News

Will Parliament pay a price for promises to WASPI women? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 61

20 Dec 2024
© WASPI / Facebook
© WASPI / Facebook

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

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

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

3-D visualisation of the royal chapel of St Stephen, Westminster

MySociety

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.

Subscribe to Parliament Matters

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.

Blog / Once again, there is still no alternative: the costed proposals for Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster

The Restoration and Renewal Client Board’s latest report once again confirms what Parliament has known for nearly a decade: the cheapest, quickest and safest way to restore the Palace of Westminster is for MPs and Peers to move out during the works. The “full decant” option was endorsed in 2018 and reaffirmed repeatedly since. Remaining in the building could more than double costs, extend works into the 2080s, and increase risks to safety, accessibility and security. With the Palace already deteriorating and millions spent each year on patchwork repairs, further delay would itself be an expensive course of action, one that defers decisions without offering a viable alternative.

07 Feb 2026
Read more

News / A Humble Address: How MPs confronted the Mandelson scandal - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 130

It has been a bruising week for the Prime Minister after the House of Commons backed a Conservative “Humble Address” demanding documents on Sir Keir Starmer’s vetting of Lord Mandelson for the Washington Ambassadorship. We explain how the procedure works, what role the Intelligence and Security Committee may play in decisions on disclosure, and how legislation to strip a peerage could be introduced. Plus, the latest on the Restoration and Renewal of Parliament as yet another report lands with a new set of costings. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

06 Feb 2026
Read more

News / Why MPs can’t just quit: The curious case of the Chiltern Hundreds - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 129

Why can’t MPs simply resign, and why does leaving the House of Commons still involve a medieval-sounding detour via the Chiltern Hundreds or its less glamorous cousin the Manor of Northstead? This week we unravel the history, constitutional logic and legal fudges behind this curious workaround, with some memorable resignations from the past along the way. We also assess the Government’s legislative programme as the Session heads toward its expected May close, including the striking lack of bills published for pre-legislative scrutiny. Finally, as Parliament begins the five-yearly process of renewing consent for the UK’s armed forces, we examine why an Armed Forces Bill is required and hear from Jayne Kirkham MP on how her Ten Minute Rule Bill helped extend the new Armed Forces Commissioner’s oversight to the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

01 Feb 2026
Read more

News / Assisted dying bill: How could the Parliament Act be used? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 128

As the assisted dying bill grinds through the House of Lords under the weight of more than a thousand amendments, Lord Falconer has signalled that time is running out. With the Bill unlikely to complete its Lords stages this Session, he has openly raised the possibility of using the Parliament Act to override the upper House in the next Session. In this episode we explore what that would mean, how it could work in practice, and the political choices now facing ministers and Parliament. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

30 Jan 2026
Read more

News / Who really sets MPs’ pay – And why you might be wrong about it. A conversation with Richard Lloyd, chair of IPSA - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 126

What are MPs actually paid and what does the public fund to help them do their job? In this conversation with Richard Lloyd, chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) we explore the delicate balance between supporting MPs to do their jobs effectively and enforcing strict standards on the use of public money. We discuss how IPSA has shifted from a rule-heavy “traffic cop” to a principles-based regulator, why compliance is now very high, and the security risks and pressures facing MPs‘ offices as workloads rise and abuse becomes more common. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | ACAST | YouTube | Other apps | RSS

21 Jan 2026
Read more