Share
Parliament Matters
Inside the hidden world of law-making.
Season 1, Ep. 45
•
How is a King’s Speech crafted? What really happens behind the doors of the Parliamentary Business and Legislation Cabinet Committee? How have parliamentary tactics on legislation evolved and what new tactics might MPs employ when facing a Government with such a commanding majority? In this episode we discuss the art and strategy of law-making with Nikki da Costa, former Director of Legislative Affairs for two Conservative Prime Ministers in Number 10 Downing Street.
Nikki shares her expert analysis of Labour’s recent King’s Speech, dissecting the potential pressure points and what it reveals about Labour’s strategy with their overwhelming majority. We get her insider’s perspective on how departments compete for legislative slots, the pivotal role civil servants play in helping a new Government prepare its legislative programme, and the Prime Minister’s influence in shaping the legislative agenda.
As Parliament gears up for a busy Session this Autumn, Nikki provides valuable insights into how the Parliamentary Business and Legislation Committee determines whether a bill is ready to be presented to Parliament and the complex drafting and preparation required to bring these bills to life.
We also explore whether Labour, with its commanding majority, still needs a dedicated parliamentary management unit like the one Nikki led under Theresa May and Boris Johnson.
How have parliamentary tactics evolved since Labour last held a similar position in 1997? Nikki explains how MPs have increasingly adopted sophisticated parliamentary strategies to craft amendments to leverage media attention, and what this could mean for Labour's ability to manage its legislative agenda.
With Labour not in command of a majority in the House of Lords, we discuss how this could impact their legislative efforts and whether they need to strengthen their presence in the Upper House to ensure their bills pass smoothly.
Nikki and Ruth also dive into the complexities of delegated legislation, examining the increasing reliance on Statutory Instruments and the potential consequences if Parliament were to begin to push back against them.
Finally, we turn our focus to the Opposition. Nikki offers her game plan for how they can maximise their impact in Parliament despite limited resources. Is it still worth engaging in the kind of late-night ambushes and procedural tactics that were once commonplace?
Tune in for a compelling look at the intricate world of law-making, as Nikki da Costa pulls back the curtain on the processes, strategies, and challenges that shape the legislative landscape.
____
🎓 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
£ - 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.
Producer: Leo Bayles, The Podcast Company
More episodes
View all episodes
63. Whipping Yarns: A Liberal Democrat whip’s tale
34:08||Season 1, Ep. 63In this episode we explore the highs and lows of coalition government through the eyes of Alistair Carmichael, former Deputy Government Chief Whip for the Liberal Democrats during the 2010-2015 coalition. Carmichael reflects candidly on how he personally navigated the seismic challenges of coalition politics, from managing party discipline to reconciling conflicting priorities within the government to providing pastoral support to colleagues. Alistair Carmichael offers a fascinating account of the inner workings of the coalition government, discussing the monumental challenges faced during his time as Deputy Chief Whip in the coalition government. Reflecting on the dynamic interplay between national, party, and constituency interests, he describes the delicate balance required to maintain stability during a period of economic crisis. The conversation sheds light on the nuanced strategies he employed to hold his party together, including persuading MPs to support controversial policies like the rise in tuition fees, and how he worked to maintain cohesion within a fractious parliamentary party. He shares vivid memories of key moments in the coalition, including the volcanic ash cloud that disrupted his campaign and the EU budget veto that nearly shattered government unity. He also discusses the pastoral side of his role, describing how he supported MPs through personal and professional crises, even as he juggled the unique challenges of representing one of the UK’s most remote constituencies. His reflections highlight the personal toll of coalition politics but also affirm his belief in the value of entering government to make a meaningful difference The episode concludes with Carmichael’s thoughts on the legacy of the coalition and lessons for future Liberal Democrats.[NOTE: This is the first in a series of conversations with former Whips, some of which took place just as the UK general election was called in Summer 2024. There may be the occasional reference to the forthcoming election - we have not edited these out in order to retain the context of the discussion and questions.] ____ 🎓 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 Townsend62. Parliament’s role in a failed state
29:41||Season 1, Ep. 62In this special episode of Parliament Matters, we sit down with author and researcher Sam Freedman to explore the themes of his book, Failed State. Freedman delivers a sharp critique of Britain’s governance, examining how bad laws and weak parliamentary scrutiny are contributing to systemic dysfunction.We discuss:Parliamentary scrutiny in crisis: Freedman highlights the erosion of Parliament's role in scrutinising legislation, forcing the unelected House of Lords and even the courts to fill the gap, creating further constitutional tensions.From part-time MPs to professional politicians: How Parliament's evolution has failed to keep pace with its members’ changing roles, leaving many MPs frustrated and directionless.Poor legislation’s ripple effects: Freedman discusses how the lack of oversight has led to flawed laws and policies, citing examples from his time in government, such as the rushed Academies Act.Decentralisation as a solution: Freedman makes the case for empowering regional and local authorities to address over-centralisation and strengthen governance.This engaging conversation covers Parliament's structural flaws, the realities of modern political life, and bold reform ideas—exploring how fixing the core of our democracy could lead to better outcomes for everyone.🎓 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 Townsend61. Will Parliament pay a price for promises to WASPI women?
01:07:16||Season 1, Ep. 61As Christmas approaches, Westminster eases into its pre-festive lull. Yet, a major political storm clouds the year’s end: the fallout from the Government’s decision not to compensate the WASPI women. This controversy highlights a recurring dilemma in politics—the risks of opposition parties over-promising and the inevitable backlash when those promises confront the harsh realities of governing. And as a seasonal stocking filler, Ruth and Mark talk to the authors of two fascinating books that uncover hidden aspects of parliamentary history. Labour’s decision not to offer compensation to the WASPI women (Women Against State Pension Inequality) who have lost out in the equalisation of the state pension age has ignited a political storm. Any number of Labour MPs are now haunted by the pledges of support they gave to the WASPI campaign – but beyond their embarrassment, every instance of a party reneging on its pre-election promises corrodes what is left of trust in politics.The case also raises questions about the role of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), the gatekeeper role MPs play in referring cases to the Ombudsman and the need for legislation to upgrade the Ombudsman system. Successive governments have said there has not been enough parliamentary time for a bill: but is that a valid reason or just an excuse? Meanwhile, a brace of parliamentary committees have made a surprise choice of Chair: does it signal a new rebellious mood, or simply a lack of experience in the ranks?For a seasonal treat Ruth and Mark talk to the authors of two captivating books that shed light on overlooked corners of parliamentary history. In Necessary Women, Mari Takayanagi explores the hidden contributions of women in Westminster — from housemaids and secretaries to pioneering clerks. Meanwhile, John Cooper’s The Lost Chapel of Westminster reveals the captivating story of St Stephen’s Chapel, a remarkable space transformed into the House of Commons chamber after the Reformation. This repurposing left an enduring legacy on British parliamentary politics, shaping traditions like opposing benches and in-person voting — practices that continue to define Westminster’s political culture today.🎓 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 Townsend60. Licence to scrutinise: Spooks, hereditary peers and assisted dying
50:11||Season 1, Ep. 60In this week’s episode the ‘assisted dying’ bill takes centre stage as the newly chosen members of the Public Bill Committee gear up for detailed scrutiny of the legislation. With 23 members, including two ministers, this committee promises a mix of seasoned voices and first-time MPs debating a very difficult issue. Our guest, Matthew England from the Hansard Society, breaks down the committee’s composition, party balance, and the strategic dynamics that will influence the bill’s trajectory. The podcast also explores the ongoing debate over hereditary peers in the House of Lords. Ruth and Mark dissect the Second Reading of the bill to abolish their voting rights, highlighting the passionate arguments on both sides. From constitutional principles to fiery rhetoric about political assassinations, the debate reveals deeper tensions about the future of Lords reform. Meanwhile, the Intelligence and Security Committee is back, with a new lineup tasked with overseeing Britain’s intelligence services. We discuss the significance of this committee’s work in ensuring transparency and accountability in the shadowy world of national security. Finally, the Liaison Committee prepares for its first grilling of Prime Minister Keir Starmer. What themes will emerge, and can select committee chairs hold the PM to account effectively? Ruth and Mark consider the challenges of this high-profile session. Join us for sharp analysis and behind-the-scenes insights into the workings of Parliament. Don’t forget to subscribe, rate, and review on your favorite podcast platform.___ 🎓 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 Townsend59. Football governance, fair elections, and fantasy reforms Parliament Matters goes live!
01:07:05||Season 1, Ep. 59Is the Football Governance Bill being filibustered in the House of Lords? Did the House of Commons just vote for electoral reform and proportional representation as the Liberal Democrats claim? And what are your fantasy parliamentary reforms? Welcome to a landmark episode of Parliament Matters, where we’ve stepped out of the studio and into the heart of Westminster. For the first time, we’re recording in front of a live audience at the 60th anniversary conference of the Study of the Parliament Group - a gathering of parliamentary aficionados, practitioners, and self-described anoraks. Joining us is former Commons Clerk Paul Evans, whose deep procedural expertise adds extra depth to the day’s discussions.We kick off with the Football Governance Bill, born from the Tracy Crouch fan-led review, which sought to safeguard the English football pyramid’s financial stability after crises like the European Super League debacle. Now in the House of Lords, the Bill faces delays and accusations of filibustering. Ruth explains the key issues, including definitions of “sustainability” and “English football,” which are left to ministerial regulation rather than the face of the Bill - much to the frustration of opposition peers. Paul unpacks the concept of hybridity, a procedural pitfall that could derail the bill, and we learn how this relates to broader debates about parliamentary process and regulatory overreach. Next, we turn to a rare parliamentary moment: a 10-Minute Rule Bill introduced by Lib Dem MP Sarah Olney proposed proportional representation for elections. Unusually the right to bring in the bill was put to a formal vote this week. However, the bill’s chances of progression are slim, as it’s been relegated to the “legislative gulag” of backbench bills unlikely to see further debate. With the newly established House of Commons Modernisation Committee inviting ideas for its agenda, we discuss our own “fantasy” parliamentary reforms. Paul pitches his bold “Festival of the Estimates,” an initiative to engage MPs and the public in substantive discussions about taxation, public spending and the trade-offs involved. We then turn to our audience for a Q&A session on topics including whether we should have an “investiture vote” for new Prime Ministers, let experts rather than MPs question the Government on its Budget, give Select Committees more powers and restore the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act.🎓 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 Townsend58. How a British student has schooled the US Congress
22:40||Season 1, Ep. 58In this special episode, we dive into the fascinating world of US congressional procedure with Hansard Society member Kacper Surdy, the once-anonymous force behind the influential social media account @ringwiss. Despite being a 20-year-old Durham University student, Kacper has become a go-to authority on Capitol Hill’s intricate rules, earning the admiration of seasoned political insiders. With Donald Trump hinting at bypassing Senate norms to appoint controversial figures to his cabinet, Kacper unravels the high stakes procedural battles shaping Washington.Ruth and Mark sat down with Kacper to explore the remarkable story of how a British student became a trusted commentator on US congressional workings—all without setting foot in Washington, DC. Kacper reveals how his fascination with the 2020 presidential election led him to explore and master the inner workings of the House and Senate. From maintaining a hobbyist’s passion for procedural rabbit holes to fielding inquiries from Capitol Hill insiders, Kacper reflects on his future plans for this unexpected, niche expertise.He explains the key differences and historical connections between British parliamentary traditions and US congressional rules, offering insights into the House’s meticulous documentation of precedents versus the Senate’s more informal approach. He also explores the potential impact of recess appointments on the balance of power in Washington, decoding the controversial practice that Trump has hinted at using to bypass Senate scrutiny, its historical origins and why it’s a constitutional flashpoint today.NOTE: This episode was recorded just before Matt Gaetz, Trump’s nominee to be Attorney General, announced he was withdrawing from the post. We’ve left the discussion about this in the recording because it may be relevant to consideration of other nominations in the future.🎓 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. Producer: Richard Townsend57. Assisted Dying Bill passes Second Reading: What next?
57:37||Season 1, Ep. 57From the emotional weight of the Assisted Dying Bill’s historic Second Reading to the first Cabinet resignation under Keir Starmer’s leadership, this has been a whirlwind week of high-stakes drama and political intrigue in Westminster. Nearly three million people have signed a parliamentary e-petition calling for another general election and it’s been a week of party defections and divisions. We unpack what it all means for the future of this Parliament.This week saw MPs engage in a solemn and respectful debate over landmark legislation. The Assisted Dying Bill cleared its Second Reading with a decisive majority of 55 votes, but the solemn silence that greeted the announcement of the result in the House of Commons reflected the gravity of the decision. There is still a long way to go if the Assisted Dying Bill is to make it to the statute book, but it cleared this first hurdle. So, what happens now as it moves into the Public Bill Committee?Meanwhile, a petition calling for a general election has amassed nearly three million signatures. It has sparked a debate and perhaps tells us something about public discontent with the current Government after just six months. But it has also revealed the constitutional illiteracy of some of our politicians and the commentariat. Despite its size, this petition holds no legal weight, though it will trigger a House of Commons debate in January having crossed the 100,000 signature threshold. What approach will the Government take?In other news, Sir Keir Starmer’s Cabinet saw its first resignation this week as Transport Secretary Louise Haigh stepped down. The move came after a past offence—declared to Starmer before her appointment—resurfaced. We unpack the implications for the Government’s ethics bar: has it been set too low, or is this the high standard needed to rebuild public trust in politicians and Parliament?🎓 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 £ - 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. Producer: Richard Townsend56. What's the point of petitioning Parliament?
58:10||Season 1, Ep. 56It’s Parliament Week, and Ruth and Mark are joined by researchers Cristina Leston-Bandeira and Richard Huzzey to celebrate an unsung hero of Westminster: the petitioning system. Once on the verge of irrelevance, this mechanism has seen record levels of public engagement, sparking debates and inquiries on an avalanche of citizen-driven issues. Together, they explore how petitioning adds value for both petitioners and MPs, and what has driven this surprising revival of a centuries-old tradition in the digital age.As the news of the death of Tony Blair’s Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, reaches us, Ruth and Mark reflect on his unique place in British politics. Prescott was more than a brawler; he was a symbol of working-class pride in a political landscape increasingly dominated by career politicians from privileged backgrounds. With the decline of working-class representation in the House of Commons, they ask: could Angela Rayner, the current Deputy Prime Minister, step into Prescott’s shoes? Can she wield the same influence within Sir Keir Starmer’s government and hold Labour’s coalition together as Prescott once did?With the select committee system kicking into gear - launching inquiries and grilling cabinet ministers - Ruth and Mark explore whether this quieter venue could outperform the raucous Commons Chamber in scrutinising the Government. In a Parliament where Labour’s dominance looms large, how might committees leverage their tools to ensure Ministers are held to account, especially when their reports are ignored, or responses fall short?From nostalgia for a working-class titan to the mechanics of modern parliamentary accountability, Ruth and Mark delve into the past, present, and future of how Westminster engages with the people it serves.🎓 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 £ - 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. Producer: Richard Townsend55. The Assisted Dying Bill: Is More Parliamentary Time Needed?
49:34||Season 1, Ep. 55Could one of the most consequential Private Members’ Bills in nearly fifty years - the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which seeks to legalise assisted dying - be sidelined not due to its content but because MPs fear they won’t have time to scrutinise it properly?Ruth and Mark look at increasing concerns in the House of Commons that the time constraints around private members legislation could prevent Kim Leadbeater’s bill from receiving the level of debate and scrutiny the issue demands.If MPs are perceived to have reached a decision on anything other than the merits of the Bill, the House of Commons will risk looking ridiculous. So, should the Government step in to ensure there’s enough time for consideration in the Chamber and in Committee, while remaining neutral on the merits of the policy? Or might Ministers prefer to sit on their hands?Also, as the Government’s proposal to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the House of Lords clears the Commons, how will the denizens of the Upper House respond? The Shadow Leader of the Lords warns the “execution will be up close and personal,” with Peers having to march through the lobbies to approve the Bill, under the watchful gaze of the colleagues they will be voting to exclude. And finally, an embarrassing blunder: the Government has discovered that it has been unlawfully charging fees for UK visa applications for years and is trying to quietly regularise its mistake. The House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee is not impressed with the Home Office. It’s a painful example of the perils of delegated 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 £ - 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. Producer: Richard Townsend