Joy Morrissey 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.

10 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 23 Jun 2026 · Defence Spending and Readiness · Hansard source
    More

    We are facing dangerous and uncertain times, in a world that has dramatically changed in just a couple of years. To set the record straight following the discussions across the House, it is worth pointing out that Europe is on a path of rearmament. In 2025 the European Union launched its rearmament plan, ReArm Europe, with the goal of upping spending across Europe by 2030. As many of my hon. and gallant Friends have pointed out, we are at the bottom of the pile now on rearmament. Even just a few years back, we were at the top of the pile for NATO spending and our defence capability. How have we fallen so dramatically in comparison with our European neighbours? Earlier this year Germany launched its modern-day comprehensive military concept—the first for a very long time—with the goal of building the strongest conventional army in Europe. Things have radically changed in but a few years. How have we gone from being at the top of the pile in terms of our NATO contributions to being at the bottom? It is because of political choices, dithering and delay from this Government—a Government who think nothing of spending £330 billion a year on welfare benefits but cannot muster the courage to face down their Back Benchers to put our brave armed servicemen and women first; a Government who think our veterans are fair game for their Islington-dining-set lawyer friends and not deserving of our enduring thanks and protection from relentless lawfare. To govern is to choose. This Government chose an extra £18 billion of welfare spending this year—an extra £18 billion on showing Britain that work does not pay. That is £18 billion that could have secured 250,000 extra soldiers, according to a recent report from the Centre for Social Justice. Instead, it went to “Benefits Street”. It could have been spent on 200 fighter jets, according to the CSJ report. Instead, it went to “Benefits Street”. It could have built 15 warships. Instead, it went to “Benefits Street”. When Labour Back Benchers want action on welfare, nothing stands in this Government’s way, but when our country needs to show our enemies we are investing to protect our country and our future, we get weakness and delay. We may have lost the Prime Minister, the Defence Secretary and the Armed Forces Minister, but the same Government with no sense of putting our country first remains. I say to the Government: stop the lawfare on our veterans now. Make the tough decisions on welfare that we on the Opposition Benches will support. Put a defence investment plan forward now that will make our enemies think twice. We are saying goodbye to a Prime Minister without a backbone. He has left our country weaker, poorer and less safe. But the country cannot wait for Labour’s internal indulgence. It is time for the investment in our armed forces that the moment demands—investment that transcends party and puts our country first. It is about Britain and our role in an unsafe and dangerous world. It is time to act and give our armed forces the investment they need.

  • 18 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to be responding again to the Leader of the House. It is the day after England started their world cup campaign, and it is fair to say that they already have our hopes up; I am a bit cheered out. Today, many of our colleagues are pounding the pavement for the by-elections. I am sure that the Leader of the House is waiting with bated breath to see if the self-anointed king of the north is shortly to begin his long march south to save the Labour party from the Greens. Or maybe the Leader of the House is waiting more keenly for the next intervention from the former Health Secretary, the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), bemoaning the Prime Minister’s “poor leadership, poor judgment and bad politics”. While the comedy of errors of this Labour Government is playing out, the serious issues facing our country go unaddressed: grooming gangs, the murder of Henry Nowak, the two-tier justice system, benefits Britain and, in particular, the irresponsible failure of the Prime Minister and this Labour Government to support our armed forces with a defence investment plan fit for the dangerous world we face. The Prime Minister and the Labour Government are prepared to see our veterans subjected to continuing persecution and relentless lawfare. It is a failure of leadership. It is a failure to put our country before party. It is a failure to put our brave servicemen and women before personal political survival. It is a failure to protect those who have fought to keep us safe and free. It is easy to say that the first duty of Government is to protect the country; it is much harder to make the choices needed to deliver on that duty. We know that the root cause of that failure is that Labour MPs put “Benefits Street” before anything or anyone else. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions kindly confirmed that when he told Peter Mandelson that the only question Labour MPs ask him is: who can they tax, in order to pay more benefits? The Prime Minister did not have the backbone to confront his Back Benchers and tackle the out-of-control welfare bill. There will be £333 billion of welfare spending this year—£18 billion higher than last year. As the Centre for Social Justice pointed out recently, that £18 billion could have been invested in our armed forces. It could have bought 200 fighter jets or 12 warships, or funded 250,000 extra soldiers. Labour is taking the wealth created by hard-working families, small businesses and millions of Britons, and making it clear that in Labour’s Britain, working just does not pay. In Labour’s Britain, “Benefits Street” comes first. That brings me back to Andy Burnham, a twice-failed Labour leadership candidate who has shown that he has exactly the same flexibility of principle as the current Labour leader. This is a twice-failed Labour leadership candidate who thinks that governing will be as simple as out-Greening the Greens—spend more, tax more, repeat. This Labour party can never and will never change. Our armed forces, hard-working families and the small business across Britain deserve better. It is time for this Government to keep their promise, or go.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Murder of Henry Nowak · Hansard source
    More

    Henry Nowak’s tragic murder is, sadly, stark proof that we have become a country where we no longer treat everyone as equal under the law. Does the Home Secretary agree it is time to put a stop to the political correctness that has overpowered common-sense policing, and will she commit to ending the nonsense of police cultural competency training being put ahead of protecting every citizen regardless of race?

  • 1 Jun 2026 · Child Sexual Offender Data · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. The petition calls on councils, the police and the CPS to publish their child sexual offender data on nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion. I cannot overemphasise the importance of that in making sure that the victim’s voice is heard. I would like to use an historical example from the Sikh community in my constituency, who came forward when the child rape gang scandal was in the news. So many of my Sikh constituents came to me in tears, publicly. They said, “We came forward saying that our girls were being raped and targeted in schools. We were trying to protect them, but we were told by the police, politicians and the media that it was an Asian problem and that we needed to just deal with it within our own community.” They were ignored—no one wanted to listen to them, because it was Pakistani Muslims who were attacking their girls. They were trying to do things to protect them, and they have historically been ignored and told it was an Asian problem that they could deal with themselves. I was not the MP at the time, but I have dealt with cases, including historical cases, that have come to me. It would be remiss of me not to say that I believe it is vital that the religion, immigration status, ethnicity and nationality are mentioned in reporting, because how can we target specific areas of criminality if we do not know those key details? Another historical example that occurred before I was an MP involved a girl who was abducted, raped and killed in an area for which I was a councillor. The person who committed those crimes was from an eastern European country that was exporting its criminals. It would let them out of prison, and they could either go to the UK or go back to prison—those were their choices, so we were getting a huge number of sexual offenders and murderers coming to the UK. Without recording ethnicity data in the police stations in areas where crimes were being committed, we could not link those things together. If Interpol did not release that information, we were not aware of that crime, which is why it is essential that we publish that information. When we look at mass rape gangs and the protection of group-based child sexual exploitation, which is a very specific kind of exploitation—the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) spoke about the horrific, sadistic abuse and torture that these girls have endured—no one wants to hear these things out loud. It is disgusting; it is an abomination; it is a shame and a blight on our country. It would be remiss of us not to do everything in our power to uphold the rule of law and ensure that any ethnic or religious groups that were targeting those girls are brought to justice. If this was a Catholic rape gang, or a Protestant rape gang, or something like that, we would be shouting from the rooftops that something needed to be done. We need to be honest about what is happening, where and why these abuses are taking place, and what ethnic and religious groups are targeting our young women.

  • 19 May 2026 · High Speed 2: Impact on Communities · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. Our constituencies border one another, and I remember visiting him in his constituency at Dogs Trust. I remember the vibration, noise and disruption from HS2. We could feel the vibrations when we were there. It is about not just the construction, but the noise pollution and disruption to residents in Hillingdon and Buckinghamshire. Our communities were completely disrupted because of HS2 construction. Until my hon. Friend’s council took HS2 to court—that was a great moment—little regard was given to the amount of countryside, land and green belt being destroyed by HS2.

  • 22 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source
    More

    Those in the other place have asked us to reconsider Lords amendments 439E and 439F, which compel the Home Secretary to review the proscription of groups linked to the Iranian armed forces, including the IRGC. There can be absolutely no doubt about the threat that Iran and its proxies pose to this country and our national security. In 2015, terrorists linked to Iran were caught stockpiling explosives on the outskirts of London. In 2020, amid protests in Iran, the IRGC sought to assassinate two journalists on British soil. Just last year, the IRGC was linked to an attempted attack on the Israeli embassy in Kensington, which was foiled by counter-terrorism police. The organisation has been linked to at least 20 credible threats in the UK. Even beyond the direct risk posed by IRGC terrorism, the organisation is responsible for funding and supporting other extreme groups in this country, and has worked closely with criminal gangs to undermine our national security. We will be able to combat that threat only if we are willing to tackle it head-on, using every power available to us to do so. To that end, the very least we can do is make it harder for Islamist extremist groups to operate legally in this country. By proscribing the IRGC and other groups linked to the Iranian armed forces, Ministers would be able to protect not only those being attacked—actually, it is our Jewish community that we are really thinking about at this difficult time. These Lords amendments can only be a good thing. They would help to strengthen those protections. When Labour Members were on the Opposition Benches, many of them agreed. In April 2024, the now Foreign Secretary called for exactly this policy. Yet now, they are refusing even to review the proscription of groups such as the IRGC, which fuel the Islamist cause and are directly linked to the Iranian armed forces. I urge the Minister and her colleagues on the Government Benches to change their minds and accept the Lords amendments. The threat is far too grave to be ignored. By burying their heads in the sand, they will not make the problem go away; they will only put our country and its people more at risk.

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Knife Crime · Hansard source
    More

    Will the Minister speak to Sadiq Khan and ask him to get a grip on the knife crime epidemic that is plaguing London? Can we increase the stop-and-search powers of the Met police so that they can actually do their job and provide the enforcement that people across London are asking for? My husband was attacked by someone with a knife while he was caring for his mother-in-law, and one of our wonderful members of staff in the Tea Room was attacked in Brixton by someone with a knife just last week. This is a problem across London. My residents want to feel safe. Will the Minister do something to stop the knife crime epidemic that is plaguing London?

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

    I thank the hon. Member for that very nuanced contribution. I also thank her for being the first female of colour at the Dispatch Box, leading the way, and Chairman of a Select Committee. She is someone who all Members of this House, from every party, respect and admire; I thank her for everything she does. As we try to protect young women and girls, there has been no clearer or more scandalous a failure than the rape gangs scandal that we are confronting now. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) and my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) who have raised this matter in Parliament, along with Alex Stafford, who is no longer in this place, and the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson)—a cross-party effort—who have raised this issue time and again, while very few other Members of this House did. I commend them for being brave enough to do so. [ Interruption. ] Yes, there are so many I am not able to thank today, but I want to recognise them as best as I can. Baroness Casey has said that too many shied away from the issue of ethnicity in the rape gangs scandal. Those hon. Members did not, and that shows real leadership by Members in a cross-party way to protect women and girls. This International Women’s Day, let us unite in clear determination. Where Nancy Astor led in confronting injustice for the voiceless, the parliamentarians of today will follow. We will speak up for the right of women to women-only spaces. We will make sure that, no matter the community, ethnicity or religion involved, we will never again let a scandal like the rape gangs go unchallenged. As someone who has fought for years for women and girls and fought against sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation, I think that every Member of the House should look at how we can protect women and girls, no matter who or where they are. I believe that is something we can all agree on. For International Women’s Day to matter, it must be more than symbolic. It must combine celebration with action. It must be a further catalyst for rights, justice and action for women and girls. It must harden our resolve to ensure safety for all women and girls. It must set in clear focus our collective determination that this will be a country in which women and girls from every race, religion and creed are able to contribute their talents, with the certainty that we will keep them safe. For rights, justice and action, our women and girls deserve nothing less.

  • 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 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to be doing business questions and responding to the right hon. Gentleman. He was a Chief Whip—a Whip, like me, but more grand—and he was much respected, revered and sometimes feared by Members of this House. I will be honest and say that even I was terrified of him, and we are not even in the same party. It is a pleasure to be here today. As we reach the fourth anniversary of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, it is important that we restate our unwavering support for the people of Ukraine. We must never abandon them. I know that it has been a challenging few weeks for Labour Members—we have all been there—who have come to realise what the British people have long understood, which is that we have a Prime Minister who has U-turned on every principle he held and every promise he made. He is a Prime Minister elected on a promise not to raise taxes on working people, and then he raised them. He is a Prime Minister who promised to be pro-business, and he has become the most anti-business Prime Minister of modern times. He is a Prime Minister who promised to raise standards in public life, but he is presiding over an ever-growing mountain of Government scandals. “The grown-ups are back in charge, no more sleaze”—how is that going for them? While the Prime Minister stumbles on, his Ministers are out of control and out of their depth, and the British people are paying the price. Let me start with the Justice Secretary. This week we saw that he intends to pursue his reckless plan to cut jury trials: a principle that has existed for over 800 years; a principle that he wants to wreck without proper debate in the House. Will the Leader of the House give me a categoric assurance that we will have time in the House to debate the changes that the Justice Secretary wants to make before we get to May? Let me turn to the Education Secretary, who is also the Equalities Minister. There can be no justification for the delay in providing guidance on single-sex spaces. The Supreme Court ruled a year ago that biological sex defines a woman—a fact that most people knew without needing a judge to tell them. I do not know whether the Education Secretary deep down still does not agree, but the inaction must end. Will the Leader of the House confirm when the guidance will be laid before the House, and grant a debate in Government time on the unacceptable delays and risk it has proved to women and girls? Let me turn to the Chancellor. This week the Chancellor’s entrepreneurship adviser shamefully said that Britain does “not need more restaurants”, laying bare what we already knew: that this Government are determined to tax our hospitality businesses into extinction. Will the Chancellor apologise for her adviser and sack her, or back her and agree with her anti-hospitality stance? Will the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on our pubs and hospitality, so that Members—at least, those on the Conservative Benches—can show their support for the hospitality sector? We want to ensure that the crippling tax burden is removed from the hospitality sector. It is now clear that we have a Prime Minister with an out-of-control Government buried deep in scandal after scandal, failure after failure and broken promise after broken promise; a Prime Minister without principle; a Prime Minister without purpose; and a Prime Minister without a future. The British people deserve better.

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: 26Communities and local government26Culture, media and sport: 4Culture, media and sport4Defence and foreign affairs: 15Defence and foreign affairs15Democracy and constitution: 15Democracy and constitution15Economy and business: 31Economy and business31Education and skills: 11Education and skills11Environment and energy: 4Environment and energy4Health and care: 2Health and care2Housing and planning: 2Housing and planning2Immigration and borders: 3Immigration and borders3Justice and policing: 10Justice and policing10Social security and pensions: 5Social security and pensions5Transport: 7Transport7Unclassified: 24Unclassified24
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 government26
Culture, media and sport4
Defence and foreign affairs15
Democracy and constitution15
Economy and business31
Education and skills11
Environment and energy4
Health and care2
Housing and planning2
Immigration and borders3
Justice and policing10
Social security and pensions5
Transport7
Unclassified24

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