David Miliband: Miliband's manifesto

David Miliband strides into his palatial office, takes off his jacket and sits at a table almost as large as the one that seats the entire Cabinet. He has just answered questions in the House of Commons. Later he will fly to Japan. In between he reflects with verve about the last extraordinary political year.

Miliband has been Foreign Secretary for 12 months. Unlike Gordon Brown he pauses from the whirl of ministerial activity to give a first-anniversary interview addressing questions on foreign policy, why Labour is deeply unpopular and whether at some point he would like to lead his party. At a moment of high political turbulence Miliband is the bookies' favourite to succeed Brown.

Miliband plucks out bigger themes that seek to make sense of a thousand disparate policies. In a government that fails to convey a clear direction it is a distinctive trait. I ask him in what ways foreign policy has changed since the departure of Tony Blair.

First he outlines a context: "We face a shift in the balance of power across the world between governments and individuals, between West and East and between governments and markets. These changes are accompanied by precise challenges, issues of democracy in countries such as Kenya and Afghanistan where the international community is asked to help, post-conflict reconstruction and changing roles for the big international institutions."

He notes discreetly that he and others are "armed with lessons" from Iraq and other recent conflicts. More precisely, he points out: "We're addressing the dangers in Kosovo in a different way now than the 1990s. The emphasis we're putting in Afghanistan on a joint Afghanistan/Pakistan strategy is different to the one that just focused on Afghanistan. In Iraq the emphasis on local solutions rather than a single national solution is different."

So after this prelude what is his definition of British foreign policy? "Britain is plugged into all the networks that matter – European, transatlantic, commonwealth and UN. This is accompanied by a range of assets from the soft power of the BBC to the hard power of our armed forces. The combination means Britain can follow progressive causes with confidence, challenging the radicalisation that seeks to create a clash of civilisations, addressing global inequality in the context of climate change, building up international institutions such as the UN and the EU."

In several of his answers Miliband refers to climate change. Prior to becoming Foreign Secretary he became something of a crusader on this issue. Has the political potency of high petrol prices lessened his interest? He is adamant: "The case for going greener is stronger than ever." He sees a focus on equality and climate change as part of a "second wing of the European aeroplane" following years of institutional introspection.

Already Miliband has visited 29 countries, an average of more than one a fortnight. His son has a map on his bedroom wall in which the countries are ticked off, one by one. But unlike two long-serving predecessors, Robin Cook and Jack Straw, Miliband's attention is not diverted from the domestic scene. Why have things gone so badly wrong for Gordon Brown?

He jokes: "I am in the slightly odd position of predicting it would be like this." He is referring to an appearance on Question Time shortly before Brown became Prime Minister when he predicted that soon everyone would be calling for the return of Blair. It was meant to be an observation about the fickleness of opinion, but was taken as anti-Brown in some quarters:

"I don't want to say I told you so, but it was always going to be tough to win a fourth election, defying political gravity," he says. "In addition leaders around the world are unpopular. I know that is not a very comforting point."

He places the domestic challenge in context as he did over foreign policy: "We are engaged in a very difficult project which is to renew Britain's most successful centre-left project since 1945 and we are trying to do it in government. Yet I am convinced the tide of ideas has not turned against us, as Jim Callaghan knew it had before he lost in 1979."

Whereas Brown highlights dividing lines with David Cameron, Miliband takes a different tack: "The Tories stick close to us on every policy area. I don't see them setting out an alternative agenda because they are frightened of moving too far away from ours. As for us, this year has been one of sowing in several areas and the reaping will follow. Is it all to play for? Yes ... it's definitely all to play for."

I put it to him that some of his admirers in the Labour party were disappointed he did not challenge Brown in last year's leadership contest. Some of them wonder whether he really wants to be a leader. Could he reassure them by making it clear that at some point he has the appetite to lead? There is a pause. "I am not going there," he replies knowing that any sign of public enthusiasm for leadership would be seen as a challenge to Brown. "I am utterly determined to be a very good foreign secretary in a Gordon Brown government. All other speculation is literally idle."

But then before I ask another question, he enthuses about his role in politics more generally: "My job is to develop a progressive foreign policy, to be an advocate for the Government as a whole and hopefully contribute to the vibrancy of our political project. I am arguing for a genuinely exciting fusion of the social democratic and liberal traditions. You might think it sounds vague but it speaks directly to what people want, more control over their lives and more stability on which to build."

I had written previously that I was not clear what Miliband had envisaged with his fusion and ask him to give some examples: "It combines a sense of security and community. There is no point having more power over your lives unless you are safe on the streets. The environment is another good example. Government leadership must include regulation of markets, but individuals must have incentives to play their role."

Does he envisage a smaller state ? "I don't think the size of the state is the key factor in measuring how progressive you are. By that token Thatcher would be a great socialist because she spent more as a share of national income than we have, but did so on shelling out bucketloads of money on unemployment benefit. The key question is what you want to achieve. Expectations are rising. They can't all be met by the state, but by a mix of individual and collective effort."

Miliband exudes optimism at odds with darker moods elsewhere in the Government: "It is a fantastic job. I learn something everyday. A job that teaches you is a good job."

But if there is a vacancy in Number 10 I am certain he would seek to leave his current "fantastic job". Next time Miliband will stand for the leadership, whenever that time comes.

Interesting? Click here to explore further