The sentencing guidelines row: A product of poor law-making? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 86

News

The sentencing guidelines row: A product of poor law-making? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 86

4 Apr 2025

The Government has published “emergency legislation” to block new sentencing guidelines. But why does Parliament have limited oversight of the Sentencing Council? Has heavy handed policing interfered with the work of an MP? What do disabled MPs make of Westminster - the building and the procedures? And after a 25-hour speech brought the US Senate to a halt, could it ever happen at Westminster?

LISTEN

The Government has published “emergency legislation” — the Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Bill — to block new guidelines coming into effect that single out differential treatment of ethnic minority offenders when ordering pre-sentencing reports. These reports would then be used by judges to make decisions on sentencing. Critics are calling it a case of “two-tier justice.” The Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood says there’s “insufficient democratic oversight” of how the Sentencing Council operates.

In this episode, Ruth and Mark examine Parliament’s limited ability to scrutinise Sentencing Council guidelines — why that’s the case, how it could have been different, and why successive governments have failed to address it. They trace the issue back to a 2009 “Christmas Tree” law that had so many policy baubles it was difficult to scrutinise, an enduring trend of outsourcing decision-making to arms-length bodies, and a culture of “perma-crisis” that has defined UK politics for over 15 years.

Also in this episode: Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ big moment before the Treasury Committee is eclipsed by President Trump’s shock international tariff announcement. At the Transport Committee, Heathrow’s Chief Executive issues a full apology for the massive flight disruption caused by a power station fire that brought the Airport to a halt. Meanwhile, MPs with disabilities and health conditions testify before the Commons Modernisation Committee about the challenges they face navigating Westminster - the building and the procedures.

Plus: Did Hertfordshire Police cross a constitutional line by warning former Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden MP not to look into the arrest of two of his constituents over “disparaging comments” they made in their child’s school WhatsApp group? Ruth and Mark consider how other cases involving vexatious constituents have been handled by MPs and how the issues engage parliamentary privilege.

After Cory Booker’s 25-hour speech in the US Senate, could a filibuster ever happen in Westminster? (Spoiler: absolutely not.) And should MPs be lobbying foreign governments to build airports when they oppose them here in the UK?

← Back to Parliament Matters homepage

Listen on our YouTube channel (captioned)

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Resources

House of Commons

Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Bill

Sentencing Council

Sentencing guidelines: Imposition of community and custodial sentences

House of Commons Treasury Select Committee

Spring Statement 2025 (2 April 2025): Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP (Chancellor of the Exchequer at HM Treasury), Louise Tinsley (HM Treasury official), and William MacFarlane (HM Treasury official)
- Oral evidence transcript and video recording
Spring Statement 2025 (1 April 2025): Paul Johnson (Institute for Fiscal Studies), Dr Jumana Saleheen (Vanguard Asset Management), and Ruth Curtice (Resolution Foundation)
- Oral evidence transcript, video recording 1, and video recording 2

House of Commons Modernisation Committee

Access to the House of Commons and its procedures (1 April 2025): Robert Halfon, Dr Marie Tidball MP, Sarah Bool MP, Steve Darling MP, and Marsha De Cordova MP.
- Video recording

CSPAN

United States Senate Session, 31 March 2025: Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) delivers the longest-ever Senate floor speech

Transcript

Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There may consequently be 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. And coming up in this week's episode.

Ruth Fox: The sentencing mess. How the government got into a tangle about new criminal sentencing guidelines and how it plans to untangle it.

Mark D'Arcy: A matter of privilege. Is heavy handed policing interfering in the work of MPs?

Ruth Fox: And after a 25 hour speech brought the US Senate to a halt, could it ever happen at Westminster?

Mark D'Arcy: And Ruth, let's begin by talking about, as you described it, the sentencing mess. The Sentencing Council, the independent arms length body, [00:01:00] which to some extent has had outsourced to it the policy on how many years tariff there should be for a particular offender who's committed a particular crime, all sorts of issues of sentencing procedure, has basically landed the government in a very difficult position.

It's supposed to be an arm's length body, but it's now recommended something that's very, very uncomfortable for a government.

Ruth Fox: Yes. So what essentially it's done, uh, it has to consult on its guidelines, uh, periodically it held its consultation at the end of 2023, beginning of 2024. At the time, it was sort of passed over politically, both by the government and, and by the opposition.

Nobody really raised any questions about it.

Mark D'Arcy: Because this surfaced actually when the conservatives were still in government.

Ruth Fox: Yes.

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.

Apple

YouTube Podcasts

Spotify

More ways to subscribe

Parliament Matters homepage

Latest / Highlights

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 23-27 March 2026

The Prime Minister will face questions from the Liaison Committee, comprising Select Committee chairs. The Conservatives will choose the topic for Tuesday’s Opposition Day debate, while the Home Secretary and the Energy and Transport Secretaries will take oral questions from MPs. The Commons will consider Lords amendments to the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, National Insurance Bill, and Victims and Courts Bill, and will continue Committee Stage scrutiny of elections legislation. In the Lords, the Pension Schemes and the Crime and Policing Bills will complete their final stages, while Peers continue scrutiny of the English Devolution Bill. MPs will also debate an e-petition on the puberty blockers trial. Select Committees will focus on child poverty, dynamic alignment, the Defence Investment Plan, energy resilience, national resilience, and Royal Mail service delivery.

News / Who really decides Immigration Rules: Parliament or the Home Secretary? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 137

Who really controls immigration law when Ministers can rewrite key rules with minimal parliamentary scrutiny? Jonathan Featonby of the Refugee Council explains the Home Secretary’s far-reaching powers over Immigration Rules. We also discuss the Crime and Policing Bill, where amendments on AI and abortion highlight the challenges posed by rushed law-making and executive overreach. And we look ahead to the next phase of the assisted dying debate, as supporters in the House of Commons prepare for a renewed legislative push in the next parliamentary Session. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

News / Jury trials under threat? The Courts and Tribunals Bill explained - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 136

Plans to restrict the right to a jury trial have cleared their Second Reading in the Commons, but the proposals in the Courts and Tribunals Bill face growing resistance, including from Labour rebels. We discuss the legal and constitutional implications with barrister Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, examining what the reforms could mean for defendants’ rights and the criminal courts system. We also assess the passage of legislation removing hereditary Peers from Parliament, and the late compromise that eased opposition in the House of Lords. Meanwhile Sir Lindsay Hoyle clashes with the Chief Whip over delays in the division lobby, and newly released papers on Peter Mandelson’s Washington appointment raise fresh political questions. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

Briefings / Last-minute powers and limited scrutiny: Parliament and the risks of consigning online safety law to delegated legislation

Two late-stage government amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill would grant Ministers significant powers to reshape key parts of the Online Safety Act through delegated legislation. While the policy goals may attract support, the method raises serious constitutional concerns about parliamentary scrutiny and accountability. Using these amendments as a case study, this briefing explores the risks of relying on regulations to make policy and explains how the Hansard Society’s proposed reforms to the delegated legislation scrutiny system could better balance governmental flexibility with democratic oversight.

News / Is the assisted dying bill being filibustered? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 135

Debate over the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been so slow in the House of Lords that opponents of the Bill are accused of deliberately running down the clock. Conservative Peer Lord Harper rejects claims of filibustering, arguing that Peers are undertaking necessary scrutiny of a flawed and complex bill. He contends the legislation lacks adequate safeguards and was unsuited to the Private Member’s Bill process and discusses whether MPs might attempt to revive it in a future parliamentary Session. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS