Looking at the Queen’s Speech

The Queen’s Speech had worthy but not particularly interesting legislation, bar Brexit.

There was hardly enough to keep MPs engaged for a year, outside Brexit, let alone the government’s desire to stretch it over two. Brexit will dominate all politics for the foreseeable future. There may be one benefit of that - the government can quietly abort its obsession with failed austerity programmes and recognise the need to reinvest in infrastructure. Grenfell Tower has reminded us more than anything that housing provision, particularly social housing, should be the highest priority.

Amongst the bills that are of some importance is one on domestic violence and abuse. Disappointingly this remains a draft bill but hopefully, given the surfeit of legislative time, this can be pulled forward.

Brexit will overwhelm the rest of the programme with bills on the customs union, trade, immigration, agriculture, fisheries and nuclear safeguards as well as the Great Reform Bill. The latter will be as complicated as it is controversial.

The threat that it will weaken environmental standards and undermine labour conditions remains a real one and for those reasons alone it should be opposed as it is currently.

I will take a particularly close interest in the reform of agriculture, partly because of my long-term interest in farming but also because of the nature of the Stroud constituency.

One benefit is that we might be able to revisit rural policy, something that is long overdue.

I’m very happy to correspond with constituents on where they think the emphasis should be and where the government should be supported and opposed.

On an unrelated matter, I’m sorry if you’ve had difficulty getting through to my parliamentary email account david.drew.mp@parliament.uk, due to a cyberattack on Parliament.