As I entered the main hall, my first impressions were that it was incredibly busy. I was shown to the members sections amidst a lot of hustle and bustle, and looked around. The banner behind the speakers said “New Politics. Fresh Ideas.” There were certainly a lot of fresh ideas; all around me was conversation concerning one topic- what should labour do? A buzz of excitement was at the root of all discussions. Even I managed a cup of coffee and an animated conversation with a middle-aged woman about what to expect from Ed Miliband’s speech!

We took our seats and a loud cheer went up for Mr Miliband before he had even taken to the stage, just at the words “our newly elected leader”. It seemed to me that despite the somewhat controversial manner in which he won the leadership election ahead his brother David, egos had been pushed to one side to back Ed as Labour’s leader, be they a trade union or citizen. Despite not being a lot of people’s first choice, the feeling in that room was that he was, at that time, the man to lead the fight at the next election.

The formalities of the National Policy Forum were despatched quickly and efficiently with the newly elected “officers” of the Forum receiving polite applause. It was then time for what everybody in the room had gathered for- Ed Miliband’s speech. The importance of what he would say had escalated after his appearance the day before on Today on BBC Radio 4. Challenged for not outlining a clear direction for the party, not defining what they were as a party now or what policies they would offer as alternatives to the Coalition, he was also jeered for repeating the phrase “squeezed middle”, with Conservatives claiming he had given six different definitions. Whilst it was naïve to expect a detailed rundown of Labour’s policies for the next few years, at the very least there was an expectation to define the party and the party’s direction.

From the moment he took to the stage- to a standing ovation- Miliband’s speech was strong both in deliverance and in content. Opening with “we are a party people are coming to, not running from” he celebrated the 45,803 new members of the Labour party since the election in May, calling it an “extraordinary achievement”.  He called for the party to go “beyond New Labour”, saying that it “got things right” (citing CCTV and anti-social behaviour orders as successes) and “got things wrong” (namely 90 days detainment without trial for terror suspects). True to the politics’ playbook, he then attacked the Coalition on two fronts. First of all he accused them of “casual arrogance” for the way they dismissed Labour’s school’s sports programme- which Miliband said had increased the portion of children doing two hours of exercise a week from 25% to 90%- with “the stroke of a pen”. He referenced Lord Young’s “never had it so good” comment as an example of the way in which the Coalition have distanced themselves to the public, and criticized the way they were casually breaking promises to the British public. Second, he accused the Con-Dem government of widening the gap between the dreams the people have and their chances of achieving them. He claimed that the problem facing Britain today is “how are we going to cope?”, and said that narrowing this aspiration gap would be at the centre of Labour’s policies. At last, a hint of Labour’s new direction.

For all of Mr Miliband’s criticisms of the Coalition, I had found myself thinking: “that’s all very well, but what’s the alternative?” One of my personal misgivings of the Conservative election campaign was the manner in which they focussed on slating Labour’s track record rather than by offering solutions. The opening to this speech seemed to come right out of David Cameron’s script. To pick apart the opposition was by no means the wrong approach- it was hugely successful in stirring the audience- but I’m positive I was not the only one asking myself when he was going to outline the direction of the Labour Party and the backbone of its policies.

Almost on cue he said “policies of reform are so important”, and then gave a short but detailed list of what Labour under his leadership, and alongside the National Policy Forum, would undertake. To summarise, he wanted Labour to become more involved with people’s lives, recapture their trust and not make promises they could not deliver. “Grassroots politics”, was a phrase he was particularly fond of.

I was still disappointed the lack of detail in the party’s aims and what they would do to achieve them, but Miliband had obviously decided on the priority- determine where the party wanted to get to, and what they wanted to achieve, and then work out the nuts and bolts. It was clear that he was building the backbone to Labour policy, and deciding on the actual policies would take precedent over the coming months and years, and put the flesh on the bones. Miliband also moved quickly to defend his use of the phrased “squeezed middle”, saying he had “no regrets” because they were not people he could not define, they were the people the Coalition had forgotten. He drew laughter and cheers from the audience, joking that as a party Labour needed to reconnect with its members more than Conservatives, who have “friends in high places who can help them out”.

I shan’t divulge too much into detail of the key elements of his speech, nor will I attempt to analyse them. But I will say this. In the thick of defining his party he commented that he wanted to take the term “big society” from David Cameron. He said that the idea that a strong opposition would wait for them to screw up does not work, and that “we have to show people we are the optimists who represent the hopes and dreams of the British people”. But one good speech and a few swipes at the opposition are unlikely to convince even the most gullible voter- although it served Nick Clegg pretty well in the first TV debate before the election. If Labour wants to win the next election, they will need to develop alternative policies to the Coalition fast. And as for Ed Miliband’s desire for a country and its government to become closer, there is still a long, long way to go.