The best government in a generation?

"The best government in generation" - that's the way I keep on hearing the coalition being described, including by some intelligent people. It bothers me a bit, so I though I'd work out why.

On one level, the description is entirely accurate. That this government is better than the last one is a given, and will remain so as long as the coalition doesn't actually declare open warfare on its own people. The Brown administration was the worst one we have had in this country since Anthony Eden nearly got us into a war with America over Suez. But the Brown government didn't last for a generation; it struggled to exist for just over half of a Parliamentary term. In order for the coalition to be the best government in a generation, it will have to do more than just be better than the last administration.

So let's travel back in time, and see whether the coalition is better than the Blair governments. Well, the first Blair administration did absolutely nothing - even when it had to do something, like during the petrol crisis and the foot and mouth outbreak, it did nothing other than faff about a bit. Blair's pitch for re-election in 2001 can be summed up like this: "give us another four years, and we'll actually do something this time." His second government was the one that took us into war with Iraq - and in doing so pretty much guaranteed that Blair's legacy would always be tainted, and his government associated with the starting of an illegal war that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives. And Blair's final years in office after winning again in 2005 saw a man desperately trying to cling to power in order to find a positive historical legacy - something that would never happen. So yes, thus far the coalition has been better than the Blair administrations, but that isn't difficult. The Blair years consisted of apathetic indolence, pointless warmongering and vicious infighting. They hardly represent a model government.

And what did we have before that? The Major years - a government that managed to destroy then rebuild the economy, and never managed to stop fighting amongst itself. Furthermore, the Major administration from 1992 appeared to be mired in sleaze and also appeared to be completely detached from the people it was meant to represent. And any government that ends in the sort of wipe-out that the Tories experienced in 1997 cannot really stand as anything other than a failure. Again, to be better than this doesn't take much.

We actually have to go all the way back to the second Thatcher administration from 1983-1987 to find a functional government that actually did something effectively for this country - since from 1987 the Tory government became increasingly dysfunctional and developed its taste for regicide. 1987 saw the last good government in this country; a fact that is simultaneously terrifying and absolutely unsurprising.

So yes, this coalition - which is a fledgling government that will not be possible to assess effectively until after it has left power - is, thus far, the best government in a generation. But for over 20 years, this country has had pretty dreadful government from its political class. And this is what bothers me - it isn't really an achievement to be the best government in a generation when you've only just started and when your immediate predecessors have been shit. The bar has been set so low for Cameron et al that they will be able to claim success even if they succeed at nothing other than avoiding direct, clear-cut failure.