Ayoub Khan MP: speeches

Speeches

• 25 Mar 2026 · NHS Continuing Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I wholeheartedly agree. One of the difficulties in Daniel’s case was that an assessment found that there was no material change in the level of support that he required, but a reassessment was conducted subsequently, and the funding was then withdrawn. I met Daniel, and I felt so sorry for his parents, who are now struggling because of the withdrawal of the funding. It is shocking that someone can sit somewhere and make a desk-based reassessment of someone’s condition and then strip them of funding. I am confident that the family will ultimately secure funding, but the stress that they are going through is simply unacceptable. I urge the Minister to review Daniel’s case. I recall writing to him on this very matter in July last year. He replied that the operational delivery of CHC is the responsibility of integrated care boards. Care boards do indeed have delegated autonomy to make funding decisions, but they must follow national guidance, and the Government have the power to act when those duties are breached. I would welcome the Minister’s reflecting on his stance on this matter. At the very least, will he meet me, Linda and Dave so that he can gain insight into how the system is failing people like Daniel? Caring for our loved ones should not be subject to a cliff edge or an all-or-nothing gamble. If we want to build an NHS fit for the future—one that delivers care closer to home and puts patients first—then fixing CHC must be a core part of that mission.

• 25 Mar 2026 · NHS Continuing Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I totally agree about the need for parity of service across the United Kingdom. That must be not only the right thing, but the only thing to do. A recent report from the Nuffield Trust describes CHC as an “all or nothing” affair for applicants that creates a cliff edge between carers getting full NHS funding and paying out of pocket to care for loved ones. But although chance certainly plays a role in determining who gets funding and who does not, there is also a sinister practice at play—one that violates the very principles of our health service and inflicts unnecessary hardship on families across the country. That is the ever more common practice of revoking funding, and making vulnerable people appeal and fight for the right to retain the funding they should have had all along. We see the same pattern emerging with benefit claimants and home-to-school transport for 16 to 18-year-olds with special educational needs and disabilities. In the vast majority of cases, after all the time and energy wasted by applicants and assessors, the decision is overturned.

• 25 Mar 2026 · NHS Continuing Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered NHS continuing healthcare. It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. The continuing healthcare—CHC—system should represent the very best of our national health service, offering 24-hour, round-the-clock care for approximately 50,000 of the country’s most vulnerable adults, but at the moment the reality is quite the opposite, exposing some of the system’s innermost failures. For those who may be unaware, continuing healthcare is a package of care arranged and fully funded by the NHS for adults with significant ongoing health needs. Crucially, eligibility is based not on diagnosis, but on whether a person has a “primary health need”. If they qualify, the NHS covers all their care costs; if they do not, they are left to navigate a complex and means-tested social care system, often at catastrophic personal cost to their carers and family. CHC was created to protect those with the most severe and complex needs, but today it often does the opposite: it confuses, delays and denies. CHC is a lifeline for people with the most complex, severe and often life-limiting conditions, making it all the more crippling when funding is stripped at short notice without a clear reason, and yet there is a body of evidence, which is growing year on year, to suggest that the system is unfair, inconsistent and often inaccessible to those who need it most.

• 25 Mar 2026 · NHS Continuing Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. There is an unnecessary burden on families to start off with, and when the appeal process can take months and it is difficult for families to secure representation—they may end up representing themselves—that causes them further anxiety. I agree that there needs to be a review of the whole system, because it is a further bottleneck in an already very stressful situation for families. I will come to an example of a family I am trying to assist in that regard. In many cases, decisions are overturned and the status quo is restored. We must be honest about what is driving this. It is the same culture of cuts and austerity, sweeping across this Government and the previous one, that is to blame for the crisis. Independent analysis shows that CHC spending decreased by 42% in 2024 compared with previous years, even as need continued to grow. That is not because people are suddenly less ill, but because access is being constrained. Investigations have also revealed that private companies are being contracted to review CHC eligibility and, in some cases, to reduce care packages, raising serious ethical concerns about profit being tied to cuts in vital care provision. A system where decisions are not always driven by clinical need but by cost containment will inevitably fail to protect and care for some of our most vulnerable individuals. My constituent Daniel has experienced the injustice of the CHC process at first hand. He suffers from severe learning difficulties, autism, anxiety and behaviour of distress, and is cared for by his elderly parents, Linda and Dave. In order to receive the proper care, Daniel is supported every day by six personal assistants, all of whom are being paid thanks to CHC funding. After an annual review in January last year, it was confirmed that his condition had not changed and therefore his funding ought to continue, and yet, since a spontaneous and unwarranted review of the decision, Daniel’s eligibility has been under excessive and unreasonable scrutiny. The reassessment directly contravened the national framework for CHC, which states that a full reassessment must be arranged only if there is “clear evidence of a change in needs to such an extent that it may impact on the individual’s eligibility”. The saga was concluded two weeks ago when, despite providing no clinical rationale for the “significant change” in Daniel’s medical needs, the care board revoked his funding, leaving his parents to foot the bill for his care. For more than a year, Linda and Dave have carried on their fight against the care board’s impropriety, which has understandably come at a great financial, emotional and personal toll, all while continuing to care for Daniel. Unfortunately, Daniel’s story is neither exceptional nor surprising. It shows how many of those reliant on Government support are being stripped of it in the blink of an eye. The stories of Daniel and so many others show exactly what is wrong with the system. Since 2017, despite an ageing population and increasing complexity of need, the number of people eligible for CHC has fallen by more than 9%. Over the same period, the proportion of people found eligible after a full assessment has dropped dramatically, from around 31% to just 18.6%. That means that more people are being assessed, but fewer are receiving support. For families, that often means a gruelling process, characterised by a mire of lengthy assessments, appeals, delays and uncertainty, at the most difficult time of their lives. Confusion, exhaustion and distress are mainstays of that process. Even for those who are fortunate enough to be granted CHC funding, it can be withdrawn upon review, leaving families in a state of permanent anxiety that they could be plunged back into crisis at any moment. Behind every statistic is a family caring for a loved one with dementia, a neurological condition or even a severe disability—a family forced to give up work, drain their savings or even sell their home, all while navigating a system that is rigged against them from the start.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Antisocial Behaviour · Hansard source

  More

  May I join Members in condemning the attacks last night on the four ambulances? In my constituency of Birmingham Perry Barr, antisocial crime is on the rise, yet since 2010, West Midlands police has had 520 fewer officers to tackle it. Now, thanks to this Government leaving a funding shortfall of £41 million, residents must either pay more council tax to fill the gap or lose another 80 police officers. Labour promised more police officers on our streets, and now they are pedalling backwards on their word. Why should the people of Birmingham, who have seen their council tax rise by 24% over three years, be squeezed even more to keep what little police presence they have?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Every credible legal analyst will state that this attack on Iran by Israel and the US was illegal. There was never an imminent threat, and the Caroline principles incorporated into the UN charter were simply not engaged. Given that Trump now seeks to withdraw from this war, and given the disquiet in this House about whether our base use is offensive or defensive in nature, will the Defence Secretary allow a parliamentary debate in which Members can vote on whether we should allow our bases to be used? If not, why not?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Hatzola Ambulance Attack · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the additional support that the Government are providing to our Jewish community. As a Muslim, I know how reassured the Muslim community was by Government support following arson attacks at a mosque. One of the biggest problems is on social media, particularly X, where extreme antisemitic remarks have been made about this incident. We know that this voluntary ambulance service supports not just the Jewish community but all communities. The perpetrators of this abhorrent and callous act must be apprehended. Does the Minister agree that it is important to expedite their apprehension so as to send a message of deterrence that says an attack on any community member or community asset is an attack on every single person in this country?

• 17 Mar 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  The one thing Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu knew full well when they entered this illegal war unilaterally was that the strait of Hormuz would be a place of strategic weaponry, if you want to call it that, for Iran to use against all other nations. Some European countries have unilaterally now decided to open negotiations with Iran, such as France and Italy. They have done that because they are not participating in any direct military action. My question for the Foreign Secretary is: if the Iranians said, “We would allow UK ships to pass through the strait of Hormuz, but you must prevent America from using your base,” would we comply?

• 17 Mar 2026 · Youth Unemployment · Hansard source

  More

  Across the west midlands, around 29,000 young people are unemployed, with unemployment rates in parts of Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Walsall running at double the national average. I welcome the measures announced today, but how will the Government ensure they reach young people in high unemployment areas such as Birmingham Perry Barr, where approximately 2,000 young people are unemployed, rather than resources being spread thinly across the counties and the country?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  Mandelson wanted more than half a million pounds to walk away from his job. This Government gave him £75,000; that went to someone who the Prime Minister said was clearly dishonest and lied. Will the Government be seeking to recover that public money—taxpayers’ money?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Strait of Hormuz · Hansard source

  More

  Over the weekend, France and Italy opened talks with Iran to allow their ships to pass through the strait of Hormuz. France has limited America’s use of its bases to non-combat missions only; Italy has refused to help altogether. With this Labour Government giving a licence to American assets on British bases, there is no hope of our striking a similar deal to let our ships through at present. Will the Government confirm that they will keep all options on the table—including suspending American military operations from our bases—because British citizens must come first, and they must be shielded from bearing the brunt of America and Israel’s illegal war?

• 16 Mar 2026 · GP Contract · Hansard source

  More

  Many of the surgeries in my constituency have faced enormous pressure when having to deal with patients who cannot get an appointment, so I welcome the additional support that will come to our communities, especially inner-city communities. The Laurie Pike and al-Shafa medical centres in my constituency do so much work on prevention; I hope the Minister will join me in commending them on the work they do. Will there be ringfenced funding for preventive work in areas such as cardiovascular disease detection, respiratory illnesses and diabetes?

• 16 Mar 2026 · United Nations Charter · Hansard source

  More

  10. What steps his Department is taking to meet its legal obligations under articles 2(4) and 51 of the United Nations charter.

• 16 Mar 2026 · United Nations Charter · Hansard source

  More

  When nations commit war crimes, the UN charter makes it plain that other nations must not provide any support or assistance. Trump and Netanyahu started this illegal war and, in welcoming US aircraft on British bases so that they can be loaded with 2,000 lb bombs, the UK is clearly aiding and abetting that, in breach of international law. Right now, we are helping to escalate this conflict, which is bringing us to the brink of global recession. That is why the British public do not support our involvement in this war. Would the Defence Secretary like to explain why they are wrong?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Immigration Policy · Hansard source

  More

  I am very perplexed, and indeed I suspect that most Brits will be perplexed. We have more than 650,000 job vacancies, of which more than 165,000 are for unskilled workers. Why are we not dealing with the refugees—processing their applications, giving them training, putting them into jobs and enabling them to earn some money, rather than paying their hotel costs?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Social Cohesion Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for introducing this definition of anti-Muslim hostility. Many facets contribute to causing division in society, not least the cost of living. When we saw the march in London, a large number of the audience there were racist, but a large majority of the people attending were not racist, they were just concerned about the cost of living. How does the Secretary of State see this definition incorporated, in terms of holding our far-right media and social media platforms to account, and how do we balance that with addressing the cost of living crisis?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Middle East: Defence · Hansard source

  More

  I mean no discourtesy to the Secretary of State, but in his statement, which lasted for 10 minutes, there was an omission: the murder of 165 young children at a school, which was allegedly targeted by a Tomahawk cruise missile in a double-tap strike. The Government talk about calling out war crimes—in particular, violence against women and girls—but this does very little to support that proposition. Will the Secretary of State condemn that attack? Would he like to explain what he has done to talk to his alleged allies about this particular strike?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Environmental Protection and Biodiversity · Hansard source

  More

  The Wood Lane playing fields in my constituency are in difficulty because the council faces bankruptcy and is looking to sell property. Does the hon. Member agree that something needs to be done about that?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Small Charity Sector · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I thank the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for securing the debate. From my short time as the Member of Parliament for Birmingham Perry Barr, and having spent over a decade as a local councillor, I know how small charities form the very lifeblood of our area. Although larger organisations no doubt do incredible amounts of good, I have found that it is the smaller groups that can only be found at the grassroots level that can reach out to the people who are most in need. I have had the privilege of meeting and working with many small-scale local charities in my time, and I am always encouraged by the hard work and decency of those looking to make our community a better place. Let me give three quick examples. The George Coller Memorial Fund is a local charity that has punched well above its weight over the years, campaigning successfully to enable schools to store and administer emergency inhalers—vital treatments—and recently campaigning to make a dose counter mandatory in emergency inhalers, which we are working on. I want to recognise and pay tribute to the work of Faizan Global Relief Foundation UK, which mobilised at the peak of the bin strikes, when there were piles and piles of rubbish across the city of Birmingham, to help the local community. The foundation also does enormous work with our youth, trying to address knife crime, substance abuse and so much more. I also want to raise the plight of Kevin, a retiree who volunteers day and night to run the Bethany food bank in my constituency. The charity feeds over 1,000 people a month, but receives its donations largely in the form of food rather than cash. With Birmingham city council applying only limited relief on business rates, Bethany food bank is at risk of shutting down permanently amid a cost of living crisis. Those sorts of small organisations do enormous work in constituencies up and down the country. When they are being squeezed at the same time as the cost of living is spiralling out of control and families are so desperate, we must support organisations that do not require an enormous amount of financial support but actually deliver so much. Will the Minister indicate what additional grants the Government can make available to smaller charities, because they are the charities that have the greatest impact?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Funeral Premises: Environmental Health Inspections · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for securing this debate. I know that he is deeply passionate about our shared work in the all-party parliamentary group for funerals, coroners and bereavement, where we have learnt about the cases he described. Does he agree that the Minister would benefit from meeting our APPG to discuss the funeral sector and how it can develop the clear standards, robust oversight and proper enforcement it so desperately requires?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Gaza: Support for Children · Hansard source

  More

  Amid the illegal attack on Iran by America and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu has closed all the border crossings into Gaza. What does the Minister know of this? Food and humanitarian aid are once again being blocked.

• 3 Mar 2026 · Community Cohesion · Hansard source

  More

  I gently ask the Minister, in relation to Pride in Place funding: why is Birmingham Perry Barr, which is at the centre of Birmingham and has the highest level of deprivation, not being given any money? Why should those residents feel left out?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Community Cohesion · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Rugby (John Slinger) for securing this debate on this important issue. Community cohesion in Birmingham has never been an abstract concept. It is a lived reality: it is the church that hosts a food bank for families of every background, the neighbour who checks in during Ramadan, and the gurdwara serving langar to anyone who walks through its doors. Our city works because, despite our differences, we choose to stand together. In recent years, we have seen how damaging political language can be. When politicians make statements that create suspicion or feed division, the consequences are felt far beyond Westminster. Words matter and narratives matter. When race or religion is weaponised for short-term political gain, it erodes trust between communities who have lived side by side for generations. We have also seen the constant drip-feed of misinformation from some politicians and commentators—misinformation that paints entire communities as problems to be solved, rather than partners in building our future. That kind of politics does not strengthen Britain; it weakens it. It does not make us safer; it makes us more fractured. No one knows that fact more than the people of Birmingham, who have seen their city trounced by people who take no effort to understand it. During the bin strikes, a narrative from outside was not about the council refusing to negotiate or the impact of years of austerity, but about blaming residents for the mess and asking silly questions like, “Why don’t they simply clean up the streets and take their rubbish to the tip?” We even saw the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) roam the streets for an hour, blaming residents for the supposed lack of integration in an area that not only hosts a vibrant community, but has been decimated by 14 years of austerity under his previous Government. We saw that again during the Maccabi Tel Aviv saga, when those raising legitimate concerns about safety and cohesion were smeared as extremists. We see the same story every time. The people of Birmingham have been subject to ridicule from outsiders who have made no effort to understand them—from politicians to media outlets who have stirred hate and division against a community they have never tried to understand. That is why measures such as the Hillsborough law matter so much. The principle behind the Hillsborough law, a duty of candour on public authorities and officials, is about more than one historical injustice. It is about changing the culture of public life and ensuring that those in authority act with honesty, transparency and responsibility. The tone set at the top shapes the reality on our streets, and that does not apply just to Birmingham. The same goes for all the towns and cities up and down the country that have been neglected, underfunded and stripped of their identities. Those places have been left behind by successive Governments and are now being kicked while they are down. It is in these places, where people have lost all sense of community, that resentment and hate take hold. Many will channel that anger into taking to the streets to raise flags or mount protests at asylum hotels and, before someone knows it, they are not a true patriot unless they look on non-white neighbours from abroad, even fellow British nationals, with contempt. Of course, the exception is those they know on a personal level. That is why it is so crucial that we get this right, not just by holding politicians and media outlets to a higher standard, but by investing in the very places that have been deprived of the means to understand and interact with one another. Community centres, youth clubs and grassroots sports are all things that we need to create cohesion, yet they are dwindling in supply. Birmingham Perry Barr lost out on £20 million over 10 years in Pride in Place funding. We have the highest unemployment, the highest inequality and high rates of homelessness and crime, but we still received none of the Pride in Place funding. There are 10 Birmingham constituencies, eight of which are represented by Labour parliamentarians. My constituency of Birmingham Perry Barr was left out. Birmingham has always shown that people of different races, religions and backgrounds can live, work and thrive together, but we must protect that legacy. We must challenge misinformation wherever we see it. We must refuse to let division define us, and we must demand better from those who represent us. Will the Minister address my point about funding for Birmingham Perry Barr? Pride in Place funding should be for communities that have the highest levels of deprivation in all indices. Birmingham Perry Barr has, but it has not received that funding.

• 2 Mar 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Prime Minister for accepting that the reason the British Army is not involved is that it would be unlawful and illegal. Thereby, what America has done is illegal—an illegal attack that has led to the death of 167 girls aged between seven and 11. There are people sitting in this Chamber who oppose refugees coming to this country; they are the very same people who are asking for war. Would he be surprised if we had a sudden influx of refugees as a result of what has happened?

• 2 Mar 2026 · Representation of the People Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Is not the real fear that young people are now able, through social media and other forums, to identify which political personality is telling the truth and which one is saying what is false, and the Conservatives are quite concerned that they will lose even more power?