But given some of the bad ideas that were floating around before, that may be for the best

SINCE standing for the leadership of the Conservatives last summer, Theresa May has promised to put a new “industrial strategy” at the heart of her government. Yet despite much talk, and even the establishment of a department with the phrase in its name, there has been little explanation of what such a strategy would amount to. At last some details were published on January 23rd. The preface to a chunky government green paper suggested that ominous changes were afoot: Mrs May wrote of a “new, active role” for government.

The contents were more modest. True, it confirmed the biggest increase in public spending on research and development since 1979. Extra money for high-tech research will benefit the economy, which has suffered from weak productivity and wage growth since the financial crisis of 2008-09. Yet these funds had already been promised, last November. Similarly, the green paper pointed to a “new” £2.3bn ($2.9bn) housing-infrastructure fund—cash which has been announced a number of times.

Beyond that, the strategy looks thin. It talks of tweaks to education (see next story) and of boosting the participation of British exporters at international trade fairs; unobjectionable stuff, but hardly revolutionary. At the launch of the green paper, at a cabinet meeting held in Cheshire, Mrs May earnestly spoke of “looking at the way in which clusters can help”. Reporters were more interested in quizzing her on what she knew about a missile that apparently misfired during a test last year.

It may be for the best that the plans are less radical than trailed. Mrs May had once suggested forcing companies to put workers on their boards, a silly pledge that has since been dropped. And whereas a few months ago she seemed intent on limiting foreign takeovers of British companies, the green paper talked up the successes of foreign-owned firms. That no bad news lurked in the paper probably explains why the pound rose slightly on its publication.

Still, the government is making a habit of overpromising. What was billed as the biggest shake-up of the railways in 20 years turned out to be timid. The “biggest overhaul in a generation” of prisons has so far amounted to even less. Even with the publication of the much-advertised industrial strategy, Mrs May lacks a flagship domestic policy.