Joy Morrissey MP: speeches

Speeches

• 18 Mar 2026 · Fuel Duty · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare), who eloquently championed his local area and covered every point that we could possibly raise—I shall follow humbly on his coat-tails. Fuel duty is a war on the motorist. It is an attack on hard-working families who have scrimped and saved to drive their child to that special holiday or even to do the school run each day. This tax is regressive. It will hurt normal, hard-working families across Beaconsfield, Marlow and the south Bucks villages. It will also hurt small and medium-sized enterprises, care workers and all the key workers who have to drive from outside Buckinghamshire to work in the area. We have care workers who come from other counties to work in Bourne End, Wooburn and Marlow because the cost of living is so high. That extra driving, that extra cost on their transport, will be devastating to our local care-working community and to those who provide vital services, such as our firefighters and police officers, who often have to drive to the fire station or police station where they are based. That extra cost is the difference between a family making it each month and slightly going under. That is who we are speaking for today: the people who are paying their taxes, working hard and wanting to do the right thing but are being punished by this fuel duty increase. My constituency is also impacted by rises in off-grid heating oil prices. I myself have off-grid heating oil, and many of my constituents in Dorney, Wooburn, Bourne End, Flackwell Heath and Iver are impacted by price increases. Although we are near London, we are actually very rural. I have more pensioners per capita than pretty much anywhere else—you might be the No. 1 winner, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I would come second. This extra cost will push my pensioners into poverty. They are barely making ends meet right now. They are humbly going about their business, but they all need transport as well. We have poor transport links so people need to use their cars, and my pensioners will be adversely affected by this fuel duty increase. It is incredibly unfair that the increase is coming in now given that world events are causing oil prices to increase anyway, so families, workers and the taxpayer will be further punished. It would be hard to have this debate without mentioning my right hon. Friend the former Member for Harlow, Robert Halfon, who led the charge on fuel duty. For years, he was the passionate voice making this point clear across the House: high fuel duty taxes are regressive because they affect working people the most. They are a brake on economic growth. We all saw the golden moment on Sunday morning when the harsh inconvenience of the facts hit the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero: that 38% of the cost of petrol is down to fuel duty, a tax entirely in the hands of the Government. This Secretary of State, who could power the entire country with hot air, seemed to get the message slowly but surely, and there is no problem to which the answer is not a faster and more ruinous race to net zero, putting ideology ahead of working families. To govern is to choose, and this Government always choose the most damaging economic pathway for families.

• 18 Mar 2026 · Fuel Duty · Hansard source

  More

  It is a shocking burden and one that many people and hard-working families will not be able to bear. I am often told by the London elite that people need to switch to electric cars and do all these other things, but many people cannot afford an electric car or the cost of electricity, or even to put fuel in their petrol car. Families will be at breaking point, and they have no alternative to taking their child to school or the doctor. That extra burden can push a family completely over the edge. We need to make our economy competitive again. We need to look at ways to make energy and fuel affordable for everyone. Working people are being saddled with higher costs and taxes while more money is being pumped into benefits Britain because of the weakness of a Prime Minister without a backbone. It is time to put working people first. It is time for another Government U-turn.

• 12 Mar 2026 · International Women’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. I support the hon. Member in pursuing this wonderful statue for Madge and lend my full support to that campaign. It is fitting that the UN’s theme for this year’s International Women’s Day is “Rights. Justice. Action. For ALL Women and Girls”. Those are three important words—rights, justice, action—that matter to women and girls. It is fitting because there are many areas where rights, justice and the call to action have been pursued by inspirational women in the face of hostility not dissimilar to what Nancy Astor faced in her time. Many Members across the House have also faced similar challenges. No matter what party they are from, I must respect the courage of many women who have gone before me, blazing the trail by coming to this Chamber and fighting for our rights, including the right to be heard. It is thanks to their contributions and sacrifice that we are allowed to debate today. I would like to mention a Member of this House who has battled for safe spaces for women and sex-based rights, which is the foundation from which true protection for women and girls needs to start. None has fought that battle with more energy, resilience and determination than the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield). She has fought tirelessly to protect children and women and girls, and deserves our thanks and respect for all she has done. In the other place, my noble Friends Baroness Jenkin of Kennington and Baroness Davies of Devonport led the way in protecting women and girls; they too faced much hostility, but were never deterred from doing what they believed to be right. A champion of women-only spaces and the defence of biological sex outside of this House is J. K. Rowling, a woman who has been nothing short of inspirational. She has faced down personal threats to her safety, determined to ensure that the rights of women are heard. The Leader of the Opposition has also firmly taken a stance to protect women and girls for years when very few joined her to stand up for those safe spaces. It is for that reason that we must also be clear that, as a society, we have failed many young girls for far too long.

• 26 Feb 2026 · Independent Faith Schools: VAT · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. This issue is very close to my heart, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing it to Westminster Hall. I see how the issue affects my constituents, and the Conservatives care very much about it because it goes to our fundamental values. Do we believe that people should have individual choice—parental choice—for where they send their child to school, or should the state control everything? This feels like a very vindictive tax, there to punish those who want choice in religion and in education, and have aspiration for where they send their child. This tax does not punish the wealthy; it punishes those who are working to barely get by. As the hon. Member for Strangford said, it punishes those who are saving up, not going on holidays, and sacrificing everything to send their child to the faith school that they choose. That may be because of their religious belief or because that school offers additional SEND provision that they cannot get in a mainstream school. I know parents who have sent their child to a school that is not of their faith because it is the only alternative to bullying or other challenges that their child is facing in school. These schools have been a lifeline for so many parents. Parents have come to me with tears in their eyes, saying that they can no longer send their child to the best school for them, because the state has said that they do not deserve to go to that school, as they do not have enough money to pay for the extra tax. It is a vindictive tax. We are the only European country that is taxing education. How can that be right? This limits choice. I believe in personal choice, competition, and letting people make their own decisions on where they send their child to school. This policy restricts that. It means that more children will flood into the state sector and compete for SEND places. Many children will be unable to find another school of the same denomination and practise their faith. I am glad that the Conservatives have pledged to reverse this policy, because I do not think we are a country that wants to limit personal religious freedom, personal choice and parental aspiration. The state does not always know best. If your child has autism, is being bullied, or is not getting the faith education that they need in the state sector, that is what independent faith schools exist for. If you wish to sacrifice your income and other comforts to send your child to that school, it should be your choice. As Conservatives, we believe that the policy should be scrapped, and we will continue to advocate for that. I know that Members have many fun and eventful things to do today, so I will conclude. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford for bringing this debate to the House, because it is important that we do not forget the impact this policy will have in the next few years. Sacrifice is no longer enough for people who desperately want to educate their children in a way that we took for granted 20 years ago. We took for granted that our child could be raised in the Jewish faith, in Islam— [ Interruption. ] Is there a time limit, Sir Alec?