Parliament Matters

The assisted dying bill – properly known as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – is facing an extraordinary procedural logjam in the House of Lords. More than 1,170 amendments remain to be debated, organised into 89 groups for debate, yet only 20 of those groups have been reached after seven days in Committee. With just a handful of sitting Fridays left before the end of the Session, Lord Falconer has warned that the Bill is very unlikely to complete its Lords stages in time. In a letter to Peers, he has floated a list of possible compromise amendments but has also, for the first time, strongly indicated that the Parliament Act may need to be invoked to override the opposition of a small group of Peers and secure the Bill’s passage in the next Session.

Although rarely used, and never in relation to a Private Members Bill, the Parliament Act has been deployed before on highly contentious measures, most recently the Hunting Bill in 2004. Using it to force through the assisted dying bill would require intricate choreography in both the Commons and the Lords, as well as major political decisions about whether the government formally takes ownership of the Bill or whether it continues as a Private Member’s Bill. It would also raise difficult questions about how amendments are handled, and how far MPs and ministers are prepared to go to assert the primacy of the elected House in the face of sustained resistance from a small but determined group of Peers.

In this episode, we explore how the Parliament Act works, how it could be used in this case, and the political and constitutional trade-offs involved in relying on it to deliver this 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.

In this episode, we ask whether MPs who switch parties should be forced to face a by-election – and what this month’s spate of defections says about representation, party power and voter consent. We also unpick a dizzying week in British and global politics as “hurricane Trump” batters the post-war order, testing the UK-US alliance and raising awkward questions about NATO, defence spending and procurement. Plus: the Lords’ push for an under-16s social media ban, Chagos ping-pong, and why is the bill to remove hereditary Peers from the House of Lords stalled?
____

With Westminster watching Washington’s every swerve, we explore why Keir Starmer’s most outspoken pushback on tariffs and Greenland matters – and why making big foreign-policy statements outside the Commons still rankles.

In the Lords, a proposed ban on social media for under-16s forces the government into damage-limitation. Is the government’s promised consultation a serious route to action, or simply a way of kicking a difficult issue into the long grass? We look at how enforceable such a ban would be, how it fits with the existing Online Safety Act, and the political and constitutional tension of tightening access at 16 while simultaneously debating votes at 16.

We then turn to a growing list of legislative headaches: the Hillsborough Law stalling again amid disputes over national security carve-outs; renewed procedural drama over the Chagos Islands Bill, how the financial privilege of the House of Commons blocks Lords amendments, and what options Peers have left. We also ask why the bill to remove he remaining hereditary peers appears to be stuck in a curious parliamentary holding pattern.

Finally, we focus on party switching, the e-petition calling for automatic by-elections for defecting MPs, and whether such a rule would enhance democratic accountability or simply hand party machines a powerful new weapon against dissent. As we were recording, news broke of an actual by-election, with Andrew Gwynne MP announcing his resignation on health grounds – a vacancy that could trigger a contest with significant implications for Labour’s internal politics and Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.
____

🎓 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.

What are MPs actually paid and what does the public fund to help them do their job? In this conversation with Richard Lloyd, chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) we explore the delicate balance between supporting MPs to do their jobs effectively and enforcing strict standards on the use of public money. We discuss how IPSA has shifted from a rule-heavy “traffic cop” to a principles-based regulator, why compliance is now very high, and the security risks and pressures facing MPs‘ offices as workloads rise and abuse becomes more common.
_____

Sixteen years after the expenses scandal that reshaped British politics, Richard Lloyd offers a rare insider’s account of how Parliament is now regulated from the outside. Drawing on his experience in government, regulation and civil society, he explains why MPs’ pay and expenses were taken out of politicians’ hands, how IPSA evolved from a body widely seen as hostile and bureaucratic into a more service-focused regulator, and why independence remains essential even when it attracts controversy.

Richard explains the basic package of salary and pension, and how this compares with those of parliamentarians in other countries, but also the less well-understood support that sits behind an MP’s work: travel between Westminster and constituency, accommodation for those far from London, and – most of all – the funding that pays for staff, offices and equipment.

We revisit how the 2008–09 expenses scandal changed everything, and how IPSA’s early reforms tightened the rules on housing costs, ending practices like mortgage interest claims and “flipping” second homes. Richard also addresses more recent controversies, including MPs renting to other MPs, and why IPSA has moved to stop new arrangements where public confidence and perceived conflicts of interest are at stake.

Richard argues that today’s system is delivering: spending is now close to 100% compliant, serious wrongdoing is rare, and IPSA’s approach is evolving from dense rulebooks to clearer principles – parliamentary purpose, integrity, value for money and accountability – backed by enforcement when needed. We also explore the strain on MPs’ offices, the separation between parliamentary and party-political activity, the rising security threat, and the growing impact of AI on constituent correspondence.

Finally, Richard discusses the politically charged question of MPs’ pay, the Citizens’ Panel work that shifted views once the reality of the job was understood, and the wider role independent regulators can play in rebuilding trust in our democratic institutions.
_____

🎓 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 a dramatic day at Westminster, Kemi Badenoch launched a pre-emptive strike against Robert Jenrick, sacking him from the Shadow Cabinet, suspending the Conservative Party whip, and moving before his headline-grabbing jump to Reform UK. We unpack what the defection tells us about party discipline, Reform’s “fishing operation” for Tory MPs, and whether anyone else might follow.

We then turn to government difficulties over the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, better known as the Hillsborough Law. With its proposed “duty of candour” for public officials, campaigners fear national security carve-outs (especially around MI5/MI6 evidence) could fatally water it down, with MPs particularly from Merseyside and Manchester pushing back hard as the Bill heads toward key Commons stages.

In our interview, Backbench Business Committee chair Bob Blackman MP sets out his committee’s “manifesto” for Commons reform: spreading backbench time beyond Thursdays, fixing the committee’s stop-start elections, and even replacing the Private Members’ Bill lottery with a more rational selection process.

Finally, we assess whether the assisted dying bill is being talked out in the Lords, what rescue routes might exist - including invoking the Parliament Act - and we note the arrival of a new Lord Speaker, Lord Forsyth, as wider Lords reform looms.
____

🎓 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.

What is it like to be part of a small but growing parliamentary party? We talk with the leader of the Green Party group at Westminster, Ellie Chowns, about the challenges of operating with limited numbers, the practical realities of parliamentary life, and how institutional structures shape the influence of smaller parties. We discuss our political culture, the Greens’ approach to leadership, internal decision-making, and the Green’s longer-term ambitions for electoral and parliamentary reform and a more representative system.

With only four MPs, the Green Party covers a wide range of policy areas with a small parliamentary footprint. We explore how this affects visibility, workload, and the ability to intervene in debates and committees, within a system largely structured around the governing party and the official opposition and how smaller parties have to work strategically, pooling resources and coordinating closely to make the most of limited opportunities.

Those structural constraints are set alongside the everyday realities of parliamentary work and the gap between Westminster’s formal traditions and the practical demands of representing constituents. Our discussion reflects on how much of an MP’s role is shaped by operational pressures: setting up offices, handling large volumes of casework, and mastering complex procedures while immediately taking on full responsibility for constituency representation.

We explore how the Commons operates in practice and what this means for reform. Chowns raises issues around speaking rights, voting processes, and the allocation of time and space, linking them to wider questions of efficiency, accessibility and accountability, and to longer-standing debates about whether existing procedures are suited to a more diverse and multi-party political landscape.

We also look at how the Green Party functions internally, both within its small parliamentary group and in its relationship with the wider party leadership. We consider how approaches to policy development, legislative coordination and party discipline shape representation, particularly in the absence of the tightly enforced whipping systems used by larger parties.

Finally, we talk about electoral reform and the case for a more proportional system. The experience of operating as a small party within a majoritarian parliament is connected to broader arguments about structural change, the future direction of UK politics, and how rising public support for the Greens could translate into greater influence.
____

🎓 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.