Mark and Ruth 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.
Parliament
Kim Leadbeater MP, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (012 of 2024-25 Session)
Hansard Society
Constitution Unit, UCL
D. Natzler, What future for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill? (4 November 2024)
The Conversation
D. Gover, Assisted dying bill enters parliament – how likely is it to become law? (16 October 2024)
House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee
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.
[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 this week.
Ruth Fox: A matter of life and death. The Assisted Dying Bill has been published. It's possibly the most important private member's bill since the 1960s. So what happens next?
Mark D'Arcy: As the bill to remove hereditary peers from the House of Lords heads for a rendezvous with their lordships, the Shadow Leader of the House warns the execution will have to be done at close quarters.
Ruth Fox: And the Government has got itself in a legislative tangle over visa fees it shouldn't have charged.[00:01:00]
Mark D'Arcy: But first, Ruth, before we get into the Assisted Dying Bill, I think I should just offer a little apology. Both of us have been slightly under the weather this week. The voices are a bit croaky, the coughs come out occasionally despite our best efforts to restrain them. So listeners, please do bear with us. It's autumn in London and the viruses are about and we've both had them, so apologies in advance.
But let's talk now about the Assisted Dying Private Members Bill that's finally been published, that will be heading for debate in a couple of weeks time in the House of Commons. It's probably the most important, biggest, most controversial Private Members Bill since really the 1960s and the heroic age of Private Members Bill legislation when homosexuality was legalised, when abortion was legalised, both huge social measures that MPs were supposed to vote on their conscience for.
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.
