I started to read this book when the 2019 general election was first called. In the light of the result, it is difficult to remember that, at that point in time, it was felt that this could well be policy by the end of the year. As it happens, the manifesto laid out in this book was decisively rejected by the electorate. Rather than laying the book aside, I decided to finish it, but to view it from a different perspective. I wanted to see how much of the book was likely to be discarded? How much would happen in any case? And how much of it will be used by the other side?
There are some parts of the book that are plainly delusional. The delusions originate from two areas. First, they describe a world that doesn't exist and find solutions to the problems of this imaginary world. At times, it seems as if we are reading a work about a dysfunctional alternative world. Second, the problems are real enough, but the solutions are delusional. Too often, the authors resort to advocating people they don't like suffering a high tax burden and for the sums raised to be given to those who the authors do like. A tax and spend policy based upon the playground bullying over lunch money is not credible. These aspects of the book are likely to be discarded as advocated and rejected.
Some parts of the book describe trends that are already under way. For example, the chapters on the Green New Deal, or the Financialisaton of Everyday Life, or New Ownership Models all address trends well under way before this book was written. These trends are likely to continue irrespective of whether or not they form policy. All policy could hope to achieve here is to guide the trends into a more congenial avenue. This part of the book falls into the category of describing the change that we already are experiencing. It's good to have it pointed out, but it does have an aspect of futility about it.
The final category is the one that has our attention. Some of the ideas in the book are too good to miss and are being used by the Conservatives in government. The aspects of regional rebalancing in the UK, and England in particular, stand out as well argued. Already we can see much of this starting to happen. We have no idea whether or not it will be successful. The point is that there is a tacit cross-party consensus on what needs to be done.
The book is a collection of essays. The essays are written mainly by academic economists. Sadly, they write like academic economists, which means that the language is dry, jargon ridden, and inaccessible. This aspect of the book surprised me the most. Some authors resort to too much theory to make the book generally readable. I see this as a missed opportunity for the academic community to engage with a wider audience.
I wouldn't recommend the book as an easy read. It may come to serve as an historical curiosity. It may come to signify something more in the future. Either way, I am glad to have read the book, but would only recommend it to enthusiasts.