The Westminster lensArchive · §02 Speeches · 1,031 contributions

Speeches by Mullan.

Every Hansard contribution by Kieran Mullan this parliament, most recent first. Back to the MP page for the headline figures and analysed positions.

Showing 341360 of 1,031 contributions · most-recent first

← PreviousPage 18 of 52Next →
DateDebate & contributionWords
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fifth sitting)

I draw the Committee’s attention to my remarks at the outset of our proceedings: our judicial system, victims and defendants and how we manage crime in this country are my personal priorities. That is primarily the reason why I sought to be elected to this place, so I will never disagree that justice should get a highe

crime
594
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

This is a great opportunity for me to learn and understand an element of the system that I did not understand—I know about it, rather than understand it. I will go back to the point that we have made repeatedly. We are designing a system from scratch here. We have the opportunity to do things exactly as we want to. We

crimefiscal-policy
274
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

We are still no further forward on understanding the three-strikes cases that I talked about.

crimefiscal-policy
15
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

That was not the point I was seeking to make, so I thank the hon. Lady for clarifying. I sometimes wonder what victims think. Do they sometimes follow a case, hear the evidence and then think it should be getting more than the magistrates’ limits? Do they question whether the magistrates, who have a preliminary view ab

crimefiscal-policy
690
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I beg to move amendment 41, in clause 3, page 5, line 38, at end insert— “(7) Where a court has determined in accordance with this section that a trial is to be conducted without a jury, the defendant may request a different judge to preside over the trial than the judge who made the determination that the case was sui

crimefiscal-policy
570
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I rise to speak in support of amendment 40 in my name and to consider other related amendments. At this point, we are considering in more detail the allocation decisions, how they work in practice and the likely legal risks and pitfalls inherent in the new process. I will begin by laying out the process that will exist

crimefiscal-policy
1,836
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I welcome that clarity; it will be interesting to see what happens as a result of that. I take what the Minister has said in good faith, and assume that she would not say that unless she was certain. That point is about the question of judicial review. The Opposition believe that there should be a right of appeal separ

crimefiscal-policy
147
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I beg to move amendment 40, in clause 3, page 5, line 38, at end insert— “(7) Where a court has determined in accordance with this section that a trial is to be conducted without a jury, the defendant may appeal that decision if he can demonstrate that the circumstances of their case are such that trial without a jury

crimefiscal-policy
126
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

As I said at the outset, there is a fundamental safeguard of people being able to have a judicial review of the allocation decision. It is all well and good for the hon. Member for Amber Valley to talk about the scenarios where it sails plainly, everyone is in agreement and it is all good. However, if it did not, at th

crimefiscal-policy
165
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I think the Minister would accept that it is a high bar, but also that it is sometimes successfully crossed. Allocations are sometimes successfully challenged, which demonstrates just how important this provision is. If it is there and is used when things have gone so significantly wrong as to meet that high bar, it is

crimefiscal-policy
79
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I want to pick out a couple of points. The Minister has criticised the risk of retrials, and we have made several points about how other elements in the Bill will increase that risk through successful appeals and so on. I accept the Minister’s point that it is unlikely that these things will happen, but this is not so

crimefiscal-policy
227
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

As I pointed out, at some point in these proceedings, even the Justice Secretary did not think it necessary. When he was considering these matters, the Justice Secretary agreed that it was perfectly reasonable for it not to be retrospective. We are actually making an argument with which, at one point, the Justice Secre

crimefiscal-policy
55
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

Yes, but the question is not whether the six-year sentence is reasonable, it is whether the mode of trial in reaching that sentence was fair. The Government agree that the preferable mode of trial in all other scenarios that could lead to a sentence of six years is a trial with a jury. Yet we could have people expectin

crimefiscal-policy
187
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I absolutely think that we should leave the ECHR, because I do not like the mechanism that it operates under, but I absolutely support some of the rights and protections in principle that it advocates. I am struggling to see why there is a contradiction. There are lots of times when we might support elements of proposa

crimefiscal-policy
67
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

Does the PPS want to intervene? No, I did not think so. As we have agreed, judicial review exists for an allocation decision by the magistrates. The Minister has quite rightly set out that that is a very high bar and is not a right of appeal. In that regard, the Minister is fair to say that our amendment is not directl

crimefiscal-policy
202
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I hope the Minister will go on to clarify whether it is actually subject to judicial review.

crimefiscal-policy
17
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

I talked about how the medical picture can evolve in a worsening situation. We can also get that situation in reverse. For example, in A&E, the A&E consultant’s interpretation of an X-ray, to determine whether someone has broken a bone, can be a key fact in deciding the classification. But when that goes to a r

crimefiscal-policy
125
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

Will the Minister give way on that point?

crimefiscal-policy
8
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

Will the Minister give way on that point?

crimefiscal-policy
8
16 Apr 2026Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting)

This is very important. I have read the legislation to the Minister, and highlighted the point that a non-conviction element of the Crown court proceedings cannot be taken to judicial review. The Minister should either say that I am wrong about that and that something like an allocation decision in the Crown court can

crimefiscal-policy
105
← PreviousPage 18 of 52 · click a debate to open the transcript with this MP’s speeches highlightedNext →
Sources
SourceHansard · official report
MethodEach row is one contribution (intervention or speech). Word count from the official text.