header-logo header-logo

Maiden speeches: an unnecessary distraction?

19 March 2020 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7879 / Categories: Features , Public , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
17921
Neil Parpworth believes maiden speeches in the House of Commons in their current form are an extravagance which ought to come to an end

As a result of the 12 December 2019 General Election, 140 new MPs were elected to the House of Commons. This was rather more than in 2017 (87 new MPs), but less than in 2015 (177 new MPs). Provided that a new MP takes the oath or affirmation, they are able to participate in parliamentary proceedings and will have the opportunity in due course to deliver a ‘maiden speech’. In the House of Commons briefing note ‘Maiden Speeches: guidance for new Members’ (December 2019), it is stated that this “will be an important personal moment and a significant event in your parliamentary career”, such that a specially printed copy of the speech can be obtained from Hansard. It is open to question, however, whether this long-established tradition ought to be allowed to continue in the 21st century House of Commons.

Making a maiden

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll