Bradford and Bingley’s taxpayer-funded rescue ended all arguments about the potential benefits of demutualisation. As the last of the ex building societies loses its independence, it joins other recent arrivals such as Northern Rock and Halifax as the latest addition to this run of corporate failure.

When the last Conservative Government encouraged societies to demutualise through the 1986 Building Societies Act it plundered generations of assets from mutual societies, replacing prudent mortgage providers with some of the worst culprits of casino capitalism.

Today we have a unique and unmissable opportunity to put that right.  By recognising the enormous benefits of mutuality and taking action to allow societies to re-mutualise we can return those institutions to their rightful position and bring stability and sustainability to the important work they can do for our economy and the millions of Britons who rely on them.

A starting point will be the future of Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley. While the Government was absolutely right to nationalise these as a short-term measure; any long term solution for these companies should be based on some key principles.

Taxpayers must not be out of pocket as a result of the change.

Hardworking families and small businesses must be protected.  This means the housing market should not be closed to first time buyers, credit lines to small business should be extended and repossessions should only occur as a last resort.

The institutions that emerge must be secure, responsible and add to the financial stability of the UK economy.

And finally, these new organisations must continue to act in the long term interests of their consumers.

That is why the Co-operative Party is calling for the newly nationalised banks to be converted into mutuals. Mutual ownership is the best solution for ensuring a stable long-term future for these companies, and making sure that the risk taken by taxpayers will deliver for consumers in the long term.

Are there any further opportunities to bring mutuality back into financial services? Is there further support that we can give to existing mutual financial institutions?

The last few years have seen a tremendous shift in public awareness of global issues. Ten years ago, it would have been considered electoral suicide to put international development and climate change as a priority for a political manifesto. Now it would be catastrophic not to. In all sectors of our national community; concern for our global impact has advanced, and is beginning to take hold in our social and political culture.

Inevitably, this has had a significant impact on the way in which ordinary people and business interact. From seeking to guarantee a fair price for primary producers, to reducing their carbon footprint; people are realising that their behaviour, as consumers, investors and citizens, has an important impact on how organisations and companies behave.

Without doubt, this Labour Government has done much to encourage the growth of CSR. The Companies Act of 2006 required listed companies to report on their environmental and social impacts, as well as employee and supplier issues. In addition, company directors will now have a clear duty not only to maximise shareholder value (although this is their only fiduciary duty), but also to consider the impacts of their business on people and the environment.

If we are to build a social and political climate in which companies become ever more aware of their license to operate, it is essential that we all play our part. This includes Government.

Whether it is to combat climate change, or foster international development, changes to our corporate culture will be crucial. Social movements can do a lot, but real lasting change will require political leadership.

What more can be done to foster the development of CSR? Do we need more regulation of companies to ensure that they behave in an ethical manner? Should Government play a more proactive role in fostering cultural change among businesses?

One of the Government’s key priorities over the last ten years has been to make public services more responsive to the people that use them. In the last few years, the Co-operative Party and its sister think tank, Mutuo, have been involved in the establishment of a number of new community-based mutuals in the provision of health, education and other public services.

The establishment of NHS Foundation Trusts has been the most radical of these in terms of both size and scale, enabling a new model of healthcare controlled by patients, staff and the wider local community.

An independent review of membership governance, commissioned by the Department of Health has shown that the unprecedented level of patient and public involvement in healthcare is making a real difference. It concludes that governors and members are changing the way that their hospitals are run, making them more responsive to local people and more focused on patient’s needs.

Given the impact that the model appears to have had on the services received by consumers, are there wider applications for similar models across public service delivery? Can new mutuals deliver for consumers in a way that both the private and traditional public sector may not be able to?