Parliament Matters

Epizódy

• Andy Burnham’s March on Westminster: How Could He Become Prime Minister? 19.06.2026 1h 6min

  Three by-elections delivered three very different results this week. To discuss the implications, we are joined by Professor Philip Cowley, a leading expert on MPs, party discipline and the realities of parliamentary power. The Conservatives secured their first Scottish by-election victory since 1967, taking Aberdeen South from the SNP. Meanwhile, the SNP held on in Arbroath and Broughty Ferry, limiting the damage from what could have been a bruising night. But it is Andy Burnham’s Labour victory in Makerfield that could have the biggest long-term consequences for British politics. We examine the political and parliamentary choreography required as Burnham begins his march back to Westminster, and we assess whether a carefully managed transition from Keir Starmer is possible, or even desirable. Are we witnessing the opening moves in a political dance of death between a sitting Prime Minister and the man many now see as his likely successor? And if Labour’s leadership question is approaching a decisive moment, which historical precedent is most relevant? Will it resemble the swift but dignified end of Margaret Thatcher’s premiership; the chaotic collapse of Boris Johnson’s government; or the slower, more managed departure of Theresa May? We explore the strategic arguments for and against a full Labour leadership contest. Would a competitive election strengthen Burnham’s authority and legitimacy, or expose divisions within the party at precisely the wrong moment? How much influence will Labour’s members, affiliates, and MPs have over the process? And would Burnham be better served by assuming the leadership quickly, or by using a managed transition to develop a governing programme and build a team around him? We also discuss the challenges Burnham could face if he does reach Number 10. Despite his prominence, relatively little is known about how he would govern nationally. What difficulties might he encounter in managing the parliamentary party? And what would a change in leadership mean for the wider workings of Parliament, from ministerial reshuffles to the balance of power across the select committee corridor? Finally, attention turns to Parliament’s agenda. The priority order for Private Members’ Bills in both the Commons and Lords is now clear. MPs will return to the assisted dying bill on 11 September, but it enters the new session only second in the queue rather than first. What difference could that make to the parliamentary tactics surrounding the legislation? And which other Private Members’ Bills deserve close attention in the months ahead?_______________ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Brexit, 10 years on: Parliament and the democratic crisis 11.06.2026 52min

  This month marks the tenth anniversary of the Brexit referendum – a vote that unleashed four years of extraordinary political turmoil. Judges were branded "enemies of the people", MPs denounced as "saboteurs", political parties fractured, and Prime Ministers rose and fell amid relentless parliamentary drama. Historian Dr Robert Saunders of Queen Mary University of London has written a new paper arguing that Brexit was more than a bitter political dispute: it amounted to a full-blown democratic crisis.  In this episode, Robert joins Ruth and Mark to explore why Britain’s political system struggled to interpret and implement the referendum instruction, and why Parliament and the major parties appear to have learned so little from the experience.  The conversation then turns to current events. In the wake of the horrific attacks in Southampton and Belfast, they ask whether the same political and social forces that fuelled the Brexit revolt are now at play over immigration.  Robert last appeared on the podcast at Christmas to discuss why the job of Prime Minister increasingly looks impossible. With Sir Keir Starmer now facing fresh turmoil following the resignation of the Defence Secretary, John Healey, the discussion returns to that theme: could this latest setback prove fatal to Starmer’s premiership, or might he survive as a “Zombie Prime Minister”, still in office but with his authority destroyed?  _____ 🎓 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 Cabinet Manual: Why Britain's constitutional "highway code" needs updating 04.06.2026 1h 3min

  The Cabinet Manual has been described as the “highway code” of the UK constitution, a guide that brings together the laws, conventions, precedents and procedures under which the Government operates. First published in 2011, it has not been updated since, despite a decade and a half of constitutional change. So why is the Government revising it now? What needs updating? Should Parliament have a role in approving it? And how important is the Manual as a guide to the UK’s unwritten constitution?  The Government has described its response to the Mandelson Humble Address as an “unprecedented piece of Government transparency”. But after publishing more than 1,500 pages of documents relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as Ambassador to the United States, what have MPs and the public actually learned? Has the disclosure shed any light on the key questions that prompted Parliament to demand the papers in the first place? And, with the exercise costing at least £1 million, what lessons should be learned about how Humble Addresses are handled in future?  The House of Commons Administration has been tasked with delivering significant savings through its new Savings and Improvement Programme. But could cost-cutting come at the expense of Parliament’s connection with the public? We examine proposals affecting Parliament’s outreach and participation work and ask whether a shift towards digitally focused engagement is the right approach. We also look at how staffing priorities have changed across Parliament over the last decade and explore what those choices reveal about Parliament’s evolving demands and priorities. _____ 🎓 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 £5m question: Who funds our politicians? 28.05.2026 21min

  In this episode, we explore the rules governing MPs’ financial interests, gifts and donations, as Reform UK leader Nigel Farage faces questions over a £5 million gift from cryptocurrency billionaire Christopher Harborne. Ruth and Mark are joined by Duncan Hames, a former MP and now Director of UK Policy at Transparency International, to ask whether the current transparency regime is working, whether a requirement to declare large gifts is enough on its own to protect public confidence, and whether a fixed cap on donations should also be put in place. At a time when political donations, gifts and hospitality are under intense scrutiny, we look at what the House of Commons Code of Conduct says MPs must declare, and why the rules require members to register financial interests and benefits that might reasonably be thought to influence their actions, speeches or votes. We also examine the wisdom of moving from a rules-based system to a principles-based system. Duncan Hames says that transparency matters because it offers a crucial safeguard against corruption and dependency. But while transparency is essential, he argues that it is no longer sufficient. With political parties and individual politicians increasingly reliant on wealthy donors, he says the real question is not just whether money is declared, but whether gifts and donations of this scale should be permitted at all. He points to international examples of donation caps and argues that the case for limits applies to domestic as well as overseas donors. We also explore the practical dilemmas MPs face when deciding what to register, the role of advice from parliamentary authorities, and whether the sanctions for breaches of the rules in both Houses are strong enough. 🎓 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 the Government censoring the Mandelson Papers? 21.05.2026 1h 10min

  The row over Lord Mandelson’s appointment as Britain’s ambassador to Washington flared up again this week after the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) accused the Government of improperly redacting documents linked to his appointment. Back in February, ministers were forced to release papers under a Humble Address to the King, with the ISC tasked with deciding what could be withheld on national security or diplomatic grounds. But the Committee now says material has been removed for other reasons not covered by the agreement. Senior ISC member Sir Jeremy Wright MP challenged ministers in the Commons through an Urgent Question, before speaking to us about his concerns and the Government’s response. The annual Private Members’ Bill ballot – Westminster’s version of legislative bingo – has also taken place, with MPs jostling for one of the precious top spots that can offer a realistic chance of changing the law. The big question now is whether one of those successful MPs will choose to bring back the assisted dying bill. And we untangle the Government’s latest Russia sanctions announcement, after ministers caused confusion over whether the UK was finally banning oil products refined in third countries using Russian crude. We explain how the Russia sanctions regime works, and why – at the very moment the new sanctions came into force – ministers also issued a general trade licence exempting diesel and jet fuel from the restrictions. The Government insists the exemption is only temporary but cannot say when it will end. We explore why Parliament gets a vote on the sanctions regulations themselves, but not on the general licences that can effectively water them down, and what that says about the gap between headline sanctions announcements and the quieter reality of how they are implemented in practice. The discussion also raises wider questions about how often these behind-the-scenes exemptions are being used, including in areas such as legal services, diamonds, steel, software and technology._____🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Labour’s leadership tangle: What does it mean for Parliament? 15.05.2026 1h 13min

  A battle for Downing Street touched off by a ministerial resignation, a chunky new King’s Speech, and an increasingly unpredictable political environment provide plenty for us to discuss with our special guest, Professor Meg Russell, the former Director of the Constitution Unit.We begin with the Labour leadership contest, which was unfolding in real time as the podcast was recorded. With Labour Party rules, parliamentary rules and election law tangling together in the intricate battle to be Prime Minister, we explore how Labour’s rulebook could shape the outcome and the prospects for the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham to win a by-election, return to Westminster and enter the leadership race.Meg Russell asks a broader question: in an era of devolved politics, should parties make it easier for big figures such as metro mayors to stand for the leadership without the upheaval of first fighting a by-election?We also cast a preliminary eye over the legislation unveiled in the King’s Speech. Could the NHS Reform Bill give Wes Streeting a parliamentary platform to strengthen his credentials as a future Prime Minister? How will the new bill to remove peerages navigate the difference between a seat in the House of lords and a peerage? Should the Representation of the People Bill be amended to impose penalties on councillors who resign within hours of being elected? And Meg – a former advisor to Blair-era Leader of the House of Commons, Robin Cook MP – describes how governments assemble a legislative programme behind the scenes.Finally, with Britain entering an era of fragmented five, or even six-party politics, the discussion turns to the future of the constitution itself. Do Westminster parties now share an interest in recasting parliamentary rules and strengthening constitutional safeguards?Meg Russell, stepping down after a decade leading the Constitution Unit, argues that the unpredictability of the electoral situation means any party could emerge dominant, diminished or anywhere in between, after the next election. If that is the case, she suggests, it is now in the interests of all the parties to update the rules of our parliamentary system so that it treats all parties fairly. Some of these issues, including how parties select their leaders and the way legislation is developed, will be discussed next month (24-25 June) at the Constitution Unit's annual online conference, The Constitution under Labour. You need to sign up to get the online link to watch each of the sessions. Parliament Matters will be represented as Ruth will be speaking on a panel with Lord Falconer about developing policy and legislating for difficult issues. ____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Gareth Jones Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• What now? The local election fallout hits Westminster 09.05.2026 41min

  After an awful set of elections for Labour across England, Scotland and Wales, are the Prime Minister’s days numbered? Could the Cabinet revolt? Might a rival formally launch a leadership challenge? Or might it take another defining crisis – a further final straw – to trigger a revolt by the parliamentary foot soldiers? We also examine how Labour’s leadership rules operate, including the nomination requirements for a leadership challenger to trigger a race. A key decision would be timing: would any contest timetable give Greater Manchester Mayor, Andy Burnham, the opportunity to attempt a return to the Commons.  The elections have demonstrated that Labour is beset by political rivals on all sides – Reform on the right flank, the Greens, Lib Dems and SNP on the left, and now Plaid Cymru in what historically was its Welsh heartland. So, would an alternative leader offer a more effective response to these multiple threats than Sir Keir Starmer? Meanwhile the Scottish and Welsh results raise fresh political and constitutional tensions for the UK Government and Parliament to address. Will invigorated nationalist governments in Edinburgh and Cardiff start picking more fights with Westminster over policy, money and legislative consent? And in Cardiff, will the process of installing a new and non-Labour Welsh Government go smoothly? With no party winning an overall majority in Wales, it looks like there will be a Plaid-led administration: but it may find itself mired in week-to-week deal-making with smaller parties, and subject to professional fouls at key moments like the Budget. Could that provide a taste of things to come at Westminster, after the next general election?_____ 🎓 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.
• Keir Starmer’s week of parliamentary torture over Mandelson appointment 24.04.2026 1h 11min

  Keir Starmer has faced “ordeal by Parliament” this week. A tense statement in the House of Commons over his handling of Peter Mandleson’s nomination as Ambassador to the United States was followed by an emergency debate and then an awkward session of PMQs. Meanwhile the Foreign Affairs Committee held a series of hearings to pick over the PM’s account of what he knew about Mandelson’s security vetting, and when he knew it.We are joined this week by veteran parliamentary lobby journalist Tony Grew (the founder of @PARLYapp on Twitter/X) to dissect a rapidly unfolding political drama that’s beginning to resemble a full-blown parliamentary crisis.We examine Starmer’s account, the Foreign Affairs Committee’s performance, and the testimony of its key witness, recently sacked Foreign Office Permanent Secretary Sir Ollie Robins, alongside the growing unease among Labour MPs.With prorogation looming, questions remain over timing. Could the suspension of Parliament be used to sidestep another PMQs on Wednesday 29 March? Will the Opposition try to prolong proceedings on remaining legislation to force Starmer back to the Despatch Box. Or might they prefer to be able to accuse him of being “frit.”And as the first session of the 2024 Parliament draws to a close, we discuss the emerging personalities shaping the Commons. Spoiler: one of them is a dog!____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Dynamic alignment and Henry VIII powers: What will the Government’s EU reset mean for Parliament? 17.04.2026 1h

  A bill to deliver the Government’s proposed “EU reset” is set to be a centrepiece of May’s King’s Speech. It will reportedly give Ministers powers to update UK law in line with certain EU rules (so-called “dynamic alignment”) in areas such as animal and plant health (known as Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS)), energy co-operation and emissions trading. Much of this is likely to be done through delegated legislation, including the use of controversial Henry VIII powers, allowing Ministers to amend primary legislation with limited parliamentary scrutiny. We are joined by Professor Catherine Barnard (University of Cambridge) to explore what dynamic alignment really means, why the UK is already tracking some EU rules, and whether this approach is a pragmatic economic necessity or a sidestepping of Parliament. We also discuss how Westminster and the devolved legislatures will need to adapt if they are to spot and shape policy before it is set in legislative stone by the European Commission.In a rare show of resistance, Parliament’s usually low-profile Ecclesiastical Committee has blocked a package of reforms to Church of England governance. What’s behind the clash over accountability and safeguarding and why have delegated powers become a sticking point here too?As the parliamentary session draws to a close, attention turns to prorogation. Once Parliament is prorogued, MPs and Peers cannot be recalled except in the most exceptional circumstances. In an increasingly volatile world, is it wise to shut down accountability for a fortnight? We explore the risks and suggest a possible way around the problem._____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Gareth Jones Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Will key Government bills pass by the end of the parliamentary Session? 27.03.2026 1h 7min

  The Government has announced that the State Opening of Parliament and King’s Speech will take place on Wednesday 13 May - just as we predicted last Autumn!However, Ministers have not confirmed when prorogation – marking the end of the current Session – will take place. It is likely to be the last week in April but could slip into the week of the local elections. That means when Parliament returns after the Easter recess there will potentially be just 12 sitting days left for the Government to get all its remaining Bills through to Royal Assent, a period of legislative scramble known as the “wash-up”.This week Mark and Ruth are joined by the Hansard Society’s researcher, Matthew England, to explore the legislative loose ends still hanging in the balance. Any Bills not agreed by both the Commons and the Lords before the Session ends will fall — raising the stakes for last-minute negotiations.The pressure is on. Peers have made significant amendments on a range of high-profile issues, including revenge porn, restricting social media access for under-16s, victims’ access to court transcripts, and AI and online safety. This is the House of Lords’ moment of maximum leverage – so expect intense deal-making and potential Government concessions.But there’s also high political drama in play. Will opposition in the Lords kill the Bill to implement the UK’s treaty to transfer the Chagos Islands – home to the strategically vital Diego Garcia airbase – to Mauritius? Might the Government try and revive it later using the Parliament Act – or quietly let it drift?And what about the Hillsborough Law , now stranded in the Commons? While the Government could carry it over into the next Session, unresolved questions remain – particularly whether a “duty of candour” should apply to the security services. Could failure to pass the Bill this Session come at a political cost for the Prime Minister?We then turn to listener questions where we:explain what a “dilatory motion” is;explore what’s happening with the stalled Northern Ireland Troubles Bill;discuss retirements from the House of Lords;break down how select committee chairs and members are chosen; anddebate whether Parliament should move out of Westminster.Finally, why are MPs asking so many more Written Parliamentary Questions than before? Is it ambitious new MPs – or even AI tools like ChatGPT? Drawing on new data and analysis, Matthew digs into what’s driving the surge, what it means for parliamentary scrutiny, and whether the system needs reform.____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend   Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Who really decides Immigration Rules: Parliament or the Home Secretary? 20.03.2026 52min

  The Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood MP, is planning sweeping changes to the immigration system. So, this week we put immigration law under the microscope. Jonathan Featonby of the Refugee Council joins us to explain how major shifts to refugees’ rights, settlement routes and visa rules can be pushed through using Immigration Rules, with Parliament left largely powerless to influence or block them.Meanwhile, in the House of Lords, Peers are wrestling with the ever-growing Crime and Policing Bill - a legislative “Christmas tree” laden with policy baubles covering everything from abortion to terrorism proscription to artificial intelligence. We explore why Ministers want broad new powers to rewrite the Online Safety Act by regulation to tackle AI harms, and why efforts to overturn a Commons amendment to decriminalise women who have a late-term abortion failed despite concerns about a lack of scrutiny.And with the assisted dying bill set to run out of time in the Lords, Labour MP Peter Prinsley discusses his initiative to persuade the Prime Minister to back efforts to secure time for a renewed attempt to bring back the bill in the next Session and the possibility of using the Parliament Act to force it through if necessary._____🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Jury trials under threat? The Courts and Tribunals Bill explained 13.03.2026 56min

  The Government’s plan to restrict the right to a jury trial for certain defendants cleared its Second Reading in the Commons this week – but the fight is far from over. The proposals in the Courts and Tribunals Bill are already provoking fierce criticism, including from a determined group of Labour backbenchers.To explore what’s at stake, we speak to barrister and former Director of Public Prosecutions, Lord Macdonald of River Glaven. We explore why legal experts are alarmed by the changes, what the reforms could mean for defendants’ rights and the criminal courts system, and whether Ministers might yet be forced into compromise.Meanwhile, the Bill to remove hereditary Peers from Parliament has now passed through the Lords. We examine the late-stage deal that helped ease opposition in the Upper House, while Mark takes aim at what he calls the “total bosh” used to defend hereditary seats, dismissing it as little more than romantic nostalgia.This week the Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has also been in combative form. He has once again rebuked ministers for briefing the media before informing MPs, ordered a member out of Prime Minister’s Questions, and publicly criticised the Government’s Chief Whip. His anger follows an extraordinary Commons episode in which Government whips reportedly stretched out a vote to prevent the Conservatives securing a vote on a Statutory Instrument. One member apparently feigned illness in the voting lobby while MPs in the Chamber audibly counted down to the cut off time for another vote – the “moment of interruption” – at 7pm. The Speaker is now demanding apologies and even hinting that Government whips might need a refresher on how to manage parliamentary business.And finally, the Government has begun releasing official papers relating to Peter Mandelson’s appointment as Britain’s Ambassador to Washington. Do the documents support the Prime Minister’s version of events – or raise new questions that could deepen his ongoing leadership troubles?____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Is the assisted dying bill being filibustered? 10.03.2026 38min

  In this episode we continue our special series tracking the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, the Private Member’s Bill that would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.With Committee Stage in the House of Lords progressing slowly – and time in the parliamentary Session running out – we talk to Conservative Peer Lord Harper, a prominent opponent of the legislation and one of the Peers who has been heavily involved in the lengthy Committee debates.Critics argue that the scale of amendments and extended scrutiny in the Lords amounts to a filibuster designed to run down the clock. Harper rejects that characterisation. He insists that Peers are fulfilling their constitutional role as a revising chamber by probing serious flaws in the Bill and raising concerns about safeguards for vulnerable and disabled people.Harper argues that the Bill – unusually large and complex for a Private Member’s Bill – arrived in the Lords in poor shape after too many issues were left unresolved in the Commons. He contends that organisations ranging from medical royal colleges to disability groups believe the legislation lacks adequate protections.In his view, the real problem lies with the legislative process itself: a measure with major implications for the NHS, the courts and devolved governance should have been introduced as a Government bill following full consultation and more detailed policy development before reaching Parliament.Our conversation explores whether the Lords’ scrutiny amounts to legitimate legislative examination or procedural obstruction. Ruth and Mark press him on the fact the tactics used by opponents are in practice preventing the Lords from ever reaching the stage of making actual changes to the Bill. They explore the limits of the Private Member’s Bill process, and what might happen next – including the possibility that MPs could attempt to revive the legislation in a future Session and even use the Parliament Acts to force it through.As the Bill’s prospects hang in the balance, the episode examines what this contentious debate reveals about Parliament’s procedures, political strategy, and the role of the House of Lords in scrutinising major social 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Starmer, Iran, and Parliament’s role in war powers 06.03.2026 53min

  What role does Parliament play when the UK is involved in military action? In this week’s episode, we explore the evolving practice of parliamentary war powers, sparked by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s response to recent military developments in Iran and the Middle East, where defensive action was authorised before any Commons statement or vote. We discuss the royal prerogative, the uncertain post-Iraq convention on parliamentary debate before offensive military action, and whether a meaningful distinction exists between defensive and offensive military action. We also examine new legislative attempts to codify Parliament’s role and the political and military realities that shape whether MPs get a say. Plus, we discuss the long-running constitutional saga over hereditary peers, as the House of Lords prepares to consider Commons amendments to the Bill to oust the hereditaries at the end of this parliamentary Session. The Government has unexpectedly published a Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill which would increase the number of paid ministers in the House of Lords. This may be linked to the amendment in the Hereditary Peers Bill originally proposed by the Conservative Peer, Lord True, that would prohibit future unpaid Ministers from being eligible for membership of the Upper House. It is possible that the ministerial salaries legislation is being synchronised to ease the passage of the Hereditary Peers Bill. Along the way we also touch on MPs’ pay which is on track to top £100K by the end of the Parliament, staff funding tensions, defence estimates scrutiny, and what the Spring Statement tells us about the government’s economic direction._____🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Mandelson, Andrew and Epstein: Should there be parliamentary committee of inquiry? 28.02.2026 1h

  After the Greens’ triumph at the Gorton and Denton by-election we ponder the implications for Parliament. Could the result tempt more MPs to switch parties? Does this heap fresh pressure on the Prime Minister? Will party leaders need to rethink how they treat opponents whose backing they may need after the next election? And with the three largest parties in Parliament securing less than 30% per cent of the vote in the by-election between them, could it spark a move to introduce electoral reform?As the controversy surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor rolls on, Conservative MP and former Security Minister Tom Tugendhat joins the podcast. He makes the case for a new parliamentary “super-committee” to investigate what went wrong, from the former Prince’s appointment as a trade envoy to Mandelson’s move to Washington,  and to consider how better to protect the constitutional monarchy from future embarrassment.Plus, Ruth and Mark can’t resist dissecting the extraordinary chain of events that saw Mr Speaker Hoyle and his Lords counterpart, Lord Forsyth, unexpectedly caught up in the arrest of Lord Mandelson.And with the Chancellor’s Spring Statement due in the coming week, as well as a series of votes to authorise billions of pounds in public spending, a lot of senior MPs have serious concerns about where the money is going in a series of government departments. So will Ministers face tough questioning during the coming Estimates Day debates or will the money be quietly voted through? Watch this space._____🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• The forgotten pioneer: Who was Margaret Bondfield, Britain’s first female Cabinet Minister? 20.02.2026 1h 10min

  Why is Britain’s first female cabinet minister almost invisible in our political memory?In this episode we are joined by historian and author Nan Sloane, whose new biography of Margaret Bondfield has just been published, to uncover the remarkable and largely forgotten story of this pioneering figure. Bondfield – a working-class trade unionist – became the first woman to serve in the British Cabinet yet is rarely mentioned alongside figures such as Nancy Astor or Ellen Wilkinson. She did not enter politics through the suffrage movement. Instead, she rose through the male-dominated trade union movement, often as the only woman in the room. Born into a large working-class family in Somerset, she left school at thirteen to work in shops where staff were legally treated as domestic servants and endured punishing conditions. Driven by a fierce commitment to social justice, she became a powerful organiser, accomplished public speaker and a leading national figure within the labour movement.Elected to Parliament in 1923, she made history in 1929 when she was appointed Minister of Labour, becoming the first woman to serve in the Cabinet and the first female Privy Counsellor. But it was, as one colleague put it, the worst job in government. In the grip of a deep economic crisis, unemployment was soaring, the national insurance system was stretched to breaking point, and painful decisions had to be taken. By 1931 the crisis had split the Labour Party and brought down the Government. Bondfield lost her seat and never returned to Parliament. Rather than being remembered as a trailblazer, her legacy was overshadowed by economic crisis and party division. Was she a pioneer, a pragmatist caught in impossible circumstances, or a woman judged more harshly than her male colleagues? In conversation with Nan Sloane, we explore Bondfield’s character, her relationships and international networks, and the political choices that shaped both her career and her reputation.Nan Sloane, Margaret Bondfield: The life and times of Britain’s first Cabinet Minister (Bloomsbury Publishing)🎓 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 happens when you lose the party whip? 13.02.2026 1h 8min

  What happens when you lose the party whip? A conversation with Neil Duncan-Jordan MPLabour MP Neil Duncan-Jordan joins us this week to reflect on his experience as one of the new intake’s most prominent rebels. He describes defying the whip over the means-testing of the Winter Fuel Allowance and proposed disability benefit cuts, the fallout from his suspension from the Parliamentary Labour Party, and the personal and political pressures that come with rebellion. He also discusses his relationship with the Whips and explains why he has twice called for Sir Keir Starmer to step down, most recently in the wake of the Mandelson affair. In this week’s episode, we also assess Starmer’s increasingly fragile position following the Mandelson–Epstein controversy, examining the risk of further damaging disclosures about Mandelson’s contact with Ministers and the potential implications for the Government’s legislative programme. We untangle the constitutional confusion surrounding proposals to strip Peter Mandelson and other disgraced peers of their titles, exploring weaknesses in the House of Lords’ Code of Conduct, and the broader dangers of legislating in response to a single scandal. Gordon Brown has called for sweeping “root and branch” standards reform – from a new anti-corruption commission to greater use of citizens’ juries on parliamentary standards and enhanced select committee scrutiny of ministerial and other public appointments. Ruth and Mark question whether such changes would genuinely rebuild public trust, pointing to nearly two decades of Hansard Society polling showing consistently low levels of trust in politicians and in the effectiveness of the political system. They also argue that the current focus on expelling disgraced Peers from the House of Lords misses a fundamental issue: the Prime Minister’s largely unchecked power to appoint them in the first place. We return to the slow progress of the assisted dying bill in the House of Lords, where disagreement continues over whether the pace of debate reflects legitimate scrutiny or amounts to filibustering. Some MPs are calling for accelerated Lords reform in response – but would a wholly elected second chamber be more likely to block legislation rather than less? Finally, we discuss two significant reports from the Procedure Committee: one recommending against the introduction of call lists for debates in the Commons Chamber, and another proposing changes to the way select committee chairs and deputy speakers are elected in the House of Commons. 🎓 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.
• A Humble Address: How MPs confronted the Mandelson scandal 06.02.2026 59min

  It has been a bruising week for the Prime Minister after the House of Commons backed a Conservative “Humble Address” demanding documents on Sir Keir Starmer’s vetting of Lord Mandelson for the Washington Ambassadorship. We explain how the procedure works, what role the Intelligence and Security Committee may play in decisions on disclosure, and how legislation to strip a peerage could be introduced. Plus, the latest on the Restoration and Renewal of Parliament as yet another report lands with a new set of costings.______🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Why MPs can’t just quit: The curious case of the Chiltern Hundreds 01.02.2026 48min

  This week we explore one of Westminster’s strangest constitutional hangovers: why MPs can’t simply resign. With the Gorton and Denton by-election triggered by Andrew Gwynne’s departure, listeners asked the obvious question – why the medieval-sounding detour via the Chiltern Hundreds (or its less glamorous cousin, the Manor of Northstead)? We trace the rule back to 1623, when the Commons barred resignations, and to later fears about MPs being bought off by “offices of profit” from the Crown. The workaround – appointing an MP to a Crown office that disqualifies them – still survives, complete with modern legal “fudges”. Along the way, we revisit colourful resignations and near-resignations, from mass Ulster Unionist walkouts to John Stonehouse’s attempted disappearance and Gerry Adams’s objection to being handed a Crown role he didn’t want.In this episode we also check the Government’s legislative scorecard as the Session edges toward its expected May close, with several dozen bills already on the statute book and many more still in play. We explain “carry-over” motions – how some bills can leap across prorogation – and why the Government has produced surprisingly few bills for pre-legislative scrutiny compared with the first Session in recent previous parliaments.Finally, the focus shifts to the Armed Forces Bill, the five-yearly legislation rooted in the Bill of Rights that renews the legal basis for military discipline and Parliament’s consent for a standing army. Labour MP Jayne Kirkham joins us to discuss how her Ten Minute Rule proposal secured Royal Fleet Auxiliary access to the new Armed Forces Commissioner, and what it’s like learning the ropes on bill committees as a new MP._____ 🎓 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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• Assisted dying bill: How could the Parliament Act be used? 30.01.2026 46min

  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 FoxProducer: Richard Townsend Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.