One consequence of the mini-parliamentary rebellion on the King’s Speech is that Keir Starmer has decisively disciplined his backbench rebels, but is this firm approach a one-off for the King’s Speech or indicative of a broader strategy? With the Chancellor set to layout the depths of the nation’s financial woes next week, we ask: will the honeymoon period for the Labour government soon be over?
Parliamentary Rebellion Consequences: The recent rebellion during the King’s Speech has significant repercussions. The seven offending MPs are barred from running for Select Committee seats. While negotiations continue over the division of Committee Chairs, the Conservative leadership race could complicate the establishment of these Committees.
The Modernisation Committee: One Committee that might kick off quicker than some others is the new House of Commons Modernisation Committee, a key promise in Labour’s manifesto. Chaired by the Leader of the House, its members will be appointed, not elected. This has sparked complaints from smaller parties about their lack of representation. Do they have a legitimate case?
MPs’ Second Jobs: Fact or Fiction? The government recently tabled a motion claiming to abolish MPs' second jobs. But is this claim accurate? If not, what further actions might be on the radar to reduce MPs' outside work?
Historic Deputy Speaker Election: For the first time, all three newly elected Deputy Speakers are women, with one being the first ethnic minority MP to sit in the Chair. Conversely, the House of Lords is moving to prevent elections for new hereditary peers, pending government legislation to abolish their voting rights.
Government’s Early Performance: After two weeks of parliamentary business, Mark and Ruth reflect on the government's performance. While there’s an increased focus on legislative standards and scrutiny, early signs of teething problems and complaints from various House of Commons members suggest challenges ahead.
Is Keir Starmer’s firm approach to disciplining backbench rebels a one-off for the King’s Speech?
With the Chancellor set to reveal the nation’s financial struggles, will the honeymoon period for Labour soon be over?
What are the repercussions of the recent rebellion during the King’s Speech?
How might the Conservative leadership race affect the establishment of these Committees?
Will the new House of Commons Modernisation Committee get up and running more quickly than other committees?
Why are the Modernisation Committee members being appointed rather than elected?
Do smaller parties have a legitimate complaint about their lack of representation on this Committee?
Has the government truly moved to abolish MPs' second jobs, or is this claim inaccurate?
What further actions might be taken to reduce MPs' outside work?
Why is the House of Lords moving to prevent stop by-elections for new hereditary peers?
How have the first two weeks of parliamentary business gone for the Labour Government?
What early signs of teething problems and complaints from House of Commons members are emerging?
Parliament Matters is supported by a grant from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, a Quaker trust which engages in philanthropy and supports work on democratic accountability.
Hansard Society
Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There are consequently minor errors and the text is not formatted according to our style guide. If you wish to reference or cite the transcript copy below, please first check against the audio version above. Timestamps are provided at the start of each minute.
[00:00:00] You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety. org. uk slash PM.
Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox.
And I'm Mark D'Arcy. Coming up
Labour tightens its grip on Parliament.
Sir Keir Starmer stomps on his first set of Commons rebels.
And does the honeymoon end on Monday, when the Chancellor is due to set out the depth of the nation's financial woes?
Ruth, let's start with that because I suspect that what's going to happen on Monday is that Rachel Reeves is going to set the tone for what happens really over the next year or 18 months or beyond. We're [00:01:00] talking here about really underlining the depth of the financial crisis. The British state is running on empty.
Almost everywhere any minister looks in the departments that they're now running, they will see places where a vast injection of money is needed. But the money to do it isn't available. So you're looking at public sector pay settlements. The junior doctors will just be the start on that. Uh, defence spending.
Defence spending. The need for a vast boost in that which may not be able to wait on a all singing, all dancing defence review taking a leisurely 18 months. And almost every other sector. You know, the crisis in the prisons that they were talking about last week. The state of the schools. The state of almost any part of the public realm.
And I suspect that an awful lot of Labour MPs, when they came in, had a very nice couple of weeks. It's marvellous setting up an office. It's marvellous making your maiden speech. But now comes the moment when they're going to have to start saying no to the general public.
Indeed, so that's the sort of tone that has been set on the King's speech, of course, with the decision by Keir Starmer [00:02:00] to discipline his rebels.
Use the links below to subscribe to the Hansard Society's Parliament Matters podcast on your preferred app, or search for 'Parliament Matters' on whichever podcasting service you use. If you are unable to find our podcast, please email us here.
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.
