We face a simple choice. Either we go back to the days when everything was disposable and landfill dumps consumed our countryside at an increasing pace, or we recognise that we have limited resources and need to use them wisely and sustainably.
The Brexit referendum showed us to be divided, and those of us who campaigned for remain have to accept that we lost. But that does not mean that we have to agree to the deal the prime minister has brought back - a deal that satisfies no one.
The EU has made it very clear that for frictionless trade and no tariffs on goods there is a mechanism for achieving that, but there are consequences. There are trade-offs that will have to happen.
After all, does it make sense to be chucking things like glass, paper, cardboard, wood, metals, plastics, and food waste into holes in the ground? No, it doesn't; especially when someone will pay you good money to take them off your hands or, in the case of wood and food waste, when you can turn them into renewable energy.
Rich country protectionism - barriers, subsidies and support - mean that the world supply of agricultural goods is artificially increased and world prices depressed.
The problem is that the global arms trade is entirely free of international regulation. In a world in which the flow of consumer goods is governed by a plethora of international conventions and regulations, deadly weapons have an uncanny knack of slipping through the net.
The truth is that it was local councils who asked for the power and the freedom to try different ways of encouraging residents to reduce the amount they throw way away, and it was Labour that gave them these powers.
When it comes to whether Britain should remain in the European Union, almost all political parties and traditions - Labour, the Greens, Liberal Democrats, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, and half of the Tory Party - agree that we are better off in Europe.
To rebuild confidence in the power of people working together to create something better, we must give people the power to do precisely that for themselves.
With rising pressures on councils, particularly on social care and looked-after children, we have to reshape the way public services work to break down the barriers and get services working together.
I was interested in public service, and looking back at my father, my grandfather and two great-grandfathers, well, yeah, that's what they did, too. And I think public service, like journalism, done right is a really honourable, really important profession.
The poorest still deserve help with life's basic necessities regardless of the quality of their government.
When it comes to jobs, investment, growth, security and our influence in the world we are clearly stronger in Europe. But we are also making a Labour argument about workers' rights that really matter, to millions of working people and the trade unions that represent them.
I agree on the need for environmental sustainability. It is no good raising gross national income while at the same time destroying natural assets.
It makes no sense to spend precious resources on propping up loss-making, state-owned enterprises when they could be used to get more children into school or provide more midwives to reduce the number of mothers dying in childbirth.
There is an opportunity - for the first time - for a global deal to control the movement of small arms, such as AK47s and anti-aircraft rocket launchers, as well as heavier weapons like battle tanks.
We came to see the benefits for working people of common employment rights, guaranteed throughout the EU to prevent a race to the bottom. We worked together in practical ways to make cleaner beaches, protect the environment and ensure consumer rights.
In the 70s and 80s, Dad was 'the most hated politician in Britain'. When I started at Holland Park school, the papers turned up and there was a photograph of me published - skinny me in white shorts lining up with lots of other kids for PE. And I was 10.