As has been widely reported, this year’s Conservative Party Conference, like its predecessor, will feature a ban on what many might see as the Tories’ beverage of choice – champagne, naturally. We are told that at last year’s conference, the drink would have been seen as a premature celebration of victory – and it’s true that nothing is punished by the British public more swiftly than perceived arrogance; just ask the Labour Party after their narrow loss against John Major’s Conservatives.

At this year’s Conference, the mood (or at least the mood the Party wants to project) is sober and business-like. The past few months since the election could be seen, perhaps, as a ‘phoney war’, a kind of hiatus – up until now, cuts have been discussed, options tabled, and Ministers have argued for the necessity of continued spending in their Departments. Now, within two weeks, the axe will begin to fall in earnest and the public will begin to see what 25% cuts in Government spending actually look like.  Accountancy firm BDO and other experts have warned that the cuts are likely to push the country into a second recession, as businesses make their own cuts in anticipation of shrinking markets. Against this background, it would be foolish, indeed, to celebrate too overtly in front of the cameras.

Yet the Conservatives, in fact, have much to celebrate. Of course, winning the election, for one thing, even if the result was the Coalition. Perhaps even more important is how smoothly the Coalition formed and how harmonious it is for the most part – It’s been said of David Cameron that he prefers consensus to confrontation, and he seems to be thriving on it.

But it’s not just about consensus – this is a radical Government – if anyone had missed that point, it was made clear by David Cameron’s invitation to Margaret Thatcher to visit 10 Downing Street in June. Margaret Thatcher herself was the leader of the most revolutionary administration since the Welfare State was born in 1945 under Clemet Attlee.  Thatcher’s revolution, of course, was about shrinking, not enlarging, the State, and David Cameron intends to complete it.

Under Thatcher, the State got out of the business of running industries. Under Cameron, the State will continue to provide the essentials to those who have no alternative, but it will no longer be a viable option for those who prefer not to work to rely on the State as a lifestyle choice. The planned cuts in Housing Benefit for the long-term unemployed are part of this strategy; while they may sound harsh, Ian Duncan Smith’s intended radical reforms to the welfare system will ensure that taking work always pays and that the culture of warehousing people on benefits for life is brought to an end.

The process will undoubtedly be painful, particularly for those State employees who lose their jobs in this process. But we should remember one thing – while the 1980s were also painful for many as the economy changed from State Socialism to free enterprise, by the mid-1990s Britain’s economy was rock-solid, house prices were reasonable, and levels of employment were increasing.

David Cameron’s rejigging of the economy is unavoidable, not least because the country is broke – but people may be pleasantly surprised to see what emerges from the process.

It would be hard to blame Conference delegates for taking a discreet swig of champagne from a paper cup, given the circumstances.