Dr David Torrance spoke to us about his major new project for the House of Commons Library: Mapping the UK Constitution.
6:00pm-7:15pm on Tuesday, 10 December 2024, at the Palace of Westminster followed by refreshments at a nearby venue
This is a meeting for Hansard Society members and their friends. Not already a member of the Hansard Society? Join us now!
We are delighted to welcome Dr David Torrance, the constitutional expert, author and researcher for the House of Commons Library. David will talk about his fascinating new project, mapping the UK Constitution.
Our meeting is hosted by the Chair of our Board of Trustees, Baroness Taylor of Bolton, alongside our Director, Dr Ruth Fox.
After the talk and Q&A with David, there will be an opportunity for socialising and refreshments at a nearby accessible bar.
The United Kingdom Constitution – A Mapping Exercise is a uniquely detailed Research Briefing written by David Torrance and published by the House of Commons Library.
First published on 26 November 2024, the work is “intended as a navigational aid to what can often appear an endless and impenetrable mass of constitutional information”. In nearly 300 pages, David captures the great range of formal and informal rules, conventions and procedures that determine how our country is run.
Dr David Torrance has worked for the House of Commons Library since 2018. He brings a wealth of expertise, with two decades of experience as a journalist and broadcaster focusing on Scottish politics. He’s authored several notable works, including biographies of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as his latest book, The Wild Men: The Remarkable Story of Britain’s First Labour Government.
The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.
On Friday 13 June, the House of Commons will once again debate the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. Specifically, it will hold a second day of Report Stage, during which the whole House will debate and vote on amendments. This briefing explains the structure of Report Stage, what happened on the first day of Report Stage, how amendments are selected and grouped, on which amendments a decision can still be taken, and the likely sequence of events this Friday, including whether a final vote will take place.
The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves MP, will deliver a statement on the Spending Review. MPs will resume Report Stage of the assisted dying bill and debate key legislation on football governance, mental health, and planning and infrastructure. Peers and MPs are expected to resolve their standoff over AI and copyright in the Data (Use and Access) Bill. The Commons Defence Committee will hear from the lead reviewers of the Strategic Defence Review, while a Lords Committee will examine the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty issue. The Hansard Society’s Director will give evidence to the Modernisation Committee about access to the House of Commons and its procedures.
In this episode, we explore why ministers keep bypassing Parliament to make major announcements to the media — and whether returning to the Despatch Box might help clarify their message. We unpack the Lords' uphill battle to protect creators’ rights in the Data Use and Access Bill, challenge claims that the Assisted Dying Bill lacks scrutiny, and examine early findings from a Speaker’s Conference on improving security for MPs, as threats and intimidation against politicians continue to rise. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.
Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.
