Queen's speech: small government

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/04/editorial-queens-speech-small-government

Version 0 of 1.

The coalition has by no means been an insignificant government, but it has reached an insignificant phase. In its first three years, as well as demonstrating that two parties could govern together, it rewired the NHS, turned most English secondary schools into academies, and announced a rolling back of public expenditure, most particularly of benefits for the poor, which defied all historical precedent. Once animated by the big idea of the small state, the administration on Wednesday passed the Queen its work plan for 2014-15, which amounted to a list of disconnected schemes.

Some of the individual initiatives (tackling trafficked slavery) could be seriously important; others (protecting exploited pub tenants) were worthy at least. But there were too many gestures: does the current law really leave the courts powerless to reflect the bravery of have-a-go heroes who end up being sued without the help of a dedicated "heroism" bill?

Then there were decent proposals tainted by the faintest familiarity with what the coalition got up to, while polling day still seemed further away. Take the new childcare subsidy, which is all well and good but does raise the question of why the old tax credit top-up to help cover nurseries had to be pared back before belatedly being replaced. The plastic-bag levy blows from the dustbin of early boasts of being the greenest government ever.

There was a flash of coalition mark 1 boldness in respect of pensions, with legislation to enact the budget promise of letting savers do what they want with their money. In the NHS, Andrew Lansley's punt that the individual choices of patient-consumers could secure Britain the healthcare it needs turned into a political disaster. In pensions – where rip-off private corporations have long ruled the roost – freeing individuals to do as they will is more appealing, although the threat to the collective pooling of risk is just as profound. Even allowing for this single bold stroke, however, the most striking shortcoming yesterday was the absence of anything that could be called a political thread to tie the pieces together.

How to explain this lack? For one thing, a political partnership that once seemed harmonious has long since soured, and Nick Clegg now struggles to agree minor moves on infant school dinners with his Conservative opposites; the idea of hammering out any real common programme has gone. For another, in a country where four-year terms have long been the norm, the coalition decided to fix its own term at five years instead. It might have hoped this would buy it more time to do big things. But with its founding agreement now largely implemented, insofar as it is going to be implemented at all, on Wednesday's evidence it has bought itself 12 months of watching the clocks and twiddling its thumbs.