In my experience, the best of all conversations are unpredictable - and that's especially true at Hay. My on-stage discussion with Richard Sennett was designed to be about his writing on work, welfare and culture; but the conversation really took off when it turned to the whole nature of the public sector.

The audience's centre of gravity was clear: a feeling that targets and new forms of public management had undermined morale in the public services. The paradox is this: across the public services, we see significant improvements over the last 10 years, and yet the audience felt that the public service ethos had been undermined by the role of the private sector and central government failing to listen sufficiently.

The audience had suggestions of its own. Celebrate the public service ethos to improve morale. Avoid reorganisations which undermine that morale. How, Sennett and members of the audience asked me, should the next government respond?

There is no easy answer here. There certainly needs to be more celebration of our public servants and the work they do. There need to be far better ways in which the public services draw on all the intelligence and knowledge of the frontline: especially when it comes to formulating and changing policy. And there must be better links between public servants to share their experiences and insights.

Instinctively, however, I worry about romanticisng the old relationships between public service professionals and the individual. Some do an extrordinary job of reaching out, understanding and engaging with the public. But the central thesis of Sennett's memoir Respect In A World of Inequality, was the failure of the old welfare state to show "respect" for the individual, an inability to understand the expertise and capacity of individuals to be part of the solutions to their own problems and those of their neighbourhood. He speaks from personal experience growing up on a housing estate in Chicago.

I see it myself as a constituency MP. How does central governmnent better respect the autonomy of professionals while at the same time ensuring a better, more equal relationship between the public services and the individuals they serve? The answer is surely to improve democratic acountability at local level. Very few people want to sit on local committees, but many want to get their voices heard. We need new ways to make this happen. Should local police hold monthly meetings for residents? Should neighbourhoods have greater say over local spending? Any other ideas?