More than any ritual in the nation’s calendar, the Queen’s Speech enshrines the convergence of what Walter Bagehot called the “efficient” and “dignified” elements of the constitution: of government and pageantry.

Today Her Majesty delivered her 64th such address at the State Opening of Parliament, setting out her Government’s legislative programme — notionally, at least, for the next two years, to allow the heavy lifting of Brexit to proceed without interruption.

Though the speech, like all its predecessors, was intended to convey a sense of statesmanlike purpose and clear trajectory, it was a far cry from what the Prime Minister had in mind in April when she called a snap election, confident that the gamble would deliver a decent Tory majority. Instead, she has lost her mandate, and her claim to represent a united nation as it leaves the EU looks like nonsense on stilts.

The legislative blueprint unveiled today is not as etiolated as some Tories had feared. There will be measures to combat extremism, to protect consumer rights, to tackle domestic abuse, to promote mental health, to advance Greg Clark’s industrial strategy and (still vague at this stage) enhance productivity. The promised investment in transport infrastructure is unequivocally welcome — though there is a bleak absurdity about promises of space missions made by a Government that found the short journey to visit the survivors of the Grenfell Tower tragedy so hard.

Much more striking, however, than the content of the speech were the elephants missing from the room. Gone, or drastically diluted, are the PM’s plans for more grammar schools; the abolition of universal free school lunches for primary school pupils; and the Tory manifesto’s original plan for social care reform. It is far from clear whether the proposed changes to state pensions and the winter fuel allowance will proceed, and, if so, in what form.

Indeed, there was a faintly ridiculous hollowness to today’s proceedings. The Speech embodies the sovereignty of the Queen-in-Parliament. It declares unambiguously that the Prime Minister and her colleagues are Her Majesty’s Government: HMG.

State Opening of Parliament 2017 - In pictures 24 show all State Opening of Parliament 2017 - In pictures 1/24 The Queen at the State Opening of Parliament in the House of Lords at the Palace of Westminster BBC 2/24 Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Ford (centre) carries the Imperial State Crown as it arrives at the Palace of Westminster and the Houses of Parliament through the Norman Porch for the State Opening of Parliament ceremony PA 3/24 The Queenand The Prince of Wales during Queen's Speech in the House of Lords at the Palace of Westminster in London PA 4/24 Yeoman of the Guard prepare for the ceremonial search ahead of the State Opening of Parliament by The Queen in the House of Lords at the Palace of Westminster in London PA 5/24 Prime Minister Theresa May and leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn walk through the House of Commons to attend the state opening of Parliament AP 6/24 The Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles, Prince of Wales arrive in the House of Lords at Houses of Parliament Carl Court/WPA Pool/Getty Images 7/24 Prime Minister Theresa May and leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn walk through the House of Commons to attend the state opening of Parliament AP 8/24 Jeremy Corbyn at the State Opening of Parliament in the House of Lords at the Palace of Westminster BBC 9/24 Yeoman of the Guard carry out the 'ceremonial search' ahead of the State Opening of Parliament REUTERS 10/24 The Queen's crown is carried into the State Opening of Parliament Reuters 11/24 Reuters 12/24 The Queen and Prince Charles are driven to the Palace of Westminster for the State Opening of Parliament Reuters 13/24 The Queen leaves driven in the Royal Bentley car from Buckingham Palace AFP/Getty Images 14/24 Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Ford accompanies the Imperial State Crown as it leaves Buckingham Palace AFP/Getty Images 15/24 Guards make their way to form up ahead of the State Opening of Parliament PA 16/24 Guardsmen arrive outside Buckingham Palace for the Changing of the Guard Reuters 17/24 Armed police patrol as part of the major operation for the state opening of Parliament PA 18/24 Members of the Household Cavalry prepare ahead of the State Opening of Parliament AFP/Getty Images 19/24 Members of the Household Cavalry arrive for the State Opening of Parliament Reuters 20/24 Gathered public look on as guardsmen parade in front of Buckingham Palace AFP/Getty Images 21/24 Baroness Mone (centre) ahead of the State Opening of Parliament PA 22/24 Crowds gather at Buckingham Palace ahead of the State Opening of Parliament Chris Jackson/Getty Images 23/24 Police on patrol in Westminster Jeremy Selwyn 24/24 Police check down sewers outside Parliament today Jeremy Selwyn

Yet the Queen’s resilience as a symbol of continuity and public service merely emphasised the evanescence and instability of the May administration. HM did her part today. But what about G?

At last acknowledging the arithmetic reality of the election, the Prime Minister promised to proceed with “humility” as well as “resolve”. Better late than never. Even so, her prospects of proceeding at all remain precarious at best.

In 2010, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats published their initial coalition agreement six days after the election. In contrast, 13 days have passed since the nation voted, and the Tories and DUP have yet to agree a much more basic “confidence and supply” pact: an arrangement that would only guarantee the junior party’s support in votes of confidence or money measures.

Every day this doomed administration limps on is a gift to its opponents Matthew d'Ancona

If the DUP’s conduct is not an elaborate bluff, even this minimal arrangement is far from settled. The Northern Irish party is evidently affronted by the (fully merited) distaste with which many Conservative MPs regard such an alliance, and insists that it be shown “some respect”.

Its 10 MPs say they “can’t be taken for granted” and that the talks “haven’t proceeded in the way we have expected”. This is hardly the language that precedes a deal upon which any Prime Minister can depend.

In practice, the most significant feature of this speech is the potentially mortal threat it poses to the Government, and imminently so. Already, Labour and the Lib-Dems are plotting to defeat May in next week’s votes on the legislative programme and, more specifically, with a barrage of amendments. In theory, only seven Conservative MPs would need to rebel on one such amendment to force a vote of confidence.

If May lost that vote, the Government would truly face the abyss: the PM’s position would be untenable. Under the terms of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, a period of 14 days would then follow in which the parties would scramble to form a viable government.

The Tories would claim the right to try first — under an interim leader, presumably —though Jeremy Corbyn might also insist that it was his turn to form a coalition government of some sort. The numbers, of course, are scarcely in his favour. Political reality would make a second election all but inevitable.

In response to such anxieties, it has become routine to insist that the DUP would never do anything that might put Corbyn, a long-time ally of Sinn Fein, in Number 10. That ancestral hostility may at least be enough to spare May next week. But it is no basis for day-to-day government, and laughably fragile as the supposed foundation for five years of lawmaking, or even 20 months of Brexit talks.

It only takes a passing familiarity with the complex politics of Northern Ireland to grasp that parties as expert at deal-making and power-sharing as the DUP cannot, indeed, “be taken for granted”. If the late Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness could end up as the “Chuckle Brothers”, the PM cannot assume that the DUP’s hostility to Corbyn and Labour is non-negotiable. In the political bazaar of modern Northern Ireland, it is amazing how much the promise of a road here, a bridge there, and a couple of hospitals for good measure can melt apparently insuperable antagonisms.

Every day this doomed administration limps on is a gift to its opponents. Each fresh convulsion, as it struggles to cling to power, betrays its core weakness. It is less than the sum of its parts, and shrinking all the time.

Today’s ceremony resembled nothing so much as a sovereign in search of a government.