Joe Morris MP: speeches

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026

How these years work

Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.

Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.

6 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Hidden Credit Liabilities: Role of the FCA · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) on securing such an important and timely debate. Catherine and Nigel Jarvis are of the type of local business owners who become the lifeblood of their communities and local economies. Creative, hard-working and passionate about the Northumberland countryside, in 2007 they looked to buy a property deep in the heart of Hadrian’s Wall country. Their dream was to raise their young family there, while renting out some of the rooms as a bed and breakfast. They approached HSBC for a loan of £175,000 to put towards the family home and business proposition. It should have been straightforward. As more than 40% of the house was always intended to be used as Catherine and Nigel’s main dwelling, under FCA rules their loan request to HSBC represented a standard home on which a normal residential mortgage should have been offered. An offer should have come from the regulated mortgage side of the bank, where all consumer protections under the mortgage conduct of business rules would apply. What happened instead trapped them in a relationship with HSBC for almost 20 years that has ruined their finances, their credit ratings, their health and their relationships. It has ruined their plans for the future and their dreams as small business owners and has had an irreversible impact on the lives of their two children, who have grown up in the shadow of this trauma. Instead of a residential mortgage, the couple were explicitly told that they had to agree to a commercial loan with a derivative product—in this case, an interest rate swap—as a condition, without which the Jarvises could not have bought their home. As every member of the public should be able to, they trusted the institution implicitly and proceeded. Even when the suggestion of a derivative product came as a surprise, they believed the bank had their best interests at heart. They were sold the swap on the understanding that it was insurance, protecting them from the risks of increasing interest rates with no up-front cost. The reality was that, on the very first day of the agreement, the product they were sold created hidden profit for the bank and an undisclosed credit line for the couple, acting effectively as a second, secret mortgage on their home. They began their SME journey with extra secured debt and a risk they knew nothing about. When rates crashed in early 2009, the undisclosed “out of the money” position covered by the hidden credit line exploded that risk, damaging Catherine and Nigel’s internal credit grade and making the loan look far riskier to the bank. Eventually, they were threatened with foreclosure unless they agreed to move into the bank’s restructuring unit, even though Catherine and Nigel never missed a payment and had no knowledge of the additional risk now being used against them. Since 2007, they have poured everything they could into trying to untangle themselves from an agreement they never would have signed had its true scope been disclosed to them. That has cost them hundreds of thousands of pounds, with an untold cost to their mental and emotional wellbeing and physical health. The then FSA’s conduct of business rules, which applied in 2007, stated that, before granting any credit or loan in connection with an investment business, such as the interest rate swap, the bank was required to make and record an assessment of the couple’s financial standing based on the information disclosed; take reasonable steps to ensure that arrangements for the loan or credit, and the amount concerned, were suitable for them; and obtain Catherine and Nigel’s prior written consent to the maximum amount of the loan or credit and to the amount or basis of any interest fees to be levied in connection with it. The bank did none of those things. In making the interest rate swap a condition of the loan it offered, it hid the credit risk from the couple and made applications for those credit facilities in their personal names without their knowledge or agreement. The hidden credit line made the agreement toxic from the start. A key factor in the lack of justice for Catherine and Nigel has been the FCA’s handling of hidden credit lines as a specific factor. At the initial IRHP review scheme, the FCA told reviewers to treat the hidden credit line as an internal bank risk and ignore it in considering almost everything that Catherine and Nigel suffered—directly derailing their claim to redress. The decision was made that the Jarvises’ losses were not foreseeable to the bank. In reality, their losses were not only foreseeable but expected, due to that hidden credit line. Hidden credit line practices and the profit motivations of banks have destroyed the lives and livelihoods of not only Catherine and Nigel but thousands of families and businesses across the country. I strongly support the calls for an investigation into the specific issue of hidden credit liabilities. Without that, and without a proper inquiry into the FCA’s own conduct on the matter, Catherine and Nigel, along with thousands of others, will continue to live without remedy for the financial destruction they have endured.

  • 27 Jan 2026 · Digital Exploitation of Women and Girls · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Sir Mark Hendrick) for securing this debate. It could not be timelier, because today represents a significant day for the constituency and community that I represent. Three years ago, Holly Newton lost her life at the hands of her ex-boyfriend in Hexham. She was a much-loved daughter, granddaughter and sister, a loving friend and a talented dancer. She was just 15 years old. Her ex-boyfriend had become increasingly obsessed, coercive and controlling in the lead-up to her murder, attempting to isolate her from friends and relentlessly bombarding her. Three years ago, he used Snapchat to track her movements before fatally stabbing her. The exploitation of technology was used as one of a range of tools to abuse Holly and ultimately to end her life. Devastatingly for her family, this abhorrent act of violence against Holly and the abuse that preceded it are not recognised as domestic violence, as Holly was under the age of 16. Micala, Holly’s mother, experienced a horrifyingly similar lack of support or acknowledgment of her own experience of domestic abuse as a teenager. Without recognition for domestic abuse victims under the age of 16, the system will continue to fail children across the country. I support the family and the campaign for Holly’s law, which would change the age of recognition and the development of relationship education for all young people. It is a critical flaw that we are not legally recognising victims when we know that they exist and that perpetrators in the realm of digital exploitation and abuse are themselves increasingly under the age of 16 or 18. I thank the Minister for the time she took to meet us last week, when we discussed the next steps for the campaign and addressed potential routes to reform. Technology is being weaponised against women and girls at a speed that far outpaces our systems to safeguard and support victims, prosecute perpetrators and intervene in cases before warning signs escalate into fatalities. I want to touch briefly on a case that my office has been working on with another constituent for well over a year. Not only has she suffered the most appalling digital violation, but she has been a victim of systemic flaws when it comes to this form of abuse. She discovered that her partner had spent several years taking non-consensual intimate photographic images of her and had posted them to websites and forums online. He was arrested, but while he was in custody he refused to share the PIN to access his device. The investigating force did not have the technology required to effectively review the device, which was key to the perpetrator’s activity. It had no way to prove where the non-consensual images came from or prove their existence with any electronic footprint on the suspect’s devices. With only circumstantial evidence based on who had access to the images, and with the suspect denying the accusations against him, the police could not meet the evidential threshold required for the CPS to charge. After being released, he was free to go straight back into the community, holding the very device that could be used to further perpetrate abuse, which he did. He turned to AI nudification apps to continue to produce non-consensual imagery of the victim and cover his digital tracks in the process. Investigation resources, appropriate technologies and the boundaries of the evidential threshold have all conspired against this innocent woman whose life has been devastated by digital and domestic abuse. I urge the Minister to look proactively at a cross-departmental approach to ensuring that our commitment to tackling digital exploitation is effective and addresses the systemic gaps.

  • 16 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    At the beginning of December, a sapling from the Sycamore Gap tree was planted by Micala Trussler and her family to commemorate what would have been her daughter’s 18th birthday. Since Holly Newton’s tragic murder, Micala has campaigned tirelessly to reduce the age limit at which someone can legally be classified as a domestic abuse victim. Will the Secretary of State join me in recognising Micala’s tireless campaigning, and meet Micala and me in the new year to discuss age classification for victims of domestic abuse?

  • 24 Nov 2025 · Gaza: Humanitarian Obligations · Hansard source
    More

    In addition to those who have plausibly been found to have endorsed or committed acts of violence against journalists, many have endorsed or committed acts of violence against aid and health workers. Does my hon. Friend agree that, as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) just said, urgent work is needed to record all those crimes and ensure that there is a reckoning for all those who have endorsed crimes against humanity and that justice is done?

  • 13 Nov 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source
    More

    5. What steps she is taking to help increase prosecution rates in cases of violence against women and girls.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Sudan · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the Minister for her answers today, and the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for bringing this urgent question to the House. The events in Sudan are undoubtedly an ongoing stain on the conscience of the global community. I am deeply concerned about increasing the accountability of those who are complicit or guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity. Following the question of my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Jon Pearce), can the Minister assure me and my constituents that she will leave no stone unturned in making sure that people face justice for the things that they have either enabled or taken part in?

Explore activity by topic or department

Contributions by debate topic

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.

View as listCommunities and local government: 18Communities and local government18Culture, media and sport: 9Culture, media and sport9Defence and foreign affairs: 11Defence and foreign affairs11Democracy and constitution: 3Democracy and constitution3Economy and business: 19Economy and business19Education and skills: 5Education and skills5Environment and energy: 13Environment and energy13Health and care: 1Health and care1Housing and planning: 2Housing and planning2Immigration and borders: 2Immigration and borders2Justice and policing: 6Justice and policing6Social security and pensions: 1Social security and pensions1Transport: 7Transport7Unclassified: 10Unclassified10
What this shows and doesn't show
4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained. Published records do not measure effort or effectiveness. Methodology.
Department or topicPublished records
Communities and local government18
Culture, media and sport9
Defence and foreign affairs11
Democracy and constitution3
Economy and business19
Education and skills5
Environment and energy13
Health and care1
Housing and planning2
Immigration and borders2
Justice and policing6
Social security and pensions1
Transport7
Unclassified10

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