“There is little difference between an 80-seat and 200-seat majority in parliament,” says Dr Hannah White of the Institute for Government. This is the kind of stupid remark that only a clever person can make.

For a while it may be true in a parliamentary sense — because a Government can usually get as much of its legislation passed with a majority of 80 as with one of 200 — it’s false in psychological terms.

If the polls are right, and stay at their present levels for less than another week, Labour will indeed win its supermajority. Anyone outside Carlton Gardens can get what that will mean.

First, opposition to the new Government will be split between the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats, and others, perhaps including Reform. There will be exultant talk on the left of the extinction of the Tories. It may even turn out to be right. And landslides don’t make for humility — especially if you’ve just gained the biggest one in modern times.

Next, Labour’s left, having shut up, will start to put up. It has shut up because, after four terms of Conservative Government, it’s decided that a fifth one would be worse than Labour austerity — which is how it sees Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves’s voter-fearful stress on financial orthodoxy.

And it will put up because, well, that’s what it always does, sooner or later. The claim will be that people didn’t vote for a Labour Government to stick with Tory policies. Morgan McSweeney and Team Starmer have done an effective job of purging the left from parliamentary selections. But not every Labour MP will be new. Jobs on the front bench will be limited. Governments with large majorities create their own opposition. And Labour activists go left when their party is in government, just as Tory ones go right. Meanwhile, the Greens and George Galloway will be lurking, ready to pick off former Labour voters in seats with lots of student, public sector and Muslim voters.

Sir Keir is 61. It’s hard to imagine him, at the age of 65 or so when the next election comes, pledging to serve a full term. Ambitious ministers will tack to the leftward wind quicker than you might think. How soon?

Stand back for a moment, as the election enters its final days, and think about it.

Reeves and Sir Keir’s Tory-lite approach to economic management will last for a while. This won’t be inconsistent with higher capital gains and inheritance tax, obviously, or with new council tax bands and pension taxes. Labour has signalled these hikes by the traditional means — namely, to say it has no plans for any of them. None of these taxes, we must assume, are paid by “working people”.

But unless Israel launches a full-scale invasion of Rafah, or Russia suddenly breaks through into western Ukraine, or a newly-elected Donald Trump begins upending the tables, Sir Keir may enjoy a few happy months — despite small boats crossing the channel as unstoppably as ever.

Legal migration will begin to tick down, as the restrictions introduced under the Conservatives begin to take effect. NHS waiting lists will continue to fall. After the chaos of recent years — the term that Labour has effectively deployed, doubtless gleaned from a mass of focus groups — a period of relative calm would come as a relief. Even the old media and social media combo — Tony Blair’s “feral beast” on steroids — may give Sir Keir a brief fair wind.

So what happens next? The answer lies in a careful reading of Labour’s manifesto.

It’s tempting to pass over the document altogether. After all, Sir Keir has broken every meaningful pledge he made in his Labour leadership campaign: higher income tax for the top five per cent, no more Universal Credit, an end to tuition fees. Why should he be any more straight with Britain’s voters than he was with Labour’s members? Why take the manifesto seriously?

Because it sets out a plausible plan for making government even bigger and the opposition even smaller. And that’s before what happens if, or rather when, economic growth doesn’t come.

Bigger government: I count 27 references in the manifesto to new offices, regulators, quangos, councils and authorities. Labour will not so much tax as regulate its way to equality.  At least at the start. At least, until profits dry up and government taxes elsewhere.

Consider, for example, its plan to mandate “UK-regulated financial institutions — including banks, asset managers, pension funds, and insurers — and FTSE 100 companies to develop and implement credible transition plans that align with the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement”.

Smaller opposition: Labour will “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations to political parties”.  Which would be consistent with keeping the flow of union money to Labour going while blocking off the supply of private funds to their opponents.

Few will shed tears for the Tories (who may also get less Short Money in Parliament if the new Government changes the rules). They may feel differently when Labour explores “further measures to keep everyone safe online, particularly when using social media”.  Do you have right-wing views on migration control? On women’s rights? On Islamist extremism? Just wait until the cries to end “hate speech” gather pace.

These are geological changes — slow in coming; sweeping in consequence

Or when class is baked into Equality legislation — and people can be treated differently on the basis of parental background. Who has priority in a GP queue, given limited resources?  Whose children go to the top or bottom of schools waiting lists? What’s the effect on which areas are policed, and how? The courts will decide. Bliss was it in that dawn to be a working person!

The implications of Labour for culture change sweep wider. Take two examples — one from its manifesto, one not.

So, schools. Labour will “launch an expert-led review of curriculum and assessment … our review will consider the right balance of assessment methods whilst protecting the important role of examinations”.

There go the Gove education reforms.

Next, GPs. Sir Keir has pledged a vote on Assisted Suicide. Whatever your view of the matters, this would radically transform medical ethics.

And so upend the relationship between patients and doctors.

These are geological changes — slow in coming; sweeping in consequence. The conventional course is to complain that voters don’t know they’re coming. That the triviality of modern electioneering has shut down adult debate.

On the contrary, I suspect that voters know perfectly well what will happen next — in general terms, if not the specifics. They don’t really want Sir Keir in. But they definitely want the Tories out — and no Nightmare On Starmer Street will change their minds. For most of us, July 4th can’t come too soon. Get it over with. Enough. Make it stop.