Premier's words count for little

The Prime Minister certainly won over the former as he contrasted Labour's financial recklessness with his vision of an enabling state as he belatedly spelled out his definition of "a Big Society".

It was also a significant political land grab; this social policy critique, with a strong emphasis on individual responsibility, contradicted Margaret Thatcher's assertion that "there is no such thing

as society".

As such, this speech could have been delivered by Tony Blair or David Miliband – the man who Labour chose not to elect as leader – and highlights the difficult task facing Mr Miliband's younger and more left-wing brother Ed, the Doncaster North MP.

Mr Cameron is clearly content to govern from the centre, and this is welcome. The Tories have finally realised that extremism and isolationism are not sustainable policies, and these traits only alienate the responsible and tolerant majority.

However, conference speeches should not be determined by the warmth of the ovation – party leaders are, after all, preaching to the converted.

It is how they resonate with the electorate that matters most of all and Mr Cameron's "feelgood" speech is unlikely to ease the public's angst ahead of the comprehensive spending review.

This was illustrated by the PM glossing over the child benefit row, and how the botched mishandling of the policy's launch has overshadowed the entire conference.

Mr Cameron told his audience: "I'm not saying this is going to be easy."

This is accepted. Yet this dispute revolves around the saving of just 1bn. Later this month, Chancellor George Osborne needs to explain how he intends to reduce expenditure by 83bn – an announcement that will be pivotal to the coalition's fate.

It is why Mr Cameron is going to have to do far more than evoke the First World War spirit of Lord Kitchener's slogan "Your country needs you".

There is still an unexplained dichotomy between the Tory leader's welcome desire to devolve decision-making, and a laudable expectation for responsible individuals to become active citizens, when the looming cuts will threaten the viability of so many local services across Yorkshire and undermine the need for community cohesion.

Imploring people to do more for society, when the state is imposing such serious funding reductions, is a noble aspiration – but it is unlikely to appease those hardworking people struggling to balance the family budget, and having to work even longer hours, as the Treasury squeezes middle class earners even further.

What people desperately wanted to hear was some specific details about how the Government intends to create a new generation of "wealth-creators" – Mr Cameron was right to say such a description should not be decried – rather than more bland platitudes.

Voters are also weary of recycled commitments to persuade the banks to

start lending to small businesses. They want to know how this will happen at a time when the bailed- out RBS seems pre-occupied with subsidising the millionaire under-achievers at crisis-ridden Liverpool Football Club.

The one adage that the Prime Minister did not use, as he highlighted the value of social responsibility, was that "actions speak louder than words". This was surprising, given the speech's tone. Mr Cameron would be correct with his assertion that individual actions should count in local neighbourhoods. But it will take far more than warm words to convince Britons that the scale of the forthcoming cuts is in the national interest, and a risk worth taking. He has been warned.