A new blueprint for limited government The Government has handed in its homework, and it's gold stars all round. Such, at least, is the impression given by David Cameron and Nick Clegg's joint foreword to the Coalition's Mid-Term Review, published today, which both evaluates their administration's performance in the first half of the parliament and sets out its agenda for the second. "We have consistently chosen," they say, "to do what is right over what is easy or popular; what is in our country's long-term interest over our parties" short-term interest." As for the state of their alliance: "Of course there have been some issues on which we have not seen eye to eye... but on the big things that matter most - the big structural reforms needed to secure our country's long-term future - our resolve and sense of shared purpose have, if anything, grown over time." Such a glowing verdict would not be shared by many impartial observers - not least when it comes to the antics of Mr Clegg and his team. Yet beyond the platitudes, the document actually offers grounds for encouragement. First, it is a remarkably Tory proposition. Drawing on the language of the "global race" that Mr Cameron unveiled in his most recent party conference speech, it makes a solid case that Britain must become tougher and leaner to compete. The Coalition's twin priorities are described as "growing the private sector and reforming the public sector so that what the Government does... boosts, rather than undermines, British competitiveness." For all the hints of an industrial strategy, the commitment to limiting the scope of the state is even more explicit. When it comes to the agenda for the future, there is also good news. Gone are the attempts to present the Coalition as a fusion of hearts, minds and souls: instead we are offered a limited set of reforms on which the squabbling partners can actually agree. As well as pushing ahead with existing reforms, not least on welfare and education, there is to be a focus on childcare; house-building; transport investment (hitherto the subject of many press releases, and not much action); an improved state pension; and a long-overdue settlement on care for the elderly. This may be far more limited than the laundry list of commitments made in 2010, but it is also far more achievable. While the commitment to house-building could all too easily become an excuse to resurrect the worst aspects of the Government's planning proposals, social care, in particular, is exactly the kind of issue that an administration claiming to be acting in the long-term interest should be addressing - though the devil, as always, will be in the detail. The Coalition may not exactly be a happy ship. But if ministers stick to their guns, it can at least be a productive one.