Preet Kaur Gill MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 11 Mar 2026 · Public Body Data Collection: Sikh and Jewish Ethnicity · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an important point, and I really value his expertise in this House. Health inequalities are an area where we really see this issue being played out. The NHS is doing some directed work with the Jewish community; I know that, because it is happening in my constituency. That is because many Jewish women of Ashkenazi descent are predisposed to breast cancer, for example, and I can give lots of similar examples about the Sikh community. That is why we must consider the real-life experiences of those in our communities—they are not only invisible, but the health inequalities they face are not being addressed, as a result of the situation we find ourselves in.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Public Body Data Collection: Sikh and Jewish Ethnicity · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Sikh and Jewish ethnicity data collection by public bodies. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I welcome my hon. Friend the Minister to her role. For more than 40 years, Sikhs and Jews have been recognised in law as both ethnic and religious groups. That is long-established; it was confirmed by the 1983 Mandla v. Dowell-Lee judgment and reaffirmed by the Equality Act 2010. Yet, in practice, our systems still fail to acknowledge what the law clearly states. Nearly six decades after racial discrimination laws were introduced, public bodies still do not collect ethnicity data on Sikhs and Jews. This is not a technical oversight; it is a structural problem with the way public bodies and our Government collect ethnicity data—one that prevents us from understanding inequality, recognising discrimination and properly protecting communities the law says we must protect. In December 2024, I introduced my ten-minute rule Bill, the Public Body Ethnicity Data (Inclusion of Jewish and Sikh Categories) Bill. The Bill provides that where a public body collects data about ethnicity for the purpose of delivering public services, it must include specific Sikh and Jewish categories as options for a person’s ethnic group. This is about how the United Kingdom delivers its public services; it is not a theological discussion, as the Office for National Statistics has told all public bodies that they can use only—this is really important—the current ethnicity data categories for service delivery. Time and again, national reviews have shown that Sikhs and Jews are missing from the datasets that shape decisions about public services. In 2018, the Women and Equalities Committee heard that the Government’s race disparity audit had identified around 340 datasets across Government, yet not one included data on Sikhs. My own written parliamentary questions have revealed that Government Departments do not collect ethnicity data on Sikhs and Jews.

• 10 Mar 2026 · Community Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  3. What fiscal steps she is taking to support the community ownership of assets.

• 10 Mar 2026 · Community Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  After 14 years of Conservative austerity, many communities like mine have seen the assets that matter most to them hollowed out. I welcome the Government’s community right to buy, because putting local people in control of local assets is simply common sense. In my constituency, Woodgate and Bartley Green will receive £20 million through Pride in Place funding over the next decade thanks to this Government. Does the Minister agree that tackling barriers such as access to finance will help communities to take ownership of local assets and rebuild neighbourhoods?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q11. For too long, communities like mine in Bartley Green felt that decisions were made about them, not with them. Fourteen years of austerity did not just close neighbourhood offices and youth services; it broke trust. Through the Pride in Place initiative, the Government are helping residents to restore the Woodgate Valley café and so much more. What is the Prime Minister’s message to my constituents about how politics can be a force for good, and about how he will never walk away from my community and the country we love?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Supported Exempt Accommodation: Birmingham · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) for securing this debate. Since I was elected in 2017, issues with supported exempt accommodation have been persistent in parts of my constituency. When supported housing works, it changes lives: it helps prison leavers turn a corner, helps people get off the streets, and helps those battling addiction or mental illness rebuild their lives. But in Birmingham the system is not just being abused; it is broken. Supported housing provision in Birmingham has tripled since 2018. Today, nearly 33,000 people live in 11,200 supported exempt properties, and the cost has risen to almost £400 million—about half the entire country’s exempt spending. The council is clear that that level far exceeds local need, yet the sector continues to expand at pace. In September 2024, I secured a Westminster Hall debate on this topic. I was very pleased to hear the ambition of the newly elected Government to finally get a grip on the wild west sector, but unfortunately progress has been slow, and we are here again. Many people who enter supported accommodation do so because they have nowhere else to turn. Public funding is there to give them safety, stability and a pathway to independent living. When it works, it saves lives and money. As the National Housing Federation reports, quality providers save the public purse approximately £3.5 billion annually by alleviating pressures on the NHS, social care services and the criminal justice system. As I have seen time and again in my constituency, however, bad actors have been allowed to exploit the system and profit from the neglect of people who are suffering.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Supported Exempt Accommodation: Birmingham · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, absolutely. We are here to talk about when we can expect the regulations, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister. In 2021, I worked with the council, my local police inspectors and north Edgbaston residents to shut down Saif Lodge. That example makes the case for why regulation is needed. I carried out a spot check with the police and was appalled to find 25 residents with one support worker, and no staff on site at weekends. The conditions were filthy and cramped. Prostitution, drug use and other antisocial behaviour had become routine. It was the first case in the country of an exempt property being shut down, but it took more than a year, with the matter before the courts. That really makes the case for why regulation is so important. Saif Lodge was a symptom of our system. I want to thank many campaigners, but in particular I thank Jane Haynes at Birmingham Live and Nick Hall, a constituent of mine who wrote an excellent piece in Central Bylines for which he spoke to many residents in north Edgbaston living in exempt accommodation. He told me that one 42-year-old man said that he feared for his health and doubted that he will reach 50. Another said: “It is safer to live in a park than in the provider’s rooms.” Since then, West Midlands police has publicly highlighted links between the exempt sector and organised crime gangs, money laundering, fraud and drug dealing. The impact on the community is real. One constituent, a veteran who served for 36 years, recently told me that he plans to sell his home and leave the area because the property next door had suddenly been converted into exempt accommodation without any consultation. He fears that the rogue providers have no care for those they support or the local areas they set up shop in. We cannot continue like this. In the last Parliament, I campaigned for a new regulatory system for supported exempt accommodation that would introduce minimum standards of support, update housing benefit rules to define care and supervision requirements, and give councils the power to manage local provision and act swiftly against rogue operators, yet we are still waiting for the new regulations to be introduced under the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. In July 2025, the previous Minister for Homelessness stated that they aimed to publish the Government’s full response to the consultation on these measures after the summer recess. In response to my written parliamentary question, the current Minister for Local Government and Homelessness said on 13 January this year that the response would be published “as soon as possible”. I hope the Minister responding to the debate will update us on when we can expect to see the Government’s response to the consultation so that we can get on with bringing in these crucial regulations. I thank the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness for visiting my constituency to see for herself the diverse accommodation available. I also welcome the steps taken by the Government and Birmingham city council to date. Birmingham city council has set up a specialist team to tackle antisocial behaviour and crime, and to improve property standards. I am grateful to the Government for extending the supported housing improvement programme with an additional £1.5 million for Birmingham. Since the team was set up, over 9,000 of the most severe hazards, such as severe mould and fire risks, have been removed. It has issued 48 community protection orders against antisocial behaviour and £8.8 million has been saved by refusing unjustified housing benefit claims. Birmingham city council also set up its own quality standard programme, but voluntary schemes cannot replace statutory oversight. So far, only 15% of providers have successfully achieved gold, silver or bronze accreditations. The council’s actions starkly evidence the need for regulation of the sector. The Minister will be aware that the SHIP funding ends in March 2026 and the council is bridging the gap with the homelessness prevention grant. Only clear regulation will give the council the tools it needs to manage local provision effectively. I welcome the Government’s publication this week of the statutory guidance for local supported housing strategies. The local strategy will be an important step in mapping current and future provision. Proper processes will be formulated for referrals, and housing teams will work with colleagues in health and social care to deliver a much better co-ordinated system, but we must go further. Local authorities are still saying that without new regulations to define minimum standards of support and empower councils to crack down on exploitative providers, vulnerable people and taxpayers will continue to be ripped off. The statutory guidance is an important first step, but it will not fix the problem that my constituents are facing today unless we move at pace to bring in these regulations. None of that is intended to dismiss the many excellent providers that deliver high-quality support every day—many of them are doing a really good job; they play a crucial role and change lives—but the sector has also attracted landlords who see vulnerable people as a source of income rather than a responsibility. Without firm oversight, those operators undermine good practice, exploit residents and damage our communities. Everyone agrees that people fleeing abuse, leaving prison or care, or battling mental health and addiction deserve somewhere safe that they are connected to and that truly helps them rebuild their lives. Our communities deserve to feel safe and taxpayers deserve to know that their money is protecting people, not enriching those who exploit them. The stories of fear, failure and sometimes outright abuse are heartbreaking. We cannot look away any longer.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am not the Chair of the Select Committee, and I think that the Secretary of State set out his position. This is really important. This is about UK taxpayers’ money being invested in training doctors, and we must ensure that UK trainees are able to secure training places once they graduate. That is the issue that we are discussing. Let me be clear: this is not a criticism of international staff. The NHS would not and could not function without the dedication, skill and compassion of people from around the world, and we should say that plainly and with gratitude. Every day, they hold our system together. However, a mature, confident country can value that contribution while also saying that we cannot replace long-term workforce planning with a permanent reliance on overseas recruitment. That is not fair on British trainees, not fair on source countries, and not fair on the NHS. As we heard from the Secretary of State, the World Health Organisation has estimated that by 2030, there will be an 11 million shortfall in health workers, as every country competes for the same limited workforce. This Government understand that putting British workers first is not something for which we will apologise. It is what the public expect. The Prime Minister has been clear: a serious Labour Government must align migration, skills and training policy with the national interest. We cannot simply be passive; we must shape our domestic workforce to ensure that the NHS can continue to function. The same principle should apply wherever we are overly dependent on skilled migration because domestic training was neglected for 14 years under the Conservatives. Investing in people in the UK, and expecting that investment to strengthen Britain, is not ideological; it is responsible government. The powers conferred to the Secretary of State in this Bill are important. The Royal College of Radiologists’ 2024 census found that 83% of cancer centre heads of service in the west midlands were concerned about patient safety as a result of workforce shortfalls. In 2024, only 19% of clinical oncology training places in the west midlands were filled. Will the Secretary of State outline how he intends to use the powers in this Bill and work with the integrated care boards to ensure that access to training matches regional workforce needs and health demands? Above all, this Bill is about respect—respect for the taxpayer, respect for the NHS workforce, and respect for a health service that must be planned for the long term, not patched up year on year. This is exactly the kind of reform that the public expect from a Labour Government who are serious about work, contribution and the future of our NHS.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Bill. I have long argued that a strong state must be rooted in work, contribution and fairness, and that principle stands behind the Bill. For too long, medical training pathways have drifted away from that principle. Taxpayers invest heavily in medical education, clinical placements and postgraduate training, but we have not been honest about who ultimately benefits from the investment. At a time when the NHS is under immense pressure, that is not sustainable. The Secretary of State set out the scale of what we are dealing with. The taxpayer invests more than £4 billion every year in medical education, with more than £1 billion invested in undergraduate clinical placements, and more than £3.3 billion invested in postgraduate foundation and specialty training. That is public money, spent so that British patients have the doctors they need. However, since the lifting of visa restrictions in 2020, we have seen a fundamental shift in the way that medical training places are allocated. In the 2025 recruitment cycle, more than 25,000 overseas-trained doctors applied for training posts, and more than 15,000 UK graduates were competing for the same—nearly 13,000—round 1 and round 2 positions. As we heard from the Secretary of State, there are more than 47,000 applicants in 2026. That is a dramatic surge. The Bill does one straightforward thing. It prioritises UK medical graduates for training posts, both foundation and specialty, where the NHS has already invested heavily. In my constituency, we see this clearly. University Hospitals Birmingham NHS foundation trust is one of the largest NHS trusts in the country. Just under 30% of my constituents work in the health sector. That figure is double the national average. We are home to the University of Birmingham medical school, one of the best in the country. The scale of public investment in training, supervision and infrastructure is enormous, and rightly so. However, the Bill recognises the basic truth that when the taxpayer pays, the public should see the return. Prioritising those who are most likely to work and stay in the NHS is not exclusionary; it is common sense. It is how we rebuild a health service that is resilient, staffed and fair.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. My constituents are fed up with seeing more and more dodgy Bob Shops on Hagley Road, Harborne and neighbouring Bearwood High Street. Can the Chancellor say what the Government are doing to tackle money laundering and other financial crimes involving the dodgy shops blighting our high streets?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Commonhold and Leasehold Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome this statement and congratulate the Minister. Does he agree that strengthening and simplifying the route to commonhold will shift power away from distant freeholders and back to residents, and that for leaseholders in Birmingham Edgbaston, this will mean control over service charges, repairs and management for the first time?

• 26 Jan 2026 · Armed Forces Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to speak in this debate. For me, the Bill is personal. My great-grandfather fought in France during the first world war and my grandfather served in Burma during the second world war, both for the British Indian Army, and my uncle served in the Indian army. Across generations and across continents, the same truth runs through my family history: service is not abstract. It is sacrifice. It is long absences, lifelong injuries and families carrying the weight at home. And it reminds us that Britain’s story has always been shaped not just on these islands, but by those from across the Commonwealth who stood up in our darkest hours. That is why how we treat those who serve and those who have served matters so deeply. Birmingham is home to nearly 18,000 veterans and my constituency is proud of its connection to the armed forces community. At the Queen Elizabeth hospital Birmingham sits the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, where military and civilian clinicians work side by side, delivering world-class care to those injured in service to this country. It is a place where duty meets compassion, where Britain’s promise to its armed forces must mean something real. I know the Minister for the Armed Forces, my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), my constituency neighbour, who served this country in uniform, understands that reality not from briefing notes but from lived experience. His service, and that of Members across this House on all sides who have worn the uniform, deserves our respect. The armed forces covenant is built on a simple principle: that those who serve should face no disadvantage, and that special consideration is owed where sacrifice has been greatest. But for too long, that promise has not been fully kept. In the spirit of Ernest Bevin, a strong Britain honours its armed forces not with words, but with lasting responsibility. The Bill matters because it extends the covenant across Government not as a slogan, but as a duty; a duty that recognises the physical and mental toll of service, the instability of constant moves, and the reality that too many veterans still struggle with housing, healthcare and support long after they leave the forces. In Birmingham, organisations such as the Royal British Legion, Help for Heroes and Fisher House, and countless local volunteers already embody that covenant every single day, supporting families at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine and providing care when the system falls short. The Bill backs them up with action. Housing is where the failure has been clearest. Too many veterans have been left in poor quality accommodation or pushed into homelessness. The “Veterans’ Survey 2022” found that one in 400 veterans reported being homeless, sleeping rough or living in a refuge. That is not just wrong; it is a breach of trust. I welcome the Government’s action: investing £9 billion into forces homes over the next decade; renewing 2,500 existing homes in the west midlands; and building 100,000 homes on surplus defence land, with priority for service families and veterans. That is what listening looks like. That is what governing looks like. This is not just about bricks and mortar; it is about dignity. It is about whether a veteran can get to hospital; whether a family can stay together during treatment; whether victims of abuse, rape and violence get support; and whether service really ends at the barracks gate or the country keeps its word. The Bill sends a clear message: Britain will not turn its back on those who stood up for her. It honours the past, supports the present and strengthens the future. I am proud to support it.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Waste Collection: Birmingham and the West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Prior to coming to this place, I worked for the city council for many years. I saw the impact of equal pay liabilities, and how they cripple public finances and the very services that the last Labour Government invested in. Children’s services were decommissioned and youth services were stripped away, and many of my communities do not want to see our city council’s public finances go in the same direction. That is why the council must take legal advice, and the right steps, to agree and come to a settled negotiation. The council does now have a plan for transformation, including a new fleet of council-owned vehicles, changes to how services will be monitored and a phased roll-out of a new collection model from June 2026. But transformation cannot mean endless disruption, and it cannot come at the cost of reopening equal pay liabilities, which would put the council back into crisis and risk hundreds of millions more being taken away from public services—this is taxpayers’ money that we are talking about. Our Government also have a role to play. Having raised the issue of fair funding for Birmingham with Ministers, I was pleased to see that the local government finance settlement will increase the council’s core spending power by more than £650 million over the next three years. Ministers must now also hold Birmingham’s commissioners to account; they must bring both sides back to the table and reach a negotiated settlement. Leadership and accountability are required at every level. Next week, I will meet directly with Unite workers to hear their perspective, to understand the challenges they face and make sure that their voices are a part of any solution. Let me be clear that residents, not politics, must be the priority. My message to all parties is simple: “Enough is enough. It is time to return to the table in good faith. It is time for negotiation, compromise and delivery.” The council, the commissioners, the workers and the union leadership all have a responsibility to make that happen. The Government must ensure that the conditions are in place for a settlement to succeed, alongside holding commissioners to account, and secure agreement, not stalemate. Birmingham is a proud city, and its people are patient, but that patience has been tested long enough. It is time to end this dispute and restore a reliable waste service that puts residents and businesses first.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Waste Collection: Birmingham and the West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for securing this debate. Birmingham is the city where I was born and raised, and the one that I have had the privilege to represent for the past eight years. It is a proud, resilient city of hard-working families, students, older people, businesses and communities who care deeply about the place they call home. Yet for more than a year, those communities have been living with a broken waste collection service: overflowing bins, rising fly-tipping and streets that do not feel clean or safe. These are not minor inconveniences; they are public health risks, environmental hazards and a source of stress for many families, for those with mobility challenges, for older residents and for everyone who cares about their neighbourhood. Last year I wrote to the council, urging it to declare a public health emergency, and it did so. That declaration allowed the Government to provide logistical support and for waste to be collected. But the reality is that the dispute has dragged on for far too long, and residents are paying the price. We need to be honest about how we got here. Years of Conservative austerity and underfunding of local government hollowed out councils such as Birmingham, with nearly £1 billion of funding having been cut since 2010, the workforce halved, services that people relied on stretched and resilience stripped away. On top of that, historical equal pay liabilities—some dating back decades—have placed immense pressure on the council’s finances. Those pressures are not abstract numbers. They shape whether residents get their bins emptied, whether streets are clean and whether public services can function effectively. That context matters, because it explains why any solution now must be sustainable. It is about fairness: fairness for women in being paid the same as men, and fairness for the citizens of Birmingham in knowing that their money is being spent on the services they need. Let me be clear about my position: I am on the side of Birmingham’s residents. I am not here to take sides between the council and the union, or to attack anyone involved. My concern is the people who live, work and raise families in our city, and who depend on a clean and reliable waste service. I support the transformation of Birmingham’s waste service because, before the industrial action began, I regularly received complaints from constituents about missed collections. Residents and businesses deserve a service that is modern, reliable and in line with other major cities.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Waste Collection: Birmingham and the West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Waste Collection: Birmingham and the West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I say gently and respectfully to my hon. Friend, who is not from Birmingham, that given that I was born and raised there and have represented a seat for eight years, I can see the difference that the Labour Government are making after the impact of austerity, when nearly £1 billion was taken from the largest council in Europe. Pride in Place money is being given to Woodgate and Bartley Green, an area with a high population of people not in education, employment or training. It is about investing in our communities. My hon. Friend is doing a disservice to the Labour-run Birmingham council and the Government. Since coming to power, they have been trying to make a difference for the communities I represent.