Parliament has officially opened and the Queen’s speech has been delivered. The speech – written by prime minister David Cameron – outlined an ambitious policy agenda for the coming year. From the so-called “snoopers’ charter”, to city deals for a “northern powerhouse”, our experts are on hand to explain what it all means.

Income tax

Prem Sikka, Professor of Accounting at University of Essex

The Queen’s speech included promises of legislation to ensure that people working 30 hours a week on the national minimum wage do not pay income tax. It also mentioned new laws to guarantee that there are no rises in income tax rates, value added tax (VAT) or national insurance for the next five years. A related government press release says that annual income tax personal allowance will increase from the current rate of £10,600 to £12,500 by 2020.

But all is not what it seems. The minimum wage rate from October 2015 is £6.70 per hour for adults. So anyone working a 37 hours a week would earn about £13,000 a year, and would still be liable to income tax.

The higher personal allowances may help the middle-classes, but will do nothing for 44% of adults whose income is already too low to pay any income tax. The poor pay VAT at 20%, the same rate as the very rich. The government statistics show that the poorest 10% of households now pay nearly 47% of their gross income in direct and indirect taxes, while the richest 10% pay 35% of their income in taxes. This imbalance is not addressed.

Surveillance

Helen Fenwick, Professor of Law at Durham University

New powers to collect data were referred to briefly in the Queen’s speech and will arise under the Investigatory Powers Bill. It will cover powers that would have arisen under the Communications and Data Bill, often referred to as the “snoopers’ charter”. Without the Liberal Democrats in government to oppose it, these powers can now re-emerge. But the new bill goes much further and will increase the security services’ warranted powers for the mass interception of the content of communications.

This legislation will require data communications companies to store the details of messages sent on social media and gaming, voice calls made over the internet, emails and phone calls – known collectively as metadata – for 12 months.

It will probably require that the information is stored in a common format data in vast databases; the security services and police would be able to access this meta-data without the permission of a judge, in the interests of investigating criminal or terrorist-related activity.

The idea behind the new bill is that details and content of communications should not be kept secret, just because they exist in digital form. It aims to address the fact that terrorist and other organised criminal groups are increasingly exploiting available communications technology in a range of sophisticated ways; for instance, by using encryption, and communicating via platforms such as WhatsApp and Snapchat.

The objections likely to be made to the bill are grounded in fears about the state’s invasion of privacy, and the security of the material; those concerns are likely to be echoed by the big communications companies such as Google.

Health

Andrew Street, Professor at Centre for Health Economics at University of York

The Queen’s speech reiterates the Conservatives’ promise to implement Simon Steven’s five-year forward view, which enjoys cross-party support. This includes plans to improve access to mental health service, reconfigure services and better integrate health and social care.

Cameron is committed to a 24/7 NHS, though this doesn’t appear to be among the priorities of his secretary of state for health, Jeremy Hunt. Operating 24/7 hospital services will be expensive, estimated to increase annual costs by up to £1.4 billion – arguably too much to justify the hoped-for reduction in higher death rates over the weekend.

It will be challenging to introduce seven-day GP services when there are insufficient GPs to meet demand during normal hours, hence the manifesto promise to recruit an additional 5,000 GPs.

There was a reminder that the Conservatives have promised to increase the NHS budget, by £8 billion over the next five years. But an additional £30 billion is required to meet rising NHS demand, with a projected £4 billion funding gap for adult social care.

The government hopes the shortfall in the NHS budget will be filled by annual productivity growth of 2% to 3%, though this would be unprecedented. Funding will prove the greatest challenge for the NHS over the parliamentary term.

Small businesses

Stephen Roper, Director of the Enterprise Research Centre at the University of Warwick

Small business owners listening to this speech probably had rather mixed feelings about the next couple of years.

On the positive side the proposed cuts in red tape will be welcome. The plan to establish a conciliation service to settle late payment and other disputes between small and large businesses will also be applauded.

In other countries such as Australia similar services have developed to become champions for small business interests and sometimes challenge the government on policies that are not small-business friendly. It is not yet clear whether these roles will also be part of the UK service.

The aim to offer 3m new apprenticeships during this parliament will also be welcomed by many firms struggling to attract skilled employees. As recent debates have suggested, however, the key issue here will be maintaining quality as numbers are expanded.

The biggest negative is the uncertainty caused by the forthcoming European referendum. This may discourage some firms from investing in expanding European sales. Businesses that supply the public sector, outside health and education, may also feel the squeeze of spending cuts and the restructuring of budgets.

City deals

Alex Nurse, Research Associate at University of Liverpool

If there were two major thematic elements to this Queen’s Speech, they would be the economy and devolution. Sat in the middle of the government’s legislative agenda, and neatly tying these themes together, came the proposals for the northern powerhouse, which will see a raft of powers including those for regeneration, transport and health devolved away from Westminster to the cities – with Manchester standing first in line.

This was pitched as a means to deliver a “balanced economic recovery”, fitting neatly within the Government’s “one nation” agenda. It can be seen broadly as an attempt to help the north to catch up to London, and to assuage those with itchy feet as Scotland receives even more powers.

But the explicit mention of metro-mayors gives a clear signal to cities that have yet to sign up: this is not a free ride. They will be expected to deliver, and be held democratically accountable for their actions under these plans.

The inclusion of high speed rail is no coincidence, reminding us that HS2 has yet to clear the statute books, but also that proposals for HS3 would form part of the glue holding this revamped northern powerhouse together.

Childcare

Caitlin McLean, Ailsa McKay Postdoctoral Fellow in Economics at Glasgow Caledonian University

With the rising costs of childcare putting increasing strain on family budgets, it was good to see the government’s childcare proposals feature in the Queen’s speech.

The Conservatives have previously proposed that working parents of three- and four-year-olds be offered free childcare for 30 hours per week – extended from the 15 per week currently on offer for all families.

This is a worthy goal. An inability to afford childcare services can pose a significant barrier to parents – especially mothers – seeking employment.

But questions remain about childcare access for families where both parents aren’t currently in employment. For instance, should these children be excluded from increased childcare hours (especially given that access to high quality early education and care plays a key role in reducing inequality)? It is also unclear what will happen in the event that a parent loses his or her job – will the child immediately lose access to those extra funded hours?

And many parents would feel unable to accept an offer of employment unless childcare had already been arranged – childcare access is a prerequisite for undertaking employment, not a reward for doing so.

While targeting eligibility may save some money in the short run, it comes at a cost – increased administrative complexity and further entrenchment of educational inequality among children.

Helen Fenwick is Professor of Law at Durham University.
Alex Nurse is Research Associate at University of Liverpool.
Andrew Street is Professor, Centre for Health Economics at University of York.
Anya Ahmed is Senior Lecturer in Social Policy at University of Salford.
Benjamin Bowman is PhD candidate in Politics at University of Bath.
Caitlin McLean is Ailsa McKay Postdoctoral Fellow in Economics at Glasgow Caledonian University.
Michael Jopling is Professor in Education, Department of Education and Lifelong Learning at Northumbria University, Newcastle.
Prem Sikka is Professor of Accounting, Essex Business School at University of Essex.
Stephen Roper is Professor of Enterprise and Director of the Enterprise Research Centre, Warwick Business School at University of Warwick.