Kemi Badenoch sparred with Keir Starmer for the first time at Prime Ministers’ Questions. We assess her debut as Leader of the Opposition and the impact she made in the chamber. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s return to the White House is expected to reshape British policy across multiple fronts - we look at how it could influence Parliament’s agenda in the coming years. Finally, we head to Belfast for insights from political expert, David Phinnemore, on the constitutional conundrum unfolding in Northern Ireland.
This week we turn the spotlight on Kemi Badenoch’s debut as Leader of the Opposition at Prime Minister’s Questions, as she sparred with Keir Starmer for the first time. We examine her strategy, topic choices and what it will take to position herself as a credible challenger in the House of Commons Chamber and beyond.
Then we analyse Donald Trump's re-election and its potential ripple effects on UK policies, from trade tariffs to defence commitments. How might a shift in US foreign policy affect British alliances, and what could this mean for Parliament's upcoming agenda? And might Nigel Farage, the new MP and UK Reform Party leader, leverage his connection with President Trump and if so how it could affect Keir Starmer’s government?
The long-awaited Ministerial Code has finally been published. The Prime Minister’s new guidelines set out the do’s and don’ts for Ministers and tighten up some of the rules on ministerial conduct. The “seven principles of public life” – selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership – provide an ethical framework to the document. Ruth and Mark break down the changes, from empowering the independent advisor on ministerial interests to initiate investigations to the newly required quarterly declarations of ministers' interests and monthly reporting of gifts and hospitality.
Finally, we explore Northern Ireland Assembly’s upcoming democratic consent vote on the Windsor Framework, which governs the nation’s post-Brexit trade rules. Professor David Phinnemore of Queen’s University Belfast joins us to explore why this vote matters, how it’s viewed differently by the nationalist and unionist parties in the Assembly, the possible outcomes, and the broader implications for the UK-EU relationship and UK politics.
David Phinnemore
David Phinnemore is Professor of European Politics at Queen’s University Belfast in Northern Ireland. His research interests are focused on European integration, EU treaty reform and EU enlargement. In recent years he has focused on the implications of Brexit for Northern Ireland and UK-EU relations, including the Northern Ireland Protocol and Windsor Framework. He currently coordinates the ESRC-funded project "Governance for 'a place between’: the Multilevel Dynamics of Implementing the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland".
Kemi Badenoch’s debut at Prime Minister’s Questions
Donald Trump’s election as President of the United States and its implications for British politics
Changes to the new Ministerial Code
The forthcoming ‘democratic consent vote’ in the Northern Ireland Assembly on whether core parts of the Windsor Framework should continue to be applied
Hansard Society
UK Government
Ministerial Code (November 2024)
Queen's University Belfast
What do voters in Northern Ireland currently think about the Windsor Framework/Protocol? (David Phinnemore, Katy Hayward and Lisa Claire Whitten)
Q&A on the Democratic Consent Vote 2024 (David Phinnemore and Katy Hayward)
The Protocol/Windsor Framework and the 2024 Democratic Consent Vote (David Phinnemore and Lisa Claire Whitten)
UK in a Changing Europe
The Windsor Framework and the 2024 democratic consent process (David Phinnemore)
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.
Intro: [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/pm.
Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox.
Mark D'Arcy: And I'm Mark D'Arcy. Coming up.
Ruth Fox: There's a new sheriff in town. Kemi Badenoch takes on Keir Starmer at Prime Minister's Questions. We assess her debut as Leader of the Opposition.
Mark D'Arcy: How will the second coming of Donald Trump reverberate through the UK Parliament?
Ruth Fox: And we go to Belfast to hear from political expert David Phinnemore about the constitutional conundrum unfolding in Northern Ireland.
Mark D'Arcy: But first Ruth, Kemi Badenoch takes her first PMQs. [00:01:00] It's always an event when a new Leader of the Opposition steps up to the plate, or in this case, the despatch box, to question a Prime Minister, and it's always interesting and it's always dissected, and I don't think anybody should underestimate quite how difficult a gig it is.
Kemi Badenoch. Medium sized cabinet minister in the last government, always looked a bit like the front runner in the Conservative leadership election, once it was clear who the runners were, and once the electorate had eliminated other possible contenders. And there she was, standing in front of Sir Keir Starmer, trying to deliver a blow, establish herself, win the confidence of the troops behind her. Only a third of MPs had, more or less, had voted for her, in the election phase that took place amongst Conservative MPs before it went out to the members, so she had quite a lot at stake.
And I, I find myself remembering David Cameron's debut all those years ago against Tony Blair, where he immediately struck a blow by delivering quite an effective [00:02:00] line. He was the future once.
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.
