Is Cameron policy light or does is he quietly mapping out a policy revolution?

Steve Richards seems to think that the latter is the case. Writing in the Independent today he argues that 'It's not true that Cameron has no policies.  He has, and they are quite revolutionary'

Putting aside whether or not you can be 'quite' revolutionary, the substance of his article is very interesting.  By looking at a collection of Cameron's speeches over recent months he sees a pattern of themes emerging around decentralisation and co-operation.

Richards suggests the new policy platform would also have a direct impact on the kind of campaign Cameron would seek to run.

"it is possible that shadow cabinet members could enter the next election unable to pledge outcomes in specific policy areas, but instead promising to create circumstances where people will have the chance to take more control of their lives."

This would certainly make a marked contrast to the shopping-list pledges that have become common to all parties' manifestos since Labour's 1997 pledge card.

However, Richards isn't convinced it would be popular enough to win him a majority.  By setting out on this path, Cameron also opens himself up for the charge that he is policy light - as he will have no specific figures to throw back at Labour when they pledge x-million new nurses, bobbies and teaching assistants. And there is the trick of making it all work:

"Do parents, especially poorer parents, have the time to set up schools or co-operatives? Will local accountability of the police improve the service or make it worse? How can a government encourage the creation of local initiatives without pulling the strings, a move that would defeat the purpose?"

There of course many liberal resonances in what Richards suggests that Cameron is trying to do. In trying to found a Conservative Co-operative movement he recalls Paddy Ashdown's farewell speech to the Lib Dems in 1999. There he said that 'mutualism' based on a new working of the co-operative movement was a key way in which liberals could meet 21st century challenges.

Has Cameron now identified what Ashdown thought was crucial to "liberals, in the widest sense, in the years ahead"? And if he has, can he put flesh on the bones and deliver it?