The House of Commons returns from its November adjournment on Tuesday (10 November), but its timetable will look like a Monday. That is because Standing Order No. 9(1) provides that when a Tuesday or Wednesday immediately follows a periodic adjournment – generally, although procedurally inaccurately, described as a “recess” – of more than two days, references to sitting times apply as though it were Monday. The Chamber will therefore meet at 2:30pm and its principal business may continue until 10pm, rather than following the usual Tuesday sitting of 11:30am to 7pm. Westminster Hall also follows a post-adjournment timetable. Under Standing Order No. 10(2) debates begin at 11:30am, are suspended between 1:30pm and 4:30pm, and may then continue for up to a further three hours.

↖ Contents

Peers begin Committee Stage of the Courts and Tribunals Bill on Tuesday (10 November). The Bill would remove a defendant’s right to elect a Crown Court jury trial for “either-way” offences and would permit judge-only trials in certain complex or lengthy cases.

Two House of Lords committees have raised concerns about powers that would enable Ministers to reshape important parts of the criminal justice system through delegated (or secondary) legislation.

The Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee objects to a power in the Bill allowing the Secretary of State, through regulations, to add offences to the list of offences eligible for judge-only trial. This is a "Henry VIII power": it would enable Ministers to amend an Act of Parliament using delegated (or secondary) legislation, which receives less parliamentary scrutiny than a Bill. The initial list focuses on fraud and other serious economic crimes, but the power could be used to add almost any offence. The Committee says the question of which offences may be tried without a jury is a fundamental part of the Bill’s policy and should be settled in primary legislation. It recommends removing the power to add offences.

The Committee is equally critical of the power to set the maximum custodial sentence available to magistrates at six, 12, 18, or 24 months. Regulations exercising the power would be subject to the negative scrutiny procedure, meaning they could be made (signed into law) without first being debated or approved by either House.

The Government presents this power as an operational tool for shifting work between magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court. But increasing magistrates’ sentencing powers would mean more serious and complex cases being tried outside the Crown Court. The Committee regards each potential increase as a significant change in criminal justice policy and recommends removing this power too.

The House of Lords Constitution Committee shares these concerns but proposes less drastic remedies. It recommends expressly limiting the first power to fraud and financial offences, and making regulations under the second power subject to the affirmative procedure, so that both Houses would have to debate and approve regulations before they could be made.

The Constitution Committee also complains that the Bill’s extensive amendments to existing legislation make the Bill’s effects difficult to understand. The Committee recommends that the Government publish “Keeling schedules”, setting out how the affected Acts would read if the Bill were enacted.

The term dates from 1938, when Conservative MP Edward Keeling complained to Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain about the “evils of legislation by reference”. Chamberlain acknowledged the advantages of making legislation more intelligible and instructed Parliamentary Counsel to proceed experimentally with the proposed approach. Regrettably, nearly 90 years later, Keeling schedules remain only an occasional rather than a routine aid to scrutiny.

Two days of Committee Stage have so far been scheduled: on Tuesday 10 and Monday 16 November, although further days may be added if necessary. Tuesday’s proceedings are expected to cover amendments concerning the rules and limitations governing judge-only trials; the delivery of judgments following verdicts; magistrates’ sentencing powers; appeals by defendants; jury equity and protections for advocates; and the transportation of people in custody.

Ten of the 76 amendments tabled thus far are in the names of four distinguished former judges: the former Lord Chief Justices Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Burnett of Maldon; the first President of the Supreme Court Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers; and former Justice Minister Lord Bellamy.

Several of their amendments are explicitly described as “probing” amendments: their purpose is not to change the Bill immediately but to test the Government’s position, draw out further information, and assess the level of support that the amendments might attract at Report Stage. This reflects the usual rhythm of Lords scrutiny. Amendments are often withdrawn in Committee after debate, preserving the option of returning to the issue at Report. In the Lords an amendment pressed to a decision and defeated in Committee cannot be retabled at Report, although the issue can be reopened through a materially different amendment.

*** Listen to the latest Parliament Matters podcast episode – Inside the new Congress – Daniel Schuman of the American Governance Institute joins us to explain how Congress’s rules, leadership contests and internal party bargains will shape what Democrats can achieve, both in advancing their legislative agenda and holding Donald Trump’s administration to account.***

↖ Contents

The Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill will receive its Second Reading in the House of Lords during Tuesday’s (10 November) “dinner break”, the period when the Lords temporarily pauses its principal business, in this case Committee Stage of the Courts and Tribunals Bill, to dispose of another item before returning to it.

The House does not adjourn for dinner. Instead, consideration of the main Bill is formally adjourned, another item is taken, often for about an hour, and the House then returns to the Bill. Dinner-break business may include the Second Reading of a short or relatively uncontroversial Bill, a short debate, consideration of a statutory instrument, or another discrete item that can be completed within a limited period. The term describes its place in the timetable, not its parliamentary importance.

The short, two-clause Church Appointments Bill repeals provisions dating from 1829 and 1858 which prevent a Roman Catholic or Jewish Prime Minister from advising the Monarch on appointments in the Church of England and Church of Scotland. Similar restrictions apply to ecclesiastical appointments made directly by the Lord Chancellor.

These restrictions acquired practical significance when Andy Burnham, a Roman Catholic, became Prime Minister. He has temporarily transferred responsibility for Church appointments to the Lord Chancellor; the Bill would enable him to resume the full constitutional functions of his office. But removing a religious disqualification is one thing. The continuing role of any Prime Minister in advising the Monarch on the appointment of bishops to an established Church to which they may not belong raises broader constitutional questions that may surface during the debate.

The Bill completed all its Commons stages in a single day last month, and Ministers are intent on an equally swift passage through the Lords. On Monday (9 November), the Leader of the House is expected to ask peers to dispense with Standing Order No. 44, which normally prevents two stages of a bill being taken on the same day. If the motion is agreed, the Bill’s remaining stages – Committee, Report and Third Reading – are expected to take place on Monday 23 November.

↖ Contents

Chancellor John Healey appears before the Treasury Committee on Wednesday (11 November) for its concluding evidence session on the Budget.

The session follows evidence from economists and the Office for Budget Responsibility. MPs will question the Chancellor about the assumptions underpinning his tax and spending decisions, their consequences for public services, borrowing, and debt, and the risks surrounding the Government’s fiscal plans.

The four-day Budget debate earlier this month allowed MPs to range widely across the Government’s economic policy but did not facilitate detailed examination of individual measures. At the conclusion of the Budget debate most of the 108 Ways and Means motions were agreed without debate or a division.

The Committee’s inquiry will help inform scrutiny of the Finance Bill, which gives legislative effect to many of the Budget’s measures. The Committee traditionally seeks to report before the Bill receives its Second Reading. The Bill was introduced on 3 November, after MPs approved the Ways and Means motions, but its Second Reading has not yet been scheduled.

The Committee can interrogate the Chancellor at length, pursue answers, and test the evidence supporting his decisions. In scrutiny terms, Wednesday’s session, and the report that follows, may prove more revealing than much of the formal Budget debate.

↖ Contents

Green Party MP Carla Denyer leads a 90-minute Westminster Hall debate on the Government’s policy on the Rosebank oilfield on Wednesday (11 November).

The original consent for the development was quashed by the Court of Session in January 2025 because the environmental assessment had not taken account of the emissions that would be produced when the extracted oil and gas were eventually burned. The application is now being reconsidered under revised environmental guidance and remains officially “under review”. A public consultation closed in August. As recently as 2 November, Energy Minister Michael Shanks said that the decision was subject to a live “quasi-judicial” regulatory process and that it would therefore be inappropriate for Ministers to comment on the project.

But last month’s Office for Budget Responsibility Economic and fiscal outlook forecast for oil and gas tax receipts included the North Sea Transition Authority’s estimate of production from new fields, including Rosebank. That prompted questions in both Houses about whether the Budget had effectively assumed that the project would be approved. The Government says not. In response to a Lords oral question, it said the OBR routinely uses projections that include potential new fields and future discoveries, and that Rosebank has featured in the forecasts since at least 2019. Its inclusion therefore does not prejudge the Energy Secretary’s decision.

MPs can use Wednesday’s debate to press Ministers on that apparent contradiction and on the environmental, economic, and energy-security arguments surrounding the project. But the Minister is likely to maintain that the quasi-judicial process prevents detailed comment on the decision itself. This is a familiar parliamentary difficulty. MPs can debate the wider policy and press the Government on the environmental, economic, and energy-security arguments. But the Minister is likely to resist discussing the decision they most want to hear about.

The debate will not end in a vote. But it gives MPs an opportunity to test the Government’s policy while the decision is still pending, although perhaps without eliciting many answers about the decision itself.

↖ Contents

Sir Keir Starmer’s former Downing Street Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney, appears before the House of Lords Constitution Committee on Wednesday (11 November) as part of its inquiry into the UK’s constitutional safeguards.

McSweeney has described the British state as highly centralised but too weak to deliver. He has argued that Labour failed to prepare adequately for government and he supported moving power and decision-makers outside London.

More controversially, he has reportedly argued that the intensity of scrutiny in government, including concerns about Freedom of Information requests, makes it difficult for Number 10 to think strategically. Peers may also revisit what his earlier evidence to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee revealed about political appointments, vetting, decision-making, and official record-keeping inside Number 10.

McSweeney’s appearance offers a rare opportunity to examine constitutional safeguards from the perspective of somebody who recently exercised considerable power at the centre of government.

The Committee will also hear separately from a panel of four people occupying key positions in the standards and regulatory landscape: representatives of the Ethics and Integrity Commission, the Electoral Commission, and the Civil Service Commission.

The two panels approach the same constitutional question from opposite directions. How effective are the formal watchdogs, and how much still depends on the judgement and restraint of those operating at the centre of government? Does transparency inhibit the candid discussion and strategic thinking that effective government requires? Or is frustration with scrutiny precisely why strong safeguards around executive power are needed?

↖ Contents

Three Commons Select Committee Statements are scheduled for Thursday (12 November).

In the Chamber, Defence Committee chair Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi will present the Committee’s report on “Defence in the High North”, followed by Health and Social Care Committee chair Layla Moran on “The obesity moonshot: making obesity a political priority”. In Westminster Hall, Liam Byrne will present the Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee’s report on “China and the UK economy”.

Select Committee Statements provide a short parliamentary launchpad for a committee report or new inquiry. The committee chair or another member speaking on the committee’s behalf has up to 10 minutes to make the Statement. MPs may then put questions to the committee representative, usually for a further 10 minutes. Unlike a Ministerial Statement, the questions are directed to the committee representative, not the Government. A Minister may attend but is not called to respond.

The procedure is becoming increasingly popular. There were 52 Select Committee Statements during the long 2024–26 Session: 41 in the Chamber and 11 in Westminster Hall. Eleven have taken place so far this session; Thursday’s three will take the total to 14.

Measured against the number of backbench business days in the Chamber, the rate has risen from 0.68 statements per day last session to 0.92 so far this session. One possible explanation is that committees now have a larger window in which to secure a slot. Previously, a statement had to take place within five sitting days of the report’s publication or the inquiry’s announcement. In April, the House agreed, on the recommendation of the Backbench Business Committee, to double the window to 10 sitting days from the start of the current session.

The procedure gives committees valuable visibility but limited leverage. There is no substantive motion, no vote, and no requirement for an immediate Government response. The occasion puts a committee’s conclusions on the parliamentary record but does not oblige Ministers to accept or act on them.

↖ Contents

The Commons will hold a general debate on Thursday (12 November) on the seven Nolan principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty, and leadership.

This week’s debate was sought by Liberal Democrat MP Susan Murray, who presented her application to the Backbench Business Committee in March. Noting that the Nolan principles are now over 30 years old, she argued that repeated failures across politics and public institutions had eroded trust, and that the House should reaffirm the standards expected of everyone holding public office.

The application encountered an initial procedural complication. The Nolan principles had already been debated during the 2024–26 Session, so the Committee told Murray that a further debate would require a substantive motion on which the House could reach a decision, rather than another general debate. But the application has outlived that Session. With Parliament now in the 2026–27 Session, the earlier debate is no longer a procedural obstacle and the subject can return as a general debate. But debating the principles again may not take matters much further. A general debate allows MPs to express concerns, but there will be no substantive proposition before the House and no vote.

↖ Contents

Remember, parliamentary business can change at short notice so always double-check the Order Paper on the relevant day if you are interested in a particular item of business.

Library briefings for each day: Commons · Lords

Not sitting (last day of autumn recess)

2:30pm, Oral Questions

3:10pm, Health Bill: Committee of the Whole House (day 3 of 7)

↖ Contents · What’s On Monday: Lords

2:30pm, Justice Questions

3:30pm, Ten Minute Rule: English Ethnic Identity (Census Particulars) Bill to include English ethnic identity within the census in England (Josh Babarinde, Liberal Democrat)

Financial Services and Markets Bill: Second Reading

Adjournment Debate: Future of Stepping Hill Hospital (Tom Morrison, Liberal Democrat)

Westminster Hall: 11:30am, Anti-social behaviour; 1:00pm, National Highways’ traffic management policies on the M5 in Somerset; 4:30pm, Potential merits of a fishing and seafood sector strategy; 6:00pm, Condition of school buildings in Rushcliffe constituency; 6:30pm, 125th anniversary of the submarine service

Delegated Legislation Committee: 6:00pm, Motion relating to Financial Assistance to Industry

2:30pm, Oral Questions

3:10pm, Courts and Tribunals Bill: Committee of the Whole House (day 1 of 2)

Interrupted around 7:30pm (dinner break) for Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill: Second Reading

Grand Committee: 11:00am, Draft Delegated Legislation: Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (Continuation) Order 2026; Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 (Display of Tobacco Products (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2026; Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 (Age Verification Defence to Underage Sales) (England and Wales) Regulations 2026; Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Cryptoassets) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2026; Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Addition of Relevant Enactments) Regulations 2026; International Claims Commission for Ukraine (Immunities and Privileges) Order 2026; 3:45pm: Debate on the initial proposed National Policy Statement for Fusion Energy Generation

↖ Contents · What’s On Tuesday: Commons · Lords · Committees

11:30am, Women and Equalities Questions

12:00 noon, Prime Minister’s Questions

12:30pm, Ten Minute Rule: Compulsory Purchase (Fees) Bill to exclude legal and professional fees from certain compensation payable by local authorities (Leigh Ingham, Labour)

Opposition Day (5th allotted day): Leader of the Opposition

Adjournment Debate: Powers of the Charity Commission (Ashley Dalton, Labour)

Westminster Hall: 9:30am, hunting trophy imports; 11:00am, the potential merits of appointing a Minister for Neurodiversity; 2:30pm, Government policy on Rosebank oilfield; 4:00pm, Government support for the West London orbital; 4:30pm, safety of emergency workers

Delegated Legislation Committees: 2:30pm, draft Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Cryptoassets) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2026 and draft Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Addition of Relevant Enactments) Regulations 2026; 4:30pm, draft Employment Rights Act 2025 (Unfair Dismissal) (Removal of Limit on Compensation) (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2026; 4:30pm, draft Licensing Act 2003 (Permitted Temporary Activities) (Amendment) Order 2026

3:00pm, Oral Questions

3:40pm, Youth Justice Board of England and Wales (Restoration of Powers and Responsibilities) Bill: Committee of the Whole House (Private Member’s Bill, Lord Oates, Liberal Democrat)

Health Bill: Committee of the Whole House (day 4 of 7)

Grand Committee: 4:15pm, Debate on the Science and Technology Committee report “Rebuilding forensic science for criminal justice: an urgent need”; Debate on the Environment and Climate Change Committee report “Surviving drought: reclaim the rain”

↖ Contents · What’s On Wednesday: Commons · Lords · Committees

9:30am, Digital, Culture, Median and Sport Questions

10:30am, Business Statement

Select Committee Statements: Defence Committee report “Defence in the High North”; Health and Social Care Committee report “The obesity moonshot: making obesity a political priority”

Backbench Business: Debate on the 110th anniversary of the Battle of the Somme; Debate on the Nolan principles

Adjournment Debate: Animal cruelty and domestic abuse (Sir John Hayes, Conservative)

Westminster Hall: 1:30pm, Select Committee Statement on the Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee report “China and the UK economy”; 1:50pm, suicide prevention training for fire and rescue services; 3:10pm, the impact of VAT policy for the hospitality sector on local economies, employment and growth

Public Bill Committees: 11:30am and 2:00pm, Highways (Financing) Bill; 11:30am and 2:00pm, Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill oral evidence

11:00am, Oral Questions

11:40am, Debate: The Autumn Budget 2026

↖ Contents · What’s On Thursday: Commons · Lords · Committees

9:30am, Private Members’ Bills: beginning with Homes and Planning Bill: Second Reading (Andrew George, Liberal Democrat)

Not sitting

↖ Contents · What’s On Friday: Commons

Both Houses will resume at 2:30pm on Monday 16 November 2026. Our next Bulletin will therefore be published on Sunday 15 November.

↖ Contents

Help keep this Bulletin free for everyone. The Bulletin is free and we want to keep it that way. But as a charity we rely on donations to fund the research and production costs that make it possible. A small regular donation – even £3 a month, less than a cup of coffee – helps us keep this Bulletin freely available to everyone interested in Parliament. Donate here