Episódios
-
In this eighth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Danny Kruger MP, a leading voice opposing the bill on the Public Bill Committee, to explore the political, procedural, and constitutional complexities of this landmark legislation.
____
Danny Kruger MP discusses how he came to play a central role in opposing the bill and reflects candidly on the intense scrutiny process, the challenges of being out-resourced, and the broader implications of legislating such a deeply controversial issue through the Private Members’ Bill (PMB) process. He raises serious concerns about the lack of judicial oversight following a key amendment, the Government’s behind-the-scenes support despite its neutral stance, and the potential for ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) considerations to override parliamentary sovereignty.
The conversation also touches on key upcoming stages — Report Stage likely to be on April 25th, potential Third Reading dates, and the importance of robust parliamentary scrutiny in shaping public trust. Kruger calls for improved resourcing, greater transparency, and more time for debate, particularly given the bill’s scope and ethical weight.
With vital clauses still to be debated—particularly around NHS provision and post-legislative review — this episode offers insight into how Parliament is handling one of the most divisive and significant moral issues of our time.
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Is Rachel Reeves gearing up for a standard Spring Statement — or are we in emergency budget territory? In this episode we dig into what form next week’s parliamentary statement might take and why it may be more than just an economic update. We trace the history of the “one fiscal event” a year rule, explore the tough choices facing the Chancellor, and ask whether Parliament still has any real say over tax and spending. Plus, could post-legislative scrutiny finally be coming into its own?
___
In this episode, Ruth and Mark cut through the fiscal fog surrounding Rachel Reeves’ upcoming Spring Economic Statement — officially billed as a routine forecast update, but with growing signals it could be something much bigger. With whispers of an “emergency budget” and mounting pressure from the Office for Budget Responsibility’s (OBR) latest projections, they weigh the procedural factors that will determine whether Reeves will take action now to meet her fiscal rules, or kick the tougher decisions down the road to the autumn Budget and the Comprehensive Spending Review.
They also take a step back to explore how we got here. The current approach of having just one major fiscal event per year was introduced in 2016 by then-Chancellor Philip Hammond, aiming to bring predictability and control. But when long-term economic forecasts suggest those all-important fiscal rules are at risk — especially ones that stretch five years into the future — that system starts to show its cracks.
They also speak to Professor David Heald, who delivers a sobering assessment of how little control Parliament has over public finances — before spending takes place. He argues that the UK’s budget-setting process is executive-dominated and ripe for reform, but political incentives keep the status quo firmly in place.
Later, Ruth and Mark highlight an encouraging sign of reform: the growing use of post-legislative scrutiny, with the Football Governance Bill now including a statutory review clause. They reflect on how tools like these could support longer-term thinking in Parliament — if only they were used more systematically.
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Estão a faltar episódios?
-
In this episode we sit down with Bambos Charalambous MP, the former Labour whip now marshalling the supporters of the assisted dying bill in the Public Bill Committee. As the bill faces intense debate, Charalambous explains the major shift from having a High Court Judge oversee assisted dying applications to a specialist panel — and why, despite extensive discussion, the Committee won’t vote on this crucial change for some time. We also explore the complexities of parliamentary procedure, the legislative timetable, and the role of social media in shaping the debate. Plus, Ruth and Mark break look at the remaining timetable for getting the bill through the Commons and then the House of Lords.
_____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Gareth Jenkins
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Labour’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill promises to speed up the planning process to boost housebuilding and infrastructure development. But does it go far enough, especially when it comes to Parliament’s role? Meanwhile, Ruth and Mark unpack the Reform UK fallout between Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe, exploring why small parties often struggle with internal disputes. And what does it really mean to be an “Independent” MP? Should lone wolves, party rebels and political outcasts all be treated the same?
__
Labour’s new Planning and Infrastructure Bill promises a wave of housebuilding and major infrastructure projects — but will it deliver? Robbie Owen, Head of Infrastructure Planning and Government Affairs at law firm Pinsent Masons, isn’t convinced. He argues that to truly fast-track major projects, the Government should revive an old parliamentary mechanism: one-clause bills that authorise big-ticket schemes while shielding them from judicial review. Plus, he suggests that more transformative projects, like HS2, may need to be directly approved by Parliament so the Hybrid Bill process may need to be utilised more often. He also suggests that this Bill will not be the last word on the issue for this Government: further legislation will probably be required.
This week, Ruth and Mark also dissect the dramatic fallout between Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and MP Rupert Lowe. Does this high-profile clash expose an inherent challenge for small and emerging parties—a lack of political culture and mechanisms to manage internal disputes?
And with Rupert Lowe joining the swelling ranks of independent MPs, we ask: what does "independent" really mean? Some have left their parties voluntarily, others were elected as non-party candidates, while some lost the whip for defying party lines—or were suspended due to allegations. While a few are true political lone wolves, others remain quietly loyal to their former parties, voting in step and hoping to return to the fold.
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Gareth Jenkins
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this sixth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to track the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which seeks to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.
We discuss the pace of the Committee’s progress, the dynamics between supporters and opponents of the Bill, and a key upcoming vote on the clause which proposes shifting oversight from High Court judges to an expert panel. Could this amendment sway MPs who previously supported the Bill?
Later, we turn to New Zealand, where assisted dying has been legal for over three years. Professor Colin Gavaghan, from the University of Bristol, shares insights into New Zealand’s experience, exploring eligibility criteria, operational challenges, and the emotional toll on medical professionals. What lessons can the UK learn from their legislative approach and the assisted dying system itself.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this episode, we sit down with Toby Perkins MP, Chair of Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee, to discuss how he and his colleagues plan to hold the Government accountable for its ambitious Net Zero commitments.
The Government’s advisory body, the Climate Change Committee, has now recommended emissions reductions for the Seventh Carbon Budget (2038-2042) —the next milestone in achieving Net Zero by 2050. Ministers must decide how much of this advice to adopt before presenting a legally binding carbon budget to Parliament for approval. Yet, in 2021, MPs spent just 17 minutes debating the Sixth Carbon Budget Order, a move later criticised by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak for its lack of scrutiny. With Keir Starmer and Ed Miliband now leading the Government, how will parliamentary oversight of climate policy change? Will MPs take their role more seriously this time?
We also examine an escalating dispute between the Government and Parliament’s National Security Committee. The Government has refused to allow Jonathan Powell, the new National Security Adviser (NSA), to give evidence to the Committee and has stopped sharing National Security Council (NSC) agendas — breaking a decade-long tradition of confidential engagement. Every NSA since 2010 has testified before Parliament, yet Ministers now argue Powell is a special adviser, not an official, and should not be subject to scrutiny. Critics, however, warn that this move weakens transparency and parliamentary oversight at a time of heightened public concern over defence and security. Matt Western MP, Chair of the NSC, argues that restricting access to the NSA could leave Parliament in the dark on key national security decisions.
Finally, we speak to Simon Hart, former Conservative MP and Chief Whip, about his newly published political diaries—packed with eyebrow-raising revelations, from Ministers getting stuck in brothels at 2am to tantrums from sacked colleagues. But beyond the scandalous anecdotes, Hart delivers a serious message: political parties need to improve candidate selection, manage MPs’ expectations, and ensure future politicians are mentally resilient enough to handle the intense pressures of modern political life.
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this fifth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we take you back inside the Public Bill Committee for the latest updates as MPs continue their scrutiny of the assisted dying bill. This week we speak with Kit Malthouse MP, a co-sponsor of the Bill and a key voice in the Committee’s deliberations.
Kit Malthouse, a former Home Office Minister and Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Choice at the End of Life, is a strong supporter of the assisted dying bill and a key ally of its sponsor, Kim Leadbeater MP, in the Public Bill Committee.
In this episode, Kit shares his insights on the Committee’s discussion of key amendments this week, as well as the further changes he hopes to propose later in the process.
We explore the challenge of determining how much detail should go on the face of the bill and how much should be left to regulations, the unusual role of Government Ministers in the Committee – speaking as Ministers but voting as MPs – and whether the decision to alter the judicial safeguards is eroding support for the bill.
_____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Parliament passed a law requiring the Government to spend 0.7% of Gross National Income on international aid. So, should Ministers be able to bypass that legal obligation through a ministerial statement? We also discuss Labour MP Mike Amesbury’s suspended jail sentence and how a recall petition will be called if he doesn’t voluntarily step down. Plus, we explore the controversy surrounding the Product Safety and Metrology Bill, which Brexiteers warn could stealthily realign Britain with the EU while handing Ministers sweeping legislative powers.
Should MPs have a say on the Government’s decision to cut yet more from the UK’s international aid budget to fund increased defence spending? By law, the UK is committed to spending 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) on international aid. Yet this latest reduction does not have to be put to a vote in Parliament.
With aid spending now slashed to just 0.3% of GNI, could an upcoming Estimates Day debate on Foreign Office funding give MPs a chance to raise concerns about the decision? And with the aid budget shrinking, is it time to reconsider the role of the International Development Select Committee?
Meanwhile, Labour MP Mike Amesbury has had his 10-week jail sentence for assault suspended on appeal — but that may not be enough to save his Commons seat. As Ruth explains, an MP sentenced to jail — even with a suspended sentence — faces a recall petition. If 10% of voters in Runcorn and Helsby back his removal, the Government will be forced into a by-election, unless he voluntarily resigns his seat first.
Also in the spotlight: the Product Safety and Metrology Bill. Ministers are keen to reassure MPs about this seemingly technical legislation, but Brexiteers suspect it’s a Trojan Horse for creeping EU alignment. The bill contains sweeping "Henry VIII powers," allowing ministers to rewrite laws with minimal parliamentary oversight. Ruth and Mark ponder why governments keep reaching for these controversial powers —and what it means for democracy.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Why is it so difficult to reform Parliaments? In this episode, we talk to Greg Power, author of Inside the Political Mind: The Human Side of Politics and How it Shapes Development. Drawing on his experience as a special advisor to Commons Leaders Robin Cook and Peter Hain, as well as his work with parliaments worldwide, Greg explains how institutional culture, political incentives, and the personal interests of MPs often derail reform efforts.
With fascinating examples - from MPs in Ghana dealing with snakes in toilets to Bangladeshi politicians setting up credit unions - Greg reveals how parliamentarians navigate their roles and why constituency work, though vital, is often disconnected from policy-making. He argues that MPs’ casework could be an invaluable early-warning system for governments - if only there were a way to systematically harness it.
Greg also discusses how new MPs are like learner drivers - thrown into Westminster without a clear guide on how things really work. With over 50% of MPs in the current Parliament being newly elected, many are still figuring out the informal norms and unwritten rules that govern the institution. While this level of turnover presents challenges, it also offers a rare opportunity to reshape how Parliament functions - if only those in power are willing to seize it.
The conversation also touches on populism and how public expectations are often at their highest when institutions are at their weakest. History shows that populist movements thrive when traditional systems fail to deliver, but once in power, they often struggle to govern effectively. Whether in Bangladesh, the USA or the UK, the lesson is clear: ignoring democratic structures in favour of quick fixes is a recipe for long-term instability.
___
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this fourth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we take you inside the Public Bill Committee as it scrutinises the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill - a landmark proposal seeking to legalise assisted dying. The Committee is in full swing, debating amendments, and tensions are running high. We sit down with Sarah Olney MP, a key player in the discussions, to unpack the latest developments.
Sarah shares insights into her proposed amendments, the growing frustration with the legislative process, and concerns over the role of Ministers when the Government says it is neutral.
The atmosphere in the Committee has taken a combative turn, with MPs digging in on both sides of the debate. As the bill progresses slowly, controversy is brewing over judicial oversight, particularly a proposal to replace High Court judges with an expert panel - an amendment that could significantly sway support for the bill.
Olney also discusses her push for a new "test of ability" rather than "test of capacity," aiming to better safeguard vulnerable individuals. Meanwhile, questions are mounting about whether the Private Members' Bill process is the right mechanism for handling such a complex legal and ethical issue.
With so much still undecided and political divisions deepening, the bill's future hangs in the balance. Is this process up to the task, or is it exposing fundamental flaws in how Parliament legislates and its capacity to make law in this area?
___
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this episode we dissect the fallout from Labour’s WhatsApp purge following the Andrew Gwynne affair and what it means for political communication at Westminster. We also explore the latest news from the House of Commons Modernisation Committee, discussing its focus on improving accessibility to Parliament, legislative scrutiny, and the debate over MPs holding second jobs.
First, we examine Labour’s swift response to a controversial WhatsApp group where MPs and councillors shared offensive remarks about colleagues, constituents, and even the late Queen. Keir Starmer wasted no time, suspending multiple party members in a move that has sent shockwaves through Westminster. Mark explores how WhatsApp has become a vital yet risky tool in modern politics and how this scandal could set a precedent for future digital leaks. As MPs rush to delete old messages, we ask: is this just the beginning of a new era of political exposés?
Next, we turn to parliamentary reform. The newly established Modernisation Committee has set out its priority strands of work: improving accessibility to Parliament, making Commons time more effective, and giving MPs greater certainty about the parliamentary schedule. But what will these reforms actually look like? And where does the overhaul of the legislative process fit into the picture?
Finally, we tackle the ongoing debate over MPs holding second jobs. Should parliamentarians be allowed to take on paid work outside Westminster? While some argue that experience in law, medicine, or business enriches political debate, others believe outside roles dilute MPs’ commitment to their constituents. The controversy surrounding high-profile MPs hosting TV shows - particularly on GB News - raises fresh questions about which types of second jobs should be restricted. Should media roles face tighter controls than other professions? And could stricter rules unintentionally discourage professionals from entering politics?
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
The assisted dying bill is about to undergo detailed scrutiny by the Public Bill Committee - a group of 23 MPs tasked with reviewing the Bill’s text and proposing amendments to refine and improve it. But what exactly happens during this amendment process? Former House of Commons Clerk, Paul Evans CBE, breaks it down. Plus, we hear from Dr Ben Spencer MP, a former consultant psychiatrist turned parliamentarian, who has proposed dozens of amendments to the Bill.
This week, Ruth is joined by procedural expert Paul Evans to break down the role and purpose of a Public Bill Committee. They explore how amendments are proposed, the rules that determine which amendments are admissible, and the grouping and selection of amendments for debate and decision. Paul explains the pivotal role played by the Committee chair in making fine procedural and political judgements and the mechanisms like ‘closure’ motions that keep the process moving and guard against filibustering.
What is the Government’s role in this process. While officially neutral, Ministers have a ‘duty to the statute book'. So, will they step in to propose amendments, or will that responsibility fall to the Bill’s sponsor, Kim Leadbeater MP? Plus, we explore the tactical side of law making: is it smarter to push amendments now, or save them for the next stage when the Bill returns to the full Commons for the Report stage?
We also sit down with Dr Ben Spencer MP, the Conservative MP for Runnymede and Weybridge. He voted against the Bill at Second Reading and discusses why he thinks the Private Members’ Bill process is not the right route for this complex legislation. Despite his opposition to the Bill, and although he’s not a member of the Public Bill Committee, he has nonetheless tabled several dozen amendments. One of his key proposals? The creation of a new body — the Assisted Dying Agency — to oversee the process. He shares why he’s pursuing these amendments, how he’s crafting them, and how he hopes to influence the Bill’s progress from outside the Committee room.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenter: Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this special episode we have an exclusive conversation with Dame Elizabeth Gardiner, the former head of the government’s Parliamentary Counsel Office, who drafted the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This is a rare insight into the legislative process from the very person who crafted the bill that MPs are now scrutinising.
Dame Elizabeth reveals how she was approached to draft the bill on a pro bono basis, the legal challenges she navigated, and how she worked closely with the Bill’s sponsor, Kim Leadbeater MP, to shape the legislation. She offers a fascinating behind-the-scenes look at the drafting process, explaining how existing laws, international precedents, and parliamentary constraints influenced her approach.
Mark and Ruth also dissect the key takeaways from this week's Public Bill Committee evidence sessions, including concerns over medical safeguards, judicial oversight, and the role of government in shaping the final legislation. With over 147 amendments already tabled, the bill faces intense scrutiny in the coming weeks.
Tune in for an in-depth discussion on the future of assisted dying law in the UK, the political dynamics at play, and what comes next in this historic parliamentary process.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
The Government is now taking difficult decisions on everything from social security to a third runway at Heathrow which could cause splits in their own ranks. But why are MPs not paying more attention to the mechanisms the House of Commons has established to control the social security budget and repeal or reform old EU laws? And the House of Lords provides good news for Sir Paul McCartney but bad news for ticket touting by “posh people” at the Royal Albert Hall.
This week we discuss the government’s big challenges — from Heathrow’s third runway to social security spending and the implications for parliamentary politics.
Infrastructure battles ahead: Rachel Reeves announces a third runway at Heathrow, but MPs opposed to the plan may use opposition day debates, e-petitions, and backbench motions to force votes. How will the government manage dissent within its own ranks?
Scrutiny shortcomings: Despite the welfare cap being breached by £8.5 billion, only a handful of MPs engaged in the debate. The growing social security budget raises long-term questions about fiscal sustainability and parliamentary oversight.
House of Lords vs. AI companies: Peers vote against the government to protect creative copyrights from AI exploitation, with backing from figures like Paul McCartney. The government now faces pressure to clarify its stance.
“Ticket touting for posh people” at the Royal Albert Hall: In a rare move – not seen since the 1990s - Peers have voted to amend a Private Bill against the wishes of the Bill’s sponsor, the Royal Albert Hall board of trustees.
Retained EU Law: Still a mystery: Ministers continue to unearth new pieces of retained EU law, but Parliament remains disengaged. Could a future reset of UK-EU relations reignite interest in these legal changes?
Speaker Lindsay Hoyle’s TV cameo: The Speaker of the House has appeared in an episode of Emmerdale, continuing the long tradition of political figures making pop culture appearances.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week we highlight Alexis Jay’s damning verdict on the Conservative government’s lackluster response to child abuse inquiry recommendations and the first major test of Northern Ireland’s “Stormont Brake” under the Windsor Framework. Plus, we take a look at the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill and how it measures up to its German counterpart.
Child abuse inquiry fallout: Professor Alexis Jay, chair of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse pulled no punches in her evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee, criticising the Conservatives for inaction while in power. We unpack her appeal to MPs to stop treating the issue as a political football and discuss what difference select committees can make in situations like this.
Northern Ireland’s Stormont Brake: Unionist members of the Assembly triggered the “democratic safeguard” to give Stormont’s politicians a say before new EU chemical regulations take effect in Northern Ireland. But Hilary Benn has concluded the provisions do not meet the threshold to invoke emergency arrangements. What does this mean for the UK-EU dynamic and parliamentary politics at Westminster and in Belfast?
Armed Forces Commissioner Bill: We take a deep dive into the Government’s plan for a new welfare watchdog for service personnel and families—how does it compare to Germany’s powerful parliamentary commissioner?
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this first "mini pod" of a series exploring one of the most controversial bills currently before Parliament — the proposed legislation to legalise assisted dying — Ruth Fox and Mark D’Arcy delve into the heated debates surrounding the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This Private Member’s Bill has already ignited passionate discussions during its first Public Bill Committee sitting.
Ruth shares her first-hand account of attending the Committee’s initial meeting, where disagreements over procedural matters — such as whether to hold private discussions about witness lists and sitting times — set a combative tone for what promises to be a challenging legislative journey.
Together, Mark and Ruth unpack the unique hurdles faced by this Private Member’s Bill. Unlike government-sponsored legislation, it lacks co-ordination by party Whips, leaving MPs to navigate disputes independently. One major point of contention? The selection of witnesses, which has sparked accusations of bias. From the Royal College of Psychiatrists to international experts, the process of choosing who gets to testify has become a lightning rod for criticism.
Adding to the intrigue, the Government claims it is ‘neutral’ on the issue, leaving it to Parliament to decide. But how neutral is it really? Ministers on the Public Bill Committee participated in a key division, raising questions about their impartiality. And by tabling a money motion to fund the Bill’s implementation — despite uncertainty over the potential costs — have Ministers signed a blank cheque? And when will MPs and the public see an Impact Assessment?
With emotions running high, this debate — focused on profound life-and-death decisions — is set to dominate parliamentary discourse in the weeks ahead. Join us as we navigate the complexities of this contentious and deeply personal piece of legislation.
____
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
With the Government still under pressure to set up an independent inquiry into child grooming gangs should Parliament have a role in setting up inquiries into state failures and national disasters? Currently, Ministers take crucial decisions about who should chair an inquiry and what its precise remit should be. But a House of Lords Committee last year proposed giving Parliament a greater say and adopting a more systematic approach to implementing inquiry recommendations.
Next week, Ministers will move the money resolution for the Assisted Dying Bill. This crucial procedural step will pave the way for the Bill’s next stage in a Public Bill Committee. Will Ministers face tough questions about how much they expect the proposed assisted dying system to cost during the 45-minute debate?
In other news, there’s been a spectacular promotion for former policy wonk and government adviser Torsten Bell, in the wake of the resignation of Treasury Minister Tulip Siddiq. Only elected last July, he’s just been made Pensions Minister, but will he be haunted by his many pronouncements as a talking head at Commons select committees and in media panel discussions?
Finally, is there still a place in the Commons for Masterpiece Theatre-style pyrotechnics? After Shadow-Chancellor Mel Stride’s attempt to shame Rachel Reeves with some Shakespearean rhetoric bombed in the chamber, Ruth and Mark reflect on whether parliamentary theatricals are now obsolete.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This week, we examine how Elon Musk’s tweets have steered the UK parliamentary agenda in the first sitting days of the New Year. From a viral petition demanding a general election, to intense debates on child sexual exploitation and grooming gangs, Musk’s influence has left its mark on this week’s key political discussions. Ruth and Mark also unpack the rise of identical parliamentary questions and share their plans to cover the Assisted Dying Bill’s next stages later this month.
Elon Musk’s tweets are more than just clickbait - they are actively driving UK politics. Ruth and Mark explore three major Commons events this week that were all amplified by Musk’s controversial social media posts: a petition signed by three million people calling for a general election, debates on grooming gangs, and controversies surrounding the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Musk’s online influence has placed these issues at the forefront of political discourse, but his incendiary comments have also raised serious concerns about misinformation, online abuse, harassment and MP safety.
In this episode, Ruth and Mark break down the strategies and tensions behind the parliamentary debates. They highlight how political positioning on the Children’s Bill overshadowed critical discussions on education reform. Musk’s online dominance and abuse has also escalated security risks for MPs like Jess Phillips, who faces intensified threats after his vituperative personal attacks.
We unpack the politics behind the parliamentary decisions, look at the challenges of effective political communication, and preview how the issues may play out in the weeks ahead. We close with a look at the latest parliamentary trend: the orchestrated surge of identical questions by whips aiming to amplify government messaging. From project management jargon to strategic question crafting, this episode sheds light on the mechanics of Westminster.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’ we sit down with Steve Baker, whose reputation as the "Hard Man of Brexit" made him a key figure in the UK’s departure from the EU.
Baker reflects on his pivotal role as the "Rebel Commander" in orchestrating rebellions during the Brexit years, his methods of leadership, and the toll politics has taken on his mental health. The episode offers an unfiltered look into the mechanisms of political rebellion, party dynamics, and the personal costs of parliamentary life.
Baker recounts his journey from a newcomer to Parliament to a commanding figure in the Brexit movement, detailing how he leveraged personal conviction and strategic organisation to challenge successive Prime Ministers and government whips.
He candidly discusses the emotional and mental toll of his role, sharing moments of intense pressure and his eventual mental health struggles.
Baker offers an insider’s view of parliamentary rebellion, revealing how he employed technology, unwavering resolve, and personal connections to mobilise support. He contrasts his approach with traditional methods, emphasising leadership through shared goals rather than coercion.
The episode also explores the Conservative Party’s ideological fractures, the influence of the House of Commons Backbench Business Committee, and the broader implications of Brexit for British democracy.
___
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
In this episode we explore the experiences of the SNP during its transformative rise at Westminster from 2015, as seen through the eyes of Patrick Grady MP who served as the party’s Chief Whip between 2017 and 2021. Patrick shares insights on the challenges, tactics, and controversies faced by the SNP as they sought to amplify Scotland’s voice in Parliament while navigating the complexities of being a third-party force with a mission for independence.
From six to 56: A political earthquake
Patrick recounts the seismic shift in 2015, when the SNP surged from six MPs to 56, reshaping Scotland’s presence at Westminster. He describes the cultural adjustments required as the party transitioned to its expanded role and new responsibilities as the third party and sought to master Westminster’s traditions and procedures while asserting their identity in a political system designed for two-party dominance. Along the way, creative tactics like the "breakfast wars" and spontaneous acts of defiance helped carve out their space.
Blending experience with fresh energy
The SNP’s parliamentary team was a mix of seasoned hands and new talent, bringing diverse professional backgrounds to the table. Patrick reflects on the complexities of maintaining party discipline in such a dynamic environment while managing the inevitable evolution of internal dynamics over time.
Theatrics with a purpose
From walking out of Prime Minister’s Questions in protest to whistling Ode to Joy during Brexit votes, Patrick sheds light on the purpose behind the SNP’s theatrical moments. These acts were not mere stunts but initiatives that helped draw attention to critical issues for Scotland, such as the contentious Internal Market Act and the English Votes for English Laws (EVEL) procedures.
The human side of whipping
Beyond the public stage, Patrick shares insights into the pastoral care aspect of a Chief Whip’s responsibilities. Supporting MPs with diverse personal and professional needs - especially those with young families - required empathy and flexibility, even as legislative demands loomed large.
Reflections on a remarkable journey
Having stepped down from Westminster, Patrick reflects on the impermanence of being an MP, his pride in representing Glasgow North, and the unpredictable challenges that shaped his tenure, from Brexit to the pandemic. His practical advice to his successors? Don’t forget a water filter jug to tackle London’s hard water — a small but vital tip for life in the capital.
🎓 Learn more using our resources for the issues mentioned in this episode.
❓ Send us your questions about Parliament:
✅ Subscribe to our newsletter.
�� Follow us across social media @HansardSociety / @hansardsociety.bsky.social
£ - Support the Hansard Society and this podcast by making a donation today.
Parliament Matters is a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Presenters: Mark D'Arcy and Ruth Fox
Producer: Richard Townsend
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
- Mostrar mais
