³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

Commentators analyse .

that the document is extremely significant:

"As the two men say in the introduction, theirs is a historic document. British governments do not normally set out their five-year plans in this way with carefully written pledges under 31 separate detailed headings. Such things are normal elsewhere in Europe, where coalitions are routine. For Britain, by contrast, this is unprecedented governmental programme transparency, a step forward, real grownup, nitty-gritty stuff. Danny Alexander and Oliver Letwin, who jointly did the heavy lifting, should take a bow."

The has a mixed review:

"On the plus side, we welcome the commitment to reduce immigration, plans for freeing schools from the dead hand of the state, and the determination to reform the welfare state, including the overdue overhaul of incapacity benefit.
It's also good news that - after a long campaign by this newspaper - the point les s and expensive Home Information Packs are to be scrapped.
Ìý

"Best of all, both parties are signed up to take rapid and determined action to tackle our calamitous public sector deficit, starting next week.
Ìý

"But regrettably, some valuable Conservative ideas have been ditched. There is no mention of repatriating powers from the EU, the Human Rights Act appears destined to survive and plans to cut stamp duty and freeze council tax have been watered down."

that there are "very big holes":

"As the The Independent pointed out yesterday quite a lot of the thorny issues, from Lords' reform to care for the elderly, are subject to review. This is either because there is 'no money', as the departing Chief Secretary to the Treasury put it in his farewell note, or because the two sides cannot agree.
Ìý

"I am reminded of an observation made by a Labour cabinet minister in the summer of 1997 when apparent hyperactivity disguised lack of direction and purpose. 'We have hit the ground reviewing,' he noted. Most of the reviews then ran into the ground, usually the fate of such exercises and often the objective in setting them up. For the coalition the long grass will prove to be impenetrably long in relation to some policies. If agreement cannot be reached in this honeymoon period there will be no consensus in a few years' time."

The the next five years of government may lack substance:

"The connecting themes of modernity, social mobility and enabling governance were also themes of the outgoing administration, and its patchy record should warn Nick Clegg and David Cameron that use of such verbiage does not guarantee that anything will actually happen. The rhetorical continuity with what went before confirms that Britain's centre ground is crowded. That will dismay those who hanker after politicians who dream bigger dreams, but it also confirms how the coalition process has capped five years of Cameronian leadership by anchoring the Conservatives away from wilder Tory shores."

The that discarded policies are the price of coalition:

"Coming from a partnership that has emphasised a belief in small government, the programme offers a dauntingly long list of proposals, intended to reassure party activists that many of their cherished policies have survived the axe, even if some have been sacrificed as part of the negotiations. The Tories have retained their demand for early spending cuts, for a cap on economic migrants from outside the EU, and for new 'accountable' state schools, though how free they will be of local authority control remains to be seen. The party had to give way in several areas that will concern its core supporters, but that is the price of coalition government."

that the document displays "awesome ambition", but asks if it will work:

"Many hurdles lie ahead - and the biggest danger to their plans is the economic crisis.
Ìý

"Some of the most ambitious plans in this manifesto (such as the scheme to encourage unemployed back to work) require extra funding in the early stages. As the document acknowledges: initial investment delivers later savings.
The burning question is whether, at a time of terrible financial difficulties, that extra investment will be available."

who wrote the document:

"Could it be, I wonder, that the civil service had a draft 'Conservative - Liberal Democrat Coalition Agreement' all ready to be taken off the shelf should the election work out as it did which is why it all seemed to work out so smoothly?
Ìý

"I guess, as well, that the Sir Humphreys of this world are secretly quite pleased with what's happened - if only because they might expect a bigger role in running the country than was the case during the Blair and Brown years. We see in local councils where there is no overall control that policy and decisions tend to be more officer-led."

More from the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳