This was a Budget I would describe as a flotilla of small measures. Westminster is poring over the 150 page Red Book in which the Budget is printed and also what is formally called the Economic and Fiscal Outlook published by the watchdog and forecaster the Office for Budget Responsibility, the OBR.

The Red Book sets out the measures the chancellor will implement and how much they will cost. There are 98 of them, considerably more than normal and more than in either of Rachel Reeves' budgets. But nearly all of them are pretty small in terms of their impact on the Treasury's spreadsheets.

This gets to the heart of why those involved in compiling this Budget have been irritated by commentary in the build up to it suggesting there would be nothing to see in John Healey's address – but also why those suggesting that were arguably onto something as well.

Firstly, as expected, it was a much smaller Budget in overall tax and spending terms than plenty of recent ones have been. But there were plenty of measures here and there which the chancellor will hope enough people notice and value – and others that some will likely curse. There are more taxes for savers and landlords, for instance, and too for banks.

When a government has promised, as Labour have, to not put up income tax, national insurance or VAT – the big revenue generators – they end up looking elsewhere if they conclude putting up tax is necessary.

That runs the political risk of choosing particular sectors who might respond rather noisily. Think of the plenty of farmers who were incensed by the changes to inheritance tax Rachel Reeves was keen on.

The central challenge for Healey, which he shares with his recent predecessors, is the public finances are in a mess and so are the personal finances of so, so many households.

And there is a recurring sense of déjà vu in the language of the OBR. "The UK's economic and fiscal position remains very challenging," it says, with a splash of understatement, adding that "there have been further adverse developments" this year with in the conflict in the Middle East.

As for what happens, next, well, frankly, who on earth knows. Or, as the OBR puts it: "The outlook for the economy and the public finances is uncertain, with significantly better or worse outcomes of broadly equal probability." The Budget book argues that "the UK economy is showing signs of resilience" but it is also true that the national debt, tax burden, inflation and interest rates are high, going up or both – and there could yet be further economic shocks that make things worse.

What happens, for instance, in the Middle East, one the mid term elections are done in America and the result of the Israeli general election is clear?

In short, the Chancellor felt constrained in his capacity to act and his capacity to make a noticeable positive difference is perhaps constrained even more so – because any intervention, even expensive ones, may merely make a grim situation a bit less bad, rather than things actually feeling better.

Mitigating the bad is arguably a noble political aim, but it costs money and potentially comes with little political upside.

Instead there is this fleet of smaller measures that the government will hope gives their MPs something to try to sell – while acknowledging that they are not world changing.

Luke Tryl, the UK Director of the More in Common think tank, says: "The softly populist tone of this budget is likely to land well with the public. The Chancellor targeted groups the public have little sympathy with - banks, landlords, gambling companies and vape shops - and turned it into cost-of-living support, rate relief for small businesses and ensuring the state pension isn't taxed." He adds: "Crucially, the chancellor may have avoided the biggest potential trap of the Budget - being seen to offer energy support for those on benefits and incurring the ire of the squeezed middle, who think they work hard but are left to fend for themselves.

"Instead, by offering support to all of those on Council Tax bands A to D, he is able to reassure them that the government will support them too." The reaction of the opposition parties, from a range of different political perspectives, amounts to a critique that this Budget was thin.

The government counters that it is one piece in the emerging jigsaw of detail from the new-ish prime minister and his chancellor – with a plan help young people into work and cut benefits before Christmas, alongside a big picture sense of what the UK's long term relationship with the European Union could look like and a 10 year vision from Andy Burnham.

In summary, this felt like a cautious Budget. One critical friend of the government suggested to me this would be a "Mr Sensible Budget" – their hope and expectation that it might be shorn of bells and whistles, but shorn of timebombs too. Let's see.