THERE is no “May-ism”, the prime minister declared as she launched the Conservative’s General Election manifesto in Halifax yesterday.

Shutting down requests to place her vision in the context of Thatcherism, Theresa May instead painted her plans as traditional conservatism, steps to promote a meritocracy where all who work hard can do well.

Yet some plans to reform the funding of social care were less traditional, threatening to hurt significant elements of her own core constituency, by ensuring elderly people contribute more to the cost of their care. The winter fuel allowance will be means-tested – though not in Scotland – and the triple lock on state pensions downgraded. These were all presented as “intergenerational fairness’ and one wonders whether Mrs May would have ventured to propose them at an election where she was under greater threat.

But there is no doubt tough decisions need to be made in this area and she deserves credit for confronting them.

In much else the manifesto is unconvincing. There are omissions: A bland desire to reduce levels of child poverty is the only mention of that topic. There are “no plans” for further radical welfare reform, although that word “radical” may be a hostage to fortune. It is not clear what justification there is for a planned voter ID law.

Perhaps the biggest omission from the manifesto is any kind of financial detail which many will find hypocritical, given Tory attacks on Labour’s manifesto costings.

In Scotland, Mrs May says, a second independence reference will not be allowed to take place until the Brexit negotiations have “played out” and then only if there is “public consent”. What do either of these phrases mean? It is not clear and may be expected to remain muddy over the next three weeks. It seems the Tories hope to kick this particular can down the road, in the belief the next Scottish Parliament elections may intervene and perhaps prevent it happening at all.

Ruling out an early referendum seems likely to further polarise the imminent vote on constitutional terms. If the Conservatives believe in the strength of the Union, this political game-playing is not the way to defend it. Yet in some ways a delay may suit the SNP too, with Nicola Sturgeon hoping more time will see Westminster austerity increase support for independence as the potential pain of a hard Brexit becomes more apparent.

Elsewhere in the manifesto, there are nods to the Brexit vote in terms of Ukip-friendly policies such as increased charges for firms employing non-EU workers and higher charges for those migrants who use the NHS.

The pledge to cut net immigration to tens of thousands is renewed yet this was a target Mrs May herself failed to meet when she was Home Secretary.

There is little detail about how powers repatriated from the EU will be administered. The inescapable conclusion from this manifesto is that much that is controversial has been left deliberately vague.

If there is such a thing as May-ism it is far from clear what that is. Perhaps, with polls pointing to a comfortable victory, that is the way she wants it.