Karl Turner MP: speeches

56 published records · newest first.

Speeches

24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Order. Interventions need to be a bit shorter. Thank you.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Order. I am going to impose an informal five-minute limit on speeches.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Order. Before I move on to the next speaker, can I just say something about housekeeping? If a right hon. or hon. Member intends to mention another Member of this House—specifically, the leader of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition—they should inform that Member. I am sure it was done inadvertently, but I say that just in case other Members wish to make mention of it.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Thank you for the entertaining contribution, Mr Morrison.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
On a housekeeping matter, I should say that it is terribly hot in Parliament today, so Members and officials are very welcome to remove their jackets.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Thank you, Mr Shannon—nearly bang on time.
24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source
More
Order. Quickly, if you do not mind. We have an informal five-minute limit.
24 Jun 2026 · Farming: Financial Sustainability · Hansard source
More
Order. There has been a lot of chuntering while the shadow Minister has been on his feet. If you wish to try to intervene on the shadow Minister, please do—he may give way. However, do not chunter constantly when people are trying to make a speech.
24 Jun 2026 · Farming: Financial Sustainability · Hansard source
More
I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in this debate. Given the number of Members wanting to take part, I have to impose a formal time limit of one minute and 30 seconds—90 seconds. I call Olly Glover.
24 Jun 2026 · Farming: Financial Sustainability · Hansard source
More
Order. I suspect that the shadow Minister is going to bring his remarks to an end very soon.
24 Jun 2026 · Farming: Financial Sustainability · Hansard source
More
Order. I remind Members that there are lots of people who want to speak. Interventions really do need to be short.
24 Jun 2026 · Public Libraries: Bournemouth East · Hansard source
More
I remind Members that interventions must be short.
24 Jun 2026 · Public Libraries: Bournemouth East · Hansard source
More
I will call Tom Hayes to move the motion; I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and from the Minister. As is the convention for a 30-minute debate, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.
20 May 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source
More
From 1997, the Prime Minister campaigned to scrap single-judge trials in Northern Ireland, yet when I opposed his Government’s plan to bring in single-judge trials in England and Wales, I received hostile briefings and smears about my mental health from the lads in No. 10 Downing Street. The Chief Whip is shaking his head, but he knows about it. The Prime Minister knows that my nephew Matty took his own life as a result of work-related stress as a young criminal lawyer. During Mental Health Awareness Week, when Ministers spoke with compassion about health and wellbeing, did the Prime Minister reflect on those hostile, discriminatory briefings, which he knew about and allowed to happen?
19 May 2026 · Jury Trial Proposals · Hansard source
More
Bin it!
19 May 2026 · Jury Trial Proposals · Hansard source
More
It must be absolutely exhausting for the Justice Secretary to hold on to an idea that only he still pretends is a good one. The Mayor of London is opposed to these changes and has tried to persuade the Justice Secretary to bin them. The Mayor of Greater Manchester is opposed to this ludicrous idea. The leader of Scottish Labour was opposed to this idea—and it does not even involve Scotland. The former Welsh First Minister was apparently opposed to it. When is the Justice Secretary going to get his ego out the way and bin the ludicrous idea of curtailing jury trials?
29 Apr 2026 · Community Infrastructure Levy: Homeowners · Hansard source
More
Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate.
29 Apr 2026 · Community Infrastructure Levy: Homeowners · Hansard source
More
Thank you, Sir Jeremy. The debate has also been very instructive to me. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the impact of the Community Infrastructure Levy on private homeowners.
29 Apr 2026 · Community Infrastructure Levy: Homeowners · Hansard source
More
I call Sir Jeremy to wind up—you may take your time.
29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source
More
Order. I remind Members that interventions should be short.
29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source
More
Richard Foord will move the motion. I will then call the Minster to respond. I remind Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for a 30-minute debate.
28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source
More
I am grateful to the hon. Lady, who is spot on. She leads me to the point raised by the Leader of the Opposition. I made a statement on social media that this motion is a stunt. A stunt is defined as an action designed to capture attention, but it is worse than that, actually. If I was to be cynical, I think the problem is that the motion is designed to capture Labour MPs. That is my concern. If it is said by our political opponents that Labour MPs came here today to block an inquiry of this House into the leader of the Labour party and Prime Minister, every single one of us will be accused by the electorate of trying to help the Prime Minister when he needed to face the music.
28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source
More
I completely agree with my right hon. Friend. I think I said on Twitter that he rarely gets things wrong—I was accused of being wrong for agreeing with what he said. In the time I have known him, my right hon. Friend has rarely, in my opinion, got it wrong. I think he is absolutely spot on. I am confident and convinced. I know the Prime Minister and know that he is not a liar. I know for a fact that he would not deliberately mislead. I think he would be exonerated. The trouble we now face is accusations from the electorate that we stopped the inquiry from happening in the first place and that the Prime Minister is guilty through the fact that we avoided it. Once we are in that position, we have a big problem, because you cannot prove something that never happened.
28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis). He and I rarely agree politically, but we do work together constructively in our constituencies for the betterment of the region. I start by way of an apology, because last week —I think this was mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition—I accidentally published correspondence between me and you, Mr Speaker. That was my mistake. I respect you, Mr Speaker, and I respect your office, so I apologise sincerely for that mistake, but it was my mistake. Do I believe that the Prime Minister deliberately misled this House? No, frankly. I have known him a long time, and I think I know him very well. It is fair to say that I describe him as a friend, and I think he has described me as a friend as well. Both him and I are lawyers by trade. In my honest opinion, there is no way that the Prime Minister would come here and deliberately mislead the House. However, there was a very significant difference, in my view, between what the Prime Minister said in answer to the right hon. Lady the Leader of the Opposition in last week’s Prime Minister’s questions, and Olly Robbins’ evidence the previous day. I think I am right in saying that the Prime Minister said there was “no pressure whatsoever”, intimating that that was the evidence that Olly Robbins had given to the Foreign Affairs Committee, but I watched every minute of it and that is definitely not the case. I have looked back, and I have checked Hansard and the evidence that was given by Olly Robbins. So I do think that there is a prima facie case for this matter to be investigated and for an inquiry to be conducted by the appropriate Committee of this House. I suspect that is not going to happen, because this debate is being whipped. I do not blame the Government for that—I find it unfortunate, to be honest, but they are not setting any new precedent; there is precedent for whipped scenarios in these situations in the past. But I do think that the Prime Minister would be vindicated.
28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source
More
I was about to say that my hon. Friend is a good man—he used to be my boss in the shadow Transport team, Mr Speaker, and he always tries to help me. I do not want to get into the stuff about Mandelson, as my hon. Friend hopes I will. But while I am speaking about the appointment of Mandelson, I will say this: I think that the Prime Minister appointed Mandelson in the national interest. I think he thought Mandelson would go to Washington, do a job in the national interest and deliver for the country. I think that is why he made the appointment. When it became clear, following the Bloomberg emails, that the appointment was politically difficult for the Government, the Prime Minister again did the right thing by dismissing Mandelson, very properly. Where I think the Prime Minister went wrong was in the shenanigans between those two points: looking around for an excuse for why it had gone wrong. “Just take it on the chin—deal with it!” That is the advice I would have given him, and that is why I am particularly disappointed. Colleagues who came in at the last general election might be disappointed in me for having the audacity to stand up and say what I happen to believe is the truth. I am sorry if they are not happy with me, but I am here to represent not my interests but the interests of those who elected me. That is what I will always do; whether it is against the policy of a Tory Government or my own Government, I will do what I think is in the interests of my electorate. Let me warn colleagues about what will happen if we are seen to go through the Lobby to defeat this process. It is a reasonable process; this is not the shenanigans that the Government have suggested in relation to jury trials. This does not involve a single judge, but a jury of peers—impartial, and made up of more Labour MPs than Tory MPs. The Prime Minister has nothing to fear. He ought to do the right thing. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) has suggested, he should have referred himself. That would have saved us all this messing around—debating the point and trying to justify why the referral is a bad idea or having two Committees running alongside each other. Utter nonsense! Get on with it, let it be dealt with and let us move on.

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →