I am giving away my age (and possibly exposing myself to ridicule) when I admit to loving the film Clueless, a 1990s take on Jane Austen's Emma. In it, two friends discuss a peer's outfit, describing it as a "full-on Monet".  
“It’s like a painting, see? From far away, it’s OK, but up close, it’s a big ol’ mess.”

The Prime Minister earlier today outlined his "Ten Point Plan" for a green industrial revolution and already it is becoming obvious that it is, to quote Cher in Clueless, a "full-on Monet".  

The plan's ten points appear at first glance to cover everything you would want from a green industrial revolution - renewable energy, electric cars and low-emission public transport, decarbonising planes and ships, tackling homes and public buildings, carbon capture, protecting nature and green innovation and finance. And there are some promising proposals in the plan, from a focus on off-shore wind to the necessary re-greening through tree planting. Bringing forward the day when we no longer produce petrol and diesel vehicles is certainly welcome.   

But criticism is already pouring in from those that know what they're looking at and see that it doesn't go far enough. Dr Darren Moorcroft, CEO at the Woodland Trust, has said it is "just a small step towards addressing the challenges facing our natural environment". Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, calls it "beyond disappointing".  

I could argue that we should rally round this ten point plan, implement it and call that a success. But when it falls far short of what we should be seeking to achieve, we must find ways of being more ambitious than our Prime Minister proposes. Yes, we should seek to implement this plan - but even if all ten points are achieved, we cannot call that a success.  

I am no art critic (though in fact, I am partial to Monet) but I know a mess when I see one.