Indefensible? How Government told Parliament about the Strategic Defence Review

News

Indefensible? How Government told Parliament about the Strategic Defence Review - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 95

6 Jun 2025

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.

LISTEN

Another big Government announcement – and another row in the Commons row about why it wasn’t made to MPs first. We look at why ministers keep breaking their own Ministerial Code by choosing to make important announcements to the media instead of in the Chamber – and wonder whether, in a shifting media landscape, they might be less likely to muddle their message if they returned to delivering statements on major issues like their Strategic Defence Review from the Despatch Box.

The Lords vs the Tech Lords: the Data Use and Access Bill has become the focus of a prolonged tug-of-war between the House of Lords and the Commons. At the heart of the dispute is whether tech companies should be allowed to use content to train artificial intelligence systems without compensating the original creators. Peers in the Lords have repeatedly amended the bill to protect creators copyright by requiring payment and safeguards, only for the Government to reject those changes in the Commons. As the Lords look set to concede, Ruth and Mark explore what this clash reveals about the limits of the upper chamber’s influence — and the growing political weight of Big Tech.

Critics claim the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill hasn't had enough scrutiny. Armed with figures comparing the times spent debating other legislation, Ruth and Mark reject the claim that the Bill has been under-debated compared to other legislation. The problem, they argue, is that Westminster’s law-making processes are generally ineffective and badly in need of an upgrade.

A Speaker’s Conference is digging into how to improve security for MPs and candidates. Ninety six percent of MPs say they have personally experienced threatening behaviour during their time in office. But tackling political intimidation is anything but straightforward. Ruth and Mark unpack the Conference’s interim findings and recommendations — and explore where its spotlight will fall next.

← Back to Parliament Matters homepage

Listen on our YouTube channel (captioned)

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Resources

House Magazine, Ruth Fox and Matthew England, The assisted dying bill: Rushed and lacking scrutiny, or unfairly criticised?
Modernisation Committee, Access to the House of Commons and its Procedures, Ruth Fox, 10 June 2025
Speaker's Conference interim report on abuse and intimidation of MPs and election candidates

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.

[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 d'Arcy. Coming up this week,

[00:00:27] Ruth Fox: Indefensible? How the government told Parliament about its Strategic Defence Review

[00:00:32] Mark D'Arcy: The House of Lords versus the Tech Lords - a long running battle over AI and copyright goes into its fourth round this week.

[00:00:39] Ruth Fox: And 96% of MPs say they have personally experienced threatening behaviour since they began working as an MP.

[00:00:46] The Speaker's Conference asks what is to be done?

[00:00:57] Mark D'Arcy: What indeed, but we'll get onto that in just a moment. First of all, Ruth, let's talk about the somewhat chaotic launch of the government's big Strategic Defence Review. Ministers appeared to be live on all channels and indeed all radio programmes as well. Ministers were everywhere. Newspapers had been fully briefed, and then eventually the House of Commons got a chance to have a look at the contents of the Government's big rethink of the UK's defence priorities.

[00:01:22] And Mr. Speaker was not amused.

[00:01:24] Ruth Fox: He wasn't, he was pretty angry. So angry in fact that he called two Urgent Questions. One from the Shadow Leader of the House, Jesse Norman, on why were ministerial statements not being made to the House of Commons, and then another on future of the nuclear deterrent from the Chair of the Defence Committee in advance of the statement that was just about to be made by the Defence Secretary John Healey on ...

[00:01:46] Mark D'Arcy: Which one assumes would've covered that very point. But, uh, but it's, it is one of the few things the Speaker has to make life difficult for governments when they insist on, on doing this. And all Governments do insist, I'm afraid, on making their big announcements in ways that maximise their public impact. And they don't think that making those big announcements just in the House of Commons and then doing a publicity blitz after the event has anything like the same impact with public opinion, which is what they're trying to influence, especially when Governments are in a hard place as, yeah, as this one currently is.

[00:02:16] Ruth Fox: I think that there's some argument to that in terms of the communications and wanting to get out and through the newspaper. But the problem was clearly journalists over the weekend had had sight of it. There were stories trailed in the Sunday papers, which particularly annoyed the Speaker, and then it became clear that journalists had been effectively offered a sort of a lock in reading room to read the report, but some had already previously had it. There was then some suggestions that defence industry personnel, senior officials from defence contractors had had sight of it before MPs. That particularly annoyed the Speaker because he was concerned about things around market sensitivity and so on. And there is a principle at stake, and I think this is why it's possibly different for this announcement than it might be for some other announcements in that what we are talking about is not just any old policy, we're talking about A, the defence of the nation and B billions and billions and billions of pounds.

Full transcript →

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? 2-6 March 2026

The newly elected Green MP, Hannah Spencer, will be introduced to the House of Commons. A Ministerial Statement is expected on the situation in Iran, while the Foreign Secretary faces MPs’ questions. Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver her Spring Statement, and MPs will consider billions of pounds in revised departmental spending through the Supplementary Estimates. The Commons will debate the Representation of the People Bill, the contribution of Commonwealth troops in the First World War, and the future of palliative care. In the Lords, Peers will scrutinise the Crime and Policing, Tobacco and Vapes, National Insurance Contributions, and English Devolution bills, as well as debate the India trade deal and International Women’s Day. Select committees will hear from Northern Ireland, Home Office and Cabinet Office ministers, military experts on the Armed Forces Bill, and Bank of England officials.

News / Mandelson, Andrew and Epstein: Should there be parliamentary committee of inquiry? A conversation with Tom Tugendhat MP - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 133

After the Greens’ Gorton and Denton by-election win, we assess the fallout: pressure on the Prime Minister, possible party-switching, shifting alliances, and whether mainstream parties’ sub-30% vote share could revive electoral reform. Tom Tugendhat MP calls for a parliamentary “super-committee” to probe the Mandelson–Mountbatten-Windsor saga. Plus: Speaker drama over Mandelson’s arrest, and looming battles over the Spring Statement and billions in public spending. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

News / The forgotten pioneer: Who was Margaret Bondfield, Britain’s first female Cabinet Minister? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 132

Why is Britain’s first female Cabinet Minister largely forgotten? Historian Nan Sloane discusses her new biography of Margaret Bondfield, the trade unionist who became the first woman in the British Cabinet. Rising from harsh shop-floor conditions to national prominence, Bondfield took office as Minister of Labour in 1929 at the onset of the Great Depression. As economic crisis split the Labour Party, her reputation never recovered. Was she a pioneer, pragmatist, or unfairly judged? Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

News / What happens when you lose the party whip? A conversation with Neil Duncan-Jordan MP - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 131

Labour MP Neil Duncan-Jordan reflects on rebelling against the whip and calling for Keir Starmer to resign, as we assess the fallout from the Mandelson–Epstein affair and its implications for the Government’s legislative programme and House of Lords reform. We examine Gordon Brown’s sweeping standards proposals, question whether they would restore public trust, revisit tensions over the assisted dying bill in the Lord and discuss two key Procedure Committee reports on Commons debates and internal elections. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

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.