In last week’s column, I said I would examine today the policies of a new Labour government following its massive victory in Britain’s general election earlier this month.

Self-evidently, the country voted for change but the election also turned out to be a savage indictment of the Conservatives. The general view in the UK appears to be that the stunning swing to Labour was principally because voters were angry with the Conservatives after 14 years of government rather than because of any particular liking for its leader, Sir Keir Starmer, and his party’s policies.

According to most reports, as well as dissatisfaction with the policies pursued by their leaders, Tory supporters had had enough of their party’s scandals, bickering, feuding and lack of unity. But there seems to be little real enthusiasm in the country for Labour. This is in contrast to the sweeping election victories of 1945 and 1997 when the mood of the country was more optimistic and in favour of substantial political change following, respectively, the end of the Second World War and of a long period of reforming governance by Margaret Thatcher. John Major took over from her and won an election in 1992. But, when the Tory government became tired and had run out of ideas, he duly lost to Labour, led by Blair, in 1997 - and in the election that year Blair’s approval rating was above Starmer’s this time around.

In this year’s election Labour won only 34 per cent of the vote in a generally low turnout. But, because of the relative success of other parties like the Liberal Democrats who, with 72 seats, had a record-breaking night, this meant that under Britain’s “first past the post” electoral system - rather than the alternative of proportional representation - Labour were able to win two thirds of the seats in a 650-strong House of Commons with only one third of the vote.

The evidence suggests that Tory voters were enraged by their own governments’ failure over the years to pursue traditional centre-right Conservative policies and principles over a range of issues. They were annoyed, in particular, by ineffectual handling of subjects like illegal immigration, high taxes, public sector strikes and failures within the National Health Service. The fact that their party leaders - and therefore prime ministers - were constantly changing made matters worse (five different PMs during the 14 years including the shortest-serving one in history). Above all, these supporters were both mystified and irritated that their party leaders managed to squander an 80-seat majority in the 2019 election under Boris Johnson - when it looked as though The Tories would be in power until the 2030s – by declining to adhere to the party’s manifesto.

The irony of all this – and in the view of many the paradox of the election - was that the centre-right voters who were furious with the Tories for moving to the Left have pushed the nation in that direction by electing a Labour government, which doubtless will, for example, in the longer term favour things like mass immigration and increased taxing and spending.

Nonetheless, the question now is to what extent a fresh start presents a genuine opportunity for a Labour government to bring about real and beneficial change for the whole country and “build a better Britain” by, for one thing, improving its struggling public services and creaking infrastructure that need more than interim solutions. Will it turn out to be a good chapter in the life of the nation that will benefit its people as a whole?

The early signs have been positive and promising. The transition to a new administration has been smooth after an election process that was efficiently organised, and there were no reports of violence or electoral malpractice. Power has changed hands in an orderly and peaceful manner - and this was a fine example of the democratic process in action in the way it was designed to be.

In his initial address outside No 10 Downing Street, Starmer gave assurances that the new government’s priority would be to serve the public’s interest. He stressed his government would be one of service unburdened by doctrine as it concentrated on national renewal, though this would require calm and patience while he and his colleagues set about their urgent task diligently and with an emphasis on delivery – in other words stolid pragmatism and accountability to the electorate.

So far so good, people might say. But also too good to be true? Starmer wants to secure people’s trust, but the test will be whether they will be reassured by such rhetoric from a new PM. Commentators say that the country is tired of political posturing and grand gestures. What people want now is action to make their lives better, and a first step is restoration of some of the institutions of government which have been visibly deteriorating.

It is said that the incoming Labour Cabinet is well prepared for office. Three new secretaries of state have experience of leading government departments and a further five are former government ministers. But some observers believe that much will depend on Starmer’s ability to avoid leftist policies which during his four and a half years as Labour leader he has successfully done in preparing his party for government. He has emphasised the need for expertise and experience in a government that is mission-driven with clear targets and objectives. To this end, he has already announced 5 missions that a Labour government aims to deliver - namely, to achieve the highest growth amongst G7 countries; to make the UK a “clean energy superpower” with zero carbon electricity by 2030; to improve the NHS and reform care services; to create safer streets with more neighbourhood police; and to provide opportunity for all through better childcare, schools and further education.

For most people, all of this will surely sound the right way forward. But the difficult choices are yet to come. Keir Starmer himself appears to be a moderate. But who knows what will happen when the Labour leadership is faced with the political reality of putting its ideas into practice and getting things done. The right-wing press in the UK is already warning about the dangers of extremism. Only time will tell.