Labour's welfare meltdown - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 99

News

Labour's welfare meltdown - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 99

4 Jul 2025

It’s been a bruising week for the Government, as a Labour backbench revolt forced ministers to gut their own welfare reforms live in the House of Commons. We explore why Sir Keir Starmer appears to have such a poor grip on parliamentary management. Plus, House of Lords reform expert Professor Meg Russell explains why the hereditary peers bill may be a once-in-a-generation chance to tackle deeper issues — like curbing prime ministerial patronage and reducing the bloated size of the upper chamber. And in Dorking, faith and politics collide over assisted dying.

Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

LISTEN

Has the Government’s complacency in managing Parliament finally caught up with it? It’s been a difficult week for Ministers, as a backbench Labour revolt forced a dramatic U-turn on plans to cut billions from Personal Independence Payments. With Rachel Reeves’ financial strategy in tatters, questions are mounting about Keir Starmer’s authority — and whether weak parliamentary management is to blame. We explore how it all went wrong, what it reveals about No.10’s approach to Parliament, and what needs to change to stop further unravelling.

Is the Government missing its last chance at real House of Lords reform? As Ministers push ahead with plans to remove the remaining hereditary Peers from the House of Lords, new polling from the Constitution Unit at UCL suggests the public wants more ambitious change. Professor Meg Russell joins us to warn that the current legislation could be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to enact deeper reforms — including curbing the Prime Minister’s power to appoint new Peers and reducing the overall size of the House of Lords.

Plus, church and state collide over assisted dying in Dorking. Liberal Democrat MP Chris Coghlan has been barred from receiving communion at his local Catholic church due to his support for Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. Is this an unacceptable case of religious interference in politics, or simply the inevitable fallout when faith and legislation collide? Ruth and Mark explore the implications and ponder the precedents from both Britain and the United States.

Finally, we tackle listeners’ questions on why primary legislation was needed to implement the Government’s welfare reforms, inquorate votes in the House of Lords, the ability of Peers to amend the assisted dying bill and the mysterious books beside the Mace.

← Back to Parliament Matters homepage

Listen on our YouTube channel (captioned)

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Our guest

Professor Meg Russell

Meg Russell is Director of the Constitution Unit and Professor of British and Comparative Politics at University College London (UCL). Having previously worked at the House of Commons and the Labour Party, she joined the UCL Constitution Unit in 1998. Her work since then has particularly focused on the UK Parliament. From 2001 to 2003 she served as a special adviser to the then Leader of the House of Commons, Robin Cook. She has also advised the House of Lords Appointments Commission, the Wright Committee on Reform of the House of Commons, the Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, and the Lord Speaker’s Committee on the Size of the House of Lords. She has been Academic Secretary of the Study of Parliament Group and a member of the editorial board of the academic journal Political Quarterly and the Hansard Society’s journal, Parliamentary Affairs. She was elected a Fellow of the British Academy in 2020, and in 2021 was named Political Communicator of the Year by the Political Studies Association. She is author of numerous works, including Legislation at Westminster in 2017 and The Parliamentary Battle over Brexit in 2023.

Resources

Constitution Unit, UCL

Public wants House of Lords reform to go further: to limit appointments and the size of the chamber
Meg Russell, 10 reasons why the hereditary peers bill should be amended to constrain Prime Ministerial patronage and the size of the House of Lords, 1 July 2025

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. Coming up this week,

Ruth Fox: The Chancellor cries on the front bench after Labour MPs wreck her financial strategy.

Mark D'Arcy: The public wants wider Lords reform on the government's plan to get rid of hereditary peers.

We talk to Lord's expert, Meg Russell,

Ruth Fox: And religion collides with politics as an MP is denied holy communion because of his vote for the assisted dying bill.

Mark D'Arcy: But first, Ruth, let's talk about Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, and more particularly about the collapse this [00:01:00] week of her financial strategy. The Chancellor was seen shedding tears during Prime Minister's Questions seated next to Keir Starmer, and whatever was behind that set the markets a tremble that the possibility that she might be removed.

But what was really going on, the really big news about this week was not whatever was going on with Rachel Reeves' life, and we were assured that this is a personal matter that wasn't to do with politics. The real big news was the way that Labour MPs basically blew a multi-billion pound hole in her financial calculations.

The savings that she had hoped to get out of personal independence payments and social security cuts were more or less sunk in the Commons. And now she has a real problem.

Ruth Fox: Yeah, well, dare I say it, Mark, we saw live this week that Parliament matters. Ouch. And you know, MPs are not lobby fodder. And big rebellion, even when the government filleted its own proposals on the [00:02:00] floor of the House of Commons as was happening, during the debate itself.

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? 16-20 March 2026

The Defence Secretary, John Healey, will face questions from MPs. The Grenfell Tower (Memorial Expenditure) Bill and the Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill will be fast-tracked through all their Commons stages in a single day. MPs will debate online safety, an e-petition calling for automatic by-elections when MPs defect to another party, and the Conservative Party will choose the Opposition Day debate. The Justice Committee will hear from the Victims’ Commissioner on the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Public Accounts Committee will question officials about the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster, and experts will give evidence on the Representation of the People Bill. In the Lords, Peers will continue scrutiny of the Crime and Policing, Pensions Schemes, and Finance (No. 2) Bills. Lord Arbuthnot will ask about Fujitsu contributing to compensation in the Post Office Horizon case, and Peers will debate terrorism, abortion, AI, and assisted dying.

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

Blog / The Backbench Business Committee 15 years on: Has it given backbench MPs a stronger voice in the House of Commons?

Fifteen years after its creation, the Backbench Business Committee has become an important mechanism through which MPs can secure debates and raise issues in the House of Commons. Drawing on new research analysing debate transcripts and interviews with MPs, Ministers and officials, this blogpost analyses the Committee’s impact on parliamentary agenda-setting and cross-party campaigning. It highlights how the Committee has transformed opportunities for backbenchers while identifying ongoing challenges around participation, transparency and the Committee’s potential role in representing backbench interests more broadly.