Peter Hoskin

What good would an annual National Strategy do?

Another set of bad notices for Cameron & Co. this morning, chief among them the Public Administration Select Committee’s report into government strategy. It basically says that there is none: short-term fripperies are indulged at the expense of long-term objectives. Or as the report puts it in one of its most trenchant passages, ‘We have little confidence that policies are informed by a clear, coherent strategic approach, informed by an assessment of the public’s aspirations and their perceptions of the national interest.’

This is a diagnosis that many will agree with, partially if not in full. Most governments could do with more long-term thinking, let alone one that is split between two parties. But the main prescription that follows from it is a little harder to swallow (although, it should be said, there are other

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in