During recent troubles, the Government has consoled itself with the idea that at least its position is not as bad as the Conservatives before the 1997 election. It should console itself no longer.

The loss of the extraordinarily safe Glasgow East constituency, to an indifferent Scottish National Party candidate, suggests that there is not now a Labour seat in the country that the party could successfully defend in a by-election. The opinion polls show that this Government has less support than any in recorded history and that the Prime Minister is seen as weaker than John Major and a less effective party leader than Iain Duncan Smith. His party meets in Warwick this weekend broke and broken.

In so far as Labour has a plan, it might best be termed the Travolta Micawber Strategy - staying alive and hoping that something will turn up.

For the Prime Minister there may be little alternative but to cobble together the strutting theme song of Hollywood's John Travolta with the hopeful philosophy of Dickens's Wilkins Micawber, but for the younger generation of Labour Ministers it is replete with dangers.

What is now the responsibility of the Miliband brothers, David and Ed, of Andy Burnham, James Purnell and Ed Balls? It is to safeguard the future of the centre Left. They need to make sure that while implementing the hard part of the Travolta Micawber Strategy - the fight to stay alive - Labour does not inflict terrible damage on itself and the country, damage that they will have to live with for the rest of their careers.

The Government will, for example, be tempted to try to spend its way out of difficulty. Having already borrowed its way into severe fiscal trouble, there is no room for a responsible Government to increase spending further or to cut taxes in the coming year. Irresponsibility will therefore look a very inviting option. If this option is chosen, it will not only be the fiscal position that will suffer. Labour will regain the reputation it tried so hard to shed. It will become once more the party incapable of managing the public finances. The next generation of Labour leaders should set their face against this, becoming a strong voice within the Cabinet for prudence.

Another temptation will be to propitiate the party base. Parties that find it difficult to attract swing voters often fall back on their core support. And in Labour's case there is an added incentive - the party has no money, and needs the trade unions. It is the task of the younger generation to ensure that any cash Labour seeks now is not provided in the form of a mortgage on the party's future, with the unions once more allowed to determine the party's direction.

The Milibands, Purnell, Balls et al also need to ensure that Labour's policies are designed to attract the supporters that once filled Tony Blair's big tent. If any of them decides to ignore this tasks - hoping, for instance, to gain an advantage in a future leadership election with statist ideas such as the latest nursery school plans - they may find themselves the sole political beneficiaries of Gordon Brown's will, inheriting an estate with a net worth of zero.

It was Harold Wilson's ambition to make Labour the natural party of government. Under the leadership of Tony Blair, this ambition came close to becoming a reality. There was a good reason why it did so. Mr Blair's combination of moderation, free markets, social justice and Atlanticism is electorally potent and a good governing philosophy.

For Gordon Brown, the challenge of staying alive and hoping for the best may tempt him to squander that mandate in acts of politcal expediency. The task of tomorrow's Labour leaders is to protect the competence of the Government. Not just in the interests of the country, but their own.