There is a school of thought that you do not need a 'Big Idea' and that pragmatism is a better approach for parties.
This may not help parties when it comes to distinguishing themselves from one another and may not make for 'exciting' politics but it may be a better route for Labour back into government.
It would be nothing new to suggest that Harold Wilson and Tony Blair were the ultimate pragmatists, and putting the post-war Attlee wins to one side, then they are the only Labour leaders to win elections.
Attlee did undoubtedly win with a big idea but that was 70 years ago.
When Labour has tried big ideas again - 1983 and as Nick Robinson suggests 2015 - they lose and in a big way.
Being distinctive and having ideas is not the same as having a 'Big Idea'. There was some distinctiveness displayed during the debate between each candidate but whether that will distinguish them from the Conservative government is unclear.
"MISSING: A BIG IDEA. LOST BY LABOUR PARTY. IF FOUND PLEASE INFORM PARTY BEFORE SEPTEMBER. REWARD - POWER (MAYBE)"Something was very obviously missing from last night's TV debate between the candidates for Labour leader. It was an election-winning 'Big Idea'.