As 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.
Dr Mari Takayanagi
The Senior Archivist at the UK Parliamentary Archives, Mari is also an Archives By-Fellow at Churchill College Cambridge, researching women, Parliament and politics in the period 1918 to 1945. Her research interests include legislation affecting women’s lives and gender equality, early women MPs, and women staff in the House of Commons and House of Lords. Her recent book Necessary Women: the Untold Story of Parliament's Working Women, co-authored with Elizabeth Hallam Smith, draws on new research from the Parliamentary Archives and other records to chart the changing context for working women in the Palace of Westminster.
Dr John Cooper
A Reader in Early Modern History at the University of York, John's research focuses on the political, religious and cultural history of sixteenth-century England. His latest project focuses on St Stephen's Chapel in the Palace of Westminster, which led to the publication of his recent book The Lost Chapel of Westminster: How a Royal Chapel Became The House of Commons. The book charts the history of St Stephen's Chapel from its construction in 1292, through its use as the House of Commons from 1548, until its near-destruction in the great fire of 1834.
Books
Necessary Women: The Untold Story of Parliament's Working Women, Dr Mari Takayanagi & Dr Elizabeth Hallam Smith
3-D visualisation of the royal chapel of St Stephen, Westminster
Visual and Political Culture 1292-1941, University of York
MySociety
To fix Parliament, fix the Parliament Ombudsman, Alex Parsons (4 December 2024)
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
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] Intro: You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org.uk/pm.
[00:00:17] Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox.
[00:00:24] Mark D'Arcy: And I'm Mark Darcy. Coming up this week.
[00:00:27] Ruth Fox: Devalued promises. Why politicians should be very careful about the pledges they make to aggrieved groups like the WASPI women.
[00:00:34] Mark D'Arcy: A Christmas rising on the committee corridor as members of two committees choose their own chairs in defiance of the customary Westminster carve up.
[00:00:43] Ruth Fox: And with Christmas just around the corner, we thought we'd deviate from our usual format a little. We'll talk to authors of a couple of parliamentary history books that are ideal if you're still looking for a present for the parliamentary nerd in your life.
[00:01:00] Mark D'Arcy: But first Ruth, I suppose we've really, really got to talk about it. The whole issue of the government saying that it can't afford to compensate women who lost out from the change in the state pension age, the WASPI women as they've come to be called, has dominated the parliamentary week. An awful lot of Labour MPs are finding that their pledges in opposition, that this should be done, are now being used in evidence against them.
[00:01:24] The Conservatives are rather enjoying themselves, having been hammered by Labour over the issue for ages, to discover that Labour's reached exactly the same conclusion that they'd reached.
[00:01:33] Ruth Fox: Yes, we should explain, Mark, just for our international audience. Listeners in particular who may not be okay with this that the phrase waspy women stands for women against state pension Inequality and they've been waging a campaign for a number of years now for compensation because the decision to equalize the state pension age meant that in their view they weren't properly informed about it and they've lost out as they see it financially.
[00:01:55] Mark D'Arcy: Because once upon a time women got the state pension in Britain for five years earlier than men, and that was gradually phased out, and at one point the speed of the phase out was increased, essentially, to save the government money.
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.
