Mothers struggling to cope with the pressures of family life have been the inspiration for our new policies on public health, but they are also underpinned by a left-of-centre political theory that can be summed up in the phrase: moving from advice from on high to support from next door.
The task of progressive government can be simply expressed - to provide security and expand opportunity for people in a changing world. Providing security means understanding the future, predicting the challenges and developing new tools to address new threats - from international action on people trafficking or terrorism to neighbourhood action to tackle anti-social behaviour.
How we create opportunity must change, too. Instead of a state that sees people as passive and uniform, our aim is to expand and support individual choice, to balance rights with responsibilities, to design policies and services that meet individual needs and that are shaped and enhanced by the people themselves, as individuals, in families and in communities.
People change their own lives. People like Amanda Acker, a Cambridgeshire catering assistant who lost five stone after her GP advised her to join Weightwatchers. She made the change herself, supported by the local NHS.
Of course, not all individuals can take their own opportunities with equal ease. Some live in more constrained circumstances than others do. So people should not be left to sink or swim. Wherever possible government should support hardworking families, because people's own ambitions are the engine of national improvement. Ultimately it is through their own effort that the disadvantaged overcome their disadvantage. Government intervention should supplement, not replace, this individual effort.
Government must gather and distribute the resources that translate choice and opportunity into a reality for the many. It is only through the collective resources provided to the NHS, for instance, that a greater degree of information, power and choice - hitherto a monopoly of the few - can become a reality for the many.
In a civilised society, individual rights have to be balanced by individual responsibilities to others. The vehicle for arbitration and enforcement of those responsibilities is the democratically elected government. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders for instance. Or protection from second-hand smoke. Though prohibitive for the few, the aim of these is a pleasant community or smoke-free environment for the many.
The state has a particular role to play in the protection of the most vulnerable. Opportunity based on informed choice generally assumes maturity and fit ness. In a civilised society we have a greater obligation to protect the weak, the vulnerable and the young. This duty of protection is often shared. In the protection of children, for example, parents can look to governments for support, but the prime responsibility rests with them as parents.
And finally, just as we have always recognised the limitations of the market in the equitable distribution of goods and services, we also recognise the limitations of the centralised, bureaucratic state. The expectations and ambitions of 60 million different people demand a far higher level of personal attention, convenience, control and power than that offered by the uniform "one size fits all" service of yesteryear.
So, in terms of health improvement, we reject not only the crude characterisation of state intervention as "Nannyism", but also the idea that people's health can be determined solely by government edict or legislation.
We reject the dogmatic assertion that public always equals good and private always equals bad. It posits the same old false dichotomies. It separates the individual from the collective in a way that can only help our ene mies. So to the traditional ethos of public service we need to add another element of customer care - organising public services around the convenience of the public - if we are truly to meet modern expectations.
We need to recognise the harmony as well as the difference between consumerism and citizenship. To force the left to choose between consumerism and citizenship cuts progressives off from one of most people's main contemporary experiences.
Thus, New Labour's political stance is clear. We support people who better themselves. We insist that people's rights and opportunities must be balanced by responsibility to others. We stand for protection for the most vulnerable, especially children. And we see a role for government in all three, a role that does not contradict but sustains opportunity.
The creation of New Labour was not an event, but the start of a process. And since that process began, more than 15 years ago, the world has already changed in so many ways. So, none of us should think that just because we bought a ticket for the game 10 years ago that it will give us entry tomorrow. The price of power is permanent renewal.
· John Reid is health secretary
