In the wake of the general election, John Ludlow takes a look at the myriad of Bills now firmly back on the legislative agenda

The annual Queen's Speech rarely contains surprises, but there were fewer than usual among the 40-odd Bills announced on 17 May.


This was partly because so many were 'retreads' - measures that fell in the dying days of the last Parliament and are being brought swiftly back. It is also because of the fact that this is the first session after a general election, where typically the lion's share of the time is given to specific manifesto commitments.


Foremost in the list of reintroduced measures is the Identity Cards Bill, which had such a rough ride last session. The government says it is now listening to its critics, but it is doubtful whether there will be any real changes to the Bill beyond the small and technical. The prime minister will surely be hoping that this is too early in the Parliament for a full-scale Labour rebellion, while the Conservatives can be held at bay by placing a greater emphasis on the Bill's supposed role in combating illegal immigration.


Though it remains to be seen whether the ID cards issue will fully reignite, there will certainly be raised tempers when a Bill outlawing incitement to religious hatred is reintroduced (this time as a stand-alone Bill). Ministers regard the opposition to the measure as ill-informed and, at times, hysterical, and they will threaten to use the Parliament Acts if it does not reach the statute books this time around.


Other casualties from the last session include the Equalities Bill - which will introduce a single equality and human rights body - and the Charities Bill. The Criminal Defence Service Bill - which made such slow progress last time around - is also scheduled to return and will reintroduce means testing in criminal cases. The Lord Chancellor is making much play with the notion that savings from the reform will go to boost the civil legal aid budget.



Measures that were flagged up in the Labour Party manifesto include yet another Immigration and Asylum Bill. This particular measure will underpin a new points-based system for would-be immigrants with an emphasis on useful skills and a test of 'Britishness'. The Bill will also remove the right of successful asylum seekers to remain in the UK permanently, a move that will inflame many Labour dissenters.


The manifesto also promised a Fraud Bill, designed to make the offence easier for juries, defendants and the general public to understand, and a Corporate Manslaughter Bill. Both measures duly appeared in the Queen's Speech, as did the Child Contact and Inter-Country Adoption Bill, which, among other things, will promote greater flexibility in the enforcement of court orders.


The most trailed of the manifesto-commitment measures - it even had its own 'mini-manifesto' - was the Violent Crime Reduction Bill. Part of the prime minister's personal crusade to curb yob culture, this Bill will restrict the sale of replica guns and knives, and give head teachers the legal right to search pupils. It is clearly one of the pillars of the legislative programme, though we are told that the text of the Bill will not be ready for some months.


A fresh Counter Terrorism Bill was promised even before the Prevention of Terrorism Act received royal assent last session. Initially available in draft form - where it will be subject to pre-legislative scrutiny - this measure will introduce new offences of 'acts preparatory to terrorism' and of 'glorifying or condoning terrorism'. This is sure to provoke a great deal of disquiet in both houses, though it will also be a good opportunity to revisit the concept of control orders.


Was everything in the Queen's Speech predictable? Not quite. There was one real surprise in the Compensation Bill, which aims to dispel the 'myth' of a compensation culture by codifying the common law of negligence. It could also be the ideal platform for the regulation of claims handlers, though there is no official commitment as yet. While this Bill is certainly not unwelcome - particularly if it discourages false claims as well as dispelling a few misconceptions - there is a worry that it could lead to increased lawyer-bashing.


Staying with the issue of legal compensation, we finally have a Bill to reform clinical negligence. The NHS Redress Bill will introduce a package of measures available for patients (while retaining their right to litigation) as well as a no-fault compensation scheme for severely neurologically impaired babies.


It was perhaps also surprising to see the return of the Mental Health Bill, given its absence from Labour's election manifesto and the criticism heaped upon it by the joint Commons and Lords committee. This is one measure that is sure to provoke much opposition, not least from the Law Society.


This is certainly a big legislative programme in a very long session, 18 months in all. There are many battles to come, though it remains to be seen if any are die-in-a-ditch issues.


Governments have a particular advantage in the first session of a Parliament in that many of their early measures are clear manifesto commitments. At least in theory, government backbenchers ought to accept the programme on which they campaigned and on which the government has won a mandate. In the Lords, the time-honoured Salisbury Convention ought to compel peers not to vote down any of those Bills.


This ought to give ministers a clear run. That is the theory; now for the practice.


John Ludlow is head of the parliamentary unit at the Law Society