. Ed Miliband and his new shadow cabinet team will need time to reflect on Labour’s defeat and rethink the party’s approach accordingly. However, there are some key lessons from our post-election update to the 1992 publications, Southern Discomfort Again, that they should bear in mind.

First, Labour must always project itself as a party of power, despite its origins in the 19th century as a party of working-class protest. In order to help people, right injustice and widen opportunity, Labour has to be in government. Although obvious, this point was sadly forgotten for much of the 1980s – and in the 1950s, too. Labour can only create a better society by winning and retaining power. Indeed, it should aspire to be the natural party of government in Britain.

Second, Labour has to create a broad electoral alliance as a national party representing a wide coalition of social and geographical interests. The party has to appeal to a wider group of voters if it is to win and hold power. As well as addressing voters’ concerns in areas where Labour has traditionally been strong, it has to capture many more marginal seats in the south and Midlands. The marginal seats that the party has to win to secure a governing majority contain a higher proportion of C2, C1 and AB voters than ‘safe’ Labour constituencies.

Third, Labour will only win if it can sustain a reputation for economic competence. That has to mean a credible plan for reducing the deficit and putting the public finances on a sustainable footing, as well as an approach to tax and spend that protects middle-income voters. Labour should examine the scope for replacing regressive taxes such as council tax and stamp duty that hit younger families hard with a progressive approach to the taxation of land and property. Most importantly, Labour has to offer a compelling growth model for the British economy, one which embraces intervention by government where necessary and takes account of the need for environmental sustainability.

Fourth, Labour has to demonstrate that it is both the party of social justice and individual aspiration. It has to protect the vulnerable by making further progress in tackling poverty, and become the party of social mobility again. The party’s mission is to break down barriers that allow elites and vested interests to hold people back, challenging established institutions and enabling every individual to fulfil their true potential. In policy terms, the party needs a radical strategy to expand the supply of social housing, while removing obstacles to home ownership, especially for first-time buyers.

Fifth, it has to face up to, and debate openly, contentious issues that concern voters such as immigration, welfare reform and the role of the state after the financial crisis. In particular, Labour will have to improve efficiency and productivity in public services given the current climate of fiscal constraint, offering greater value for money and higher service standards, while doing more to expand life chances.

Sixth, the party has to strengthen its position in local government, both to ensure decent local services and to act as a springboard to national power. It has to decentralise as far as possible rather than hoarding power at the centre; citizens in England need to feel as well represented as they are in Wales and Scotland after devolution. Reviving local government is essential to helping the party reclaim an English identity.

Seventh, it has, as a matter of priority, to revitalise and modernise the party in both its traditional strongholds and in the south and the Midlands. The 2010 leadership election showed the power and potential of community organising to reform and re-energise Labour. There should be a campaign by the national party to recruit a new generation of local Labour candidates and councillors, particularly in the south, where Labour is chronically under-represented in local government.

Finally, Labour must develop its own conception of the new politics, recognising that the public appreciates politicians who are prepared to work together in the national interest. The party must be ready to offer a warm welcome to disillusioned Liberal Democrats who seek a radical home. And, if political circumstances change, Labour should not rule out a progressive alliance with the Liberal Democrats. The referendum on the Alternative Vote for the House of Commons ought to be wholeheartedly supported by the party. Labour must also reach out to voters who previously supported it but now vote Conservative. New ways must be found of doing politics differently.

Labour has to look to the future confidently, but it should never underestimate the electoral threat it now faces. David Cameron and Nick Clegg wish to destroy Labour as a prospective party of government, constructing a new coalition based on a philosophy of economic and social liberalism which, they believe, has the potential to command the centre ground of British politics. Resisting this threat has to mean, first and foremost, rebuilding Labour’s electoral support in southern England.

This will not be done simply by pursuing the policies and strategies of the 1990s. Things have changed. Social democrats are most successful where they are prepared to rethink their strategies and approaches in the light of changing circumstances, recognising that, as the world moves on, so must we. If Labour takes into account the views of those voters that have deserted the party in recent years, it can re-emerge as the dominant progressive force in British politics, advancing its vision of a society where, in RH Tawney’s words, every individual has access to ‘the means of civilisation’, and once again become the natural party of government.