Question: The IPPR played a key role in developing the tuition fees policy. Did the government simply get the presentation issues wrong?

Nick Pearce: I think the policy was right but it was certainly badly handled - at least to begin with. It took a long time to address the concerns that backbenchers had and to focus on the social justice arguments for tuition fees and in particular about access to higher education for people from lower social economic groups.

The policy was right; it’s progressive and fair. The IPPR has argued that for many years going back to pamphlets in the early '90s. But certainly the politics could have been handled better.

Question: Labour are now talking about bringing backbenchers in earlier to the policy making process. Should that come first rather than focusing on policy advisors?

Nick Pearce: I don’t think the government is focused on policy advisors and think tanks before backbenchers - that would be a wrong characterisation of the situation. It’s up to the Labour Party over how it wants to engage with its own MPs and so on.

I think the issue for us in the higher education debate was the progressive case for tuition fees. The fact that there has been a huge middle class subsidy for many years in terms of higher education costs while other parts of the education system - particularly further education - have been neglected.

Those were the real core issues; about how you pay for expansion and ensure that you rebalance your public subsidy towards parts of the education system like FE that need more. What the government should have been doing is addressing those earlier in the debate but I think they recognise that now.

Question: The focus is now moving back towards domestic issues. What are the things that the government could go forward with?

Nick Pearce: The big thing this year is the spending review. The fiscal position is tighter than before. The previous big increases in public expenditure can’t simply be repeated at the levels that they were. This requires the government to look very hard at what its priorities are and where the money should go.

That will also help determine what’s in the manifesto for the next general election because you can only promise what you can pay for.

It’s a very important year for taking the agenda forward for coming years. Certainly from our perspective, if you want to achieve social justice, then the early years are crucially important; what kinds of childcare should you fund and where - programmes like SureStart.

All the evidence shows that investment in children’s’ early lives makes a difference to life chances.

The other big area is transport where there’s been a big insufficient progress. Labour needs to convince the electorate it can succeed in public transport. Where things have worked it’s because people have been bold and brave. I think there is a desire for doing that in transport.

The IPPR has argued for road user charges as a way of extending the investment that can be made in public transport and cutting car congestion.

Question: What else should the government be considering?

Nick Pearce: Democracy. Some people in government have been signalling they’re prepared to return to the issue of House of Lords reform. There’s a whole democratic renewal agenda that needs to be taken forward for a third term - if Labour achieves one. At the moment it’s been stalled.

More broadly there’s what David Blunkett calls civil renewal and community empowerment. It’s putting communities in the driving seat and given a much greater voice over the design and delivery of public services.

Question: Do you think Labour really can be radical given its spending commitments and relations?

Nick Pearce: We’re at a point where the government needs to refresh and renew its vision. We at the IPPR certainly want to see it achieving progressive values of social justice, of full employment, sustainability and democratic renewal. These are the things Labour needs to tell a stronger story about.

This parliament has been dominated by foreign affairs. It’s going to be very difficult for Labour to get the focus back on domestic issues. The spending review is going to be a very good means of doing it, albeit a very tough round.

Question: Does the government need to also focus on re-establishing trust with voters; given that the Hutton verdict hasn’t cleared the air?

Nick Pearce: There are some very big issues about trust in politicians generally - as a separate issue of trust in the Labour government.

Despite its recent difficulties - and nobody could deny they haven’t had difficulties - the polls aren’t showing a precipitous decline. Nonetheless the difficulty for the prime minister is, I think, that he can’t control the agenda on foreign affairs in the same way that he can with the domestic agenda. Events are very difficult when you’re playing on a wider stage.

The key thing will be for them to try and put across to the public that there are real policies and reform programmes delivering and looking forward that they want to put to the electorate in the coming year.

They need to focus on those and try to tell a stronger narrative about what the government stands for.

Question: Does the prime minister’s personal standing come into something like that?

Nick Pearce: Really it’s the policies that matter. What kinds of policies will deliver greater equality, greater democratic renewal, environmentally sustainable public transport infrastructure and so on. Those are the things that really count.

It’s getting the policies in place and ensuring that you’re delivering consistently against them and involving people in their communities in discussing them. Things like the Big Conversation will be important to that.

Question: If the government’s going to back concepts like localism, that means central government has got to give up some of its powers, doesn’t it?

Nick Pearce: We’ve just launched IPPR North in Newcastle to demonstrate our commitment to working with localities and regions to develop policies that are important to particular areas.

It’s certainly true that Labour needs to take forward a new vision for local government. It needs to work out how that aligns with civil renewal and involving communities. And of course regional devolution.

It’s clear that there is a potentially big reform agenda there with a lot of people talking about New Localism. There’s still a lot of thinking to be done in those areas but it must be a core part of what Labour does in the coming years. It must address how power can be developed and held locally and regionally.

Question: On policies like transport there have been claims that the government has fudged key issues. How do you avoid that while taking into account real politics?

Nick Pearce: The key issue is that on things like transport Labour has the courage of its convictions. That’s things like road user charging, tolls and so on. It’s clear that’s the way forward.

Likewise on the House of Lords, I think there’s a recognition emerging now that a fully appointed House would not be tenable. We do need greater democracy in the proposals for a second chamber. There is a need to be more imaginative and bold about some of those policy areas.

Question: Should the government bring more groups like the unions into policy decisions?

Nick Pearce: The IPPR’s always been committed to a very pluralist vision of progressive change. There are a number of members of the progressive family and unions can play an important part in public debate, in sustaining progressive change. It’s up to them to maintain that engagement, as well as the government. Can trade unions be a force for good in society? Clearly they can.

Question: If the Big Conversation tells ministers things they don’t want to hear do you think they will listen?

Nick Pearce: I would hope so. Politicians always have to weigh up the things they’re told and consider different objectives in the round. They have to strike balances between different objectives and so on. You can’t just do what people tell you to because they will tell you different things and you’ve got to take in wider concerns.

But I think the Big Conversation is a genuine effort at involving people in a new dialogue with government. I think it’s well intentioned.

It’s been designed in a way to draw people into conversation with the government and in the end the test will be whether people feel it’s been a genuine process and that they’ve got something out of it.

Question: If you had a hotline to the prime minister, what would be the one thing you would advise him to focus on?

Nick Pearce: I’m not sure there is one thing. For the IPPR the issues are around public service reform and how we can strengthen and expand our public services. If I had to say one thing it would be ‘keep focused on the goal of social justice’.