Sojan Joseph 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.

11 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 10 Jun 2026 · Water Supply in Kent · Hansard source
    More

    I beg to move, That this House has considered water supply in Kent. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair this afternoon, Mr Twigg. I am grateful to colleagues for coming to the debate, but it is disappointing that we are having to have it at all, after the fourth incident—and the third major one—disrupting the supply of water to South East Water customers in six months. Between November and December, approximately 24,000 customers experienced low water pressure or little to no water supply. When supplies were restored, a boil water notice was issued. In January, about 30,000 customers again had to put up with little or no water supply. In April, around 6,000 customers experienced water supply problems, which South East Water said were “caused by a burst water main.” At the end of May, as we know, customers had to cope for 11 days with interruptions to their water supply. On that most recent occasion, around 22,000 customers across Kent, including roughly 4,000 in my constituency, were impacted. Last week, during an urgent question secured by the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale), I spoke about how, like many of my constituents, I have lost all faith in South East Water due to its repeated failures. Access to clean, reliable water is not a luxury; it is a fundamental expectation. When people turn on their taps, they should be able to rely on a consistent supply of water. That is the absolute minimum any water company should guarantee, but all too often South East Water is not meeting that minimum expectation. The repeated disruptions are not only inconvenient but deeply distressing for residents, who should be able to rely on water. The impact of these repeated failures is evident from the Consumer Council for Water report last week, which showed that trust in South East Water had been “materially weakened”. More than half of those surveyed now store bottled water at home in case of future incidents. The most recent incident occurred during a short period of hot weather, when the consequences of shortages can be especially acute. It affected households; farmers, whose livelihoods depend on a steady supply of water; and vulnerable individuals in care homes, where continuity of basic services is critical to wellbeing and safety. The wider economic impact must also be recognised. Hotels, restaurants and pubs across parts of the county were forced to close, losing vital income during what should have been a busy period coinciding with the school half-term holidays.

  • 17 Mar 2026 · Meningitis Outbreak · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. I pay tribute to all the health leaders in Kent and the school leaders for their calm and quick actions yesterday and over the weekend. I was able to get a briefing from UKHSA yesterday morning and also was able to visit my local hospital, the William Harvey, which has made immediate changes to accident and emergency to take care of those patients who are turning up. There is much speculation on social media and in local newspapers that vape sharing might be the reason behind this outbreak. I am not asking the Secretary of State to comment on that speculation, but can he reinforce the public health message? Can he offer advice to young people and parents in the Kent area on precautions they should be following at this time?

  • 24 Feb 2026 · Online Harm: Child Protection · Hansard source
    More

    This is an issue in which I have taken a close personal interest, because I have spent 22 years working in mental health services in the NHS. During that time, I have seen a gradual increase in mental health conditions, especially among young people. I do not want to say that this is all because of social media—there could be various reasons, such as 14 years of austerity, the cutting of NHS services or the closure of youth hubs—but I believe, and many studies show, that social media has played a role in the recent increase in mental health conditions and mental illness among young people. This is not just because of online content; as many Members have said, it is also because screentime takes away young people’s social interactions with the rest of society. I am particularly concerned about the high rates of depression and anxiety caused by cyber-bullying and exposure to the dark side of the internet, to which our children have almost totally unfiltered access through the devices in their pockets. I pay tribute to the work that has been done in schools across my Ashford constituency. In my visits to local schools, I have seen how effective measures, such as students locking their phones away in sealed pouches at the start of the school day, can ensure that mobile phones do not disrupt learning. Some of the studies done in those schools show that children’s academic work and behaviour have improved, especially their attitude towards teachers and fellow students.

  • 24 Feb 2026 · Online Harm: Child Protection · Hansard source
    More

    Local studies show that locking away smartphones leads to students feeling that they have not been taken away. They are still able to hold on to their phones in their pockets, but they are not able to use them. I agree with my hon. Friend’s suggestion that another option is for children to have brick phones, so that they can still make contact or send text messages but are not able to access online content. These sorts of things need to come out in the consultation, so that we know what works and what does not work. That is why it is important to have the consultation. Local studies have shown that locking away smartphones helps to improve students’ ability to concentrate, learn and socialise during the school day, and it has been welcomed by teachers and the overwhelming majority of students. Last year, I went to see a performance of a play by young people in Kent. The play, “Generation FOMO”, explores the impact of smartphones and social media on young people, with a script drawn from interviews with people aged between 10 and 17. It is a powerful and moving piece of work that highlights some of the harms associated with smartphones and social media, as told by young people themselves. “Generation FOMO” has been performed in schools across Kent, and I know that it has been incredibly well received by teachers, young people and parents. After seeing the impact that the play has had locally, I was delighted to bring the cast to Parliament at the start of January, so that they could perform it to parliamentarians and other policymakers in Westminster. Following that performance, I joined many of my colleagues in writing a letter to the Prime Minister to ask the Government to take steps to look into this area. The letter set out why technology firms, not parents or teachers, should take responsibility for preventing under-age access to their platforms. I therefore welcome the Government’s announcement of a swift consultation on what further measures are needed to keep children safe online. Ministers have been clear that the consultation is not about whether the Government will take further action, but about what the next steps should be. So I am particularly pleased that, alongside the formal consultation, the Government will run a national conversation to ensure that the views of parents, teachers and young people themselves are placed at the centre of future action. Although I want to see further measures introduced, I believe that, in order to be truly effective, they must be evidence-based. As the consultation takes place, it is right that Ministers look at what other countries—particularly Australia—are doing to protect their children. Some Members have mentioned the loopholes and how the children work around the restrictions, and this will be an opportunity to look at what is and is not working there, so we can get it right from the beginning. In the meantime, last week the Government announced immediate action to make the online world safer for children, including a crackdown on illegal content created by AI. Some Members have talked about AI chatbots, with young people and other members of the public have been accessing for mental health help, which is dangerous. We all want to see our children grow up healthy, confident and safe, which means ensuring that the digital world they now inhabit is built with their wellbeing in mind. The actions already announced by this Government are welcome, and I look forward to Ministers returning to the House soon with meaningful, evidence-based measures that will further strengthen the protections on the platforms that shape so much of young people’s lives.

  • 2 Feb 2026 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source
    More

    As part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I recently visited some of our Army training centres and met with a few international recruits who are concerned about the future of their life in this country. Last week, as chair of the APPG on adult social care, I had the pleasure of hosting an event in Parliament to mark the launch of a new report by the Social Care Institute for Excellence. The report examines what national standards of care should look like in future national care surveys. Crucially, the report makes the point that national standards alone will not address some of the deeper challenges faced by adult social care. One of those challenges is workforce shortages. Across adult social care, workforce shortages have a direct impact on the quality and continuity of the care that people receive. Consistency of staff is fundamental, and delivering high-quality, long-term care without a stable workforce cannot guarantee that consistency. I support the Government’s ambition to reduce long-term reliance on international recruitment. It is right that we focus on building a strong, sustainable domestic workforce, but as we do so, it is essential that we do not lose the skills of those who are already working in the sector. It is equally important to acknowledge the invaluable contribution that overseas workers have made and continue to make. After the pandemic, the previous Government specifically encouraged overseas recruitment into social care. Many of those who came into the UK uprooted their lives and left their families. They made sacrifices to serve in a sector that holds the wellbeing of our most vulnerable citizens in its hands. As we look to encourage domestic workers to think about pursuing a rewarding career in social care, will my hon. Friend the Minister consider allowing those overseas care workers who are already in the country to complete the five-year route to indefinite leave to remain? In its last annual report examining the healthcare and social care sectors, the Care Quality Commission stated: “Vacancy and turnover rates in adult social care have continued to fall”. While that is to be welcomed, it also pointed out that vacancy rates in the sector are still “3 times higher than those in the wider job market.” We should do everything we can to encourage both the recruitment and retention of workers. After all, retaining trained care workers is significantly cheaper and more reliable than replacing them. But if overseas workers who are already working in social care will have to wait 10 or 15 years to get indefinite leave to remain, they may be tempted to move to other countries such as Australia or Canada that offer quicker routes to similar settlement status.

  • 12 Nov 2025 · SEND Provision: Kent · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I am regularly contacted by parents or guardians of children to express their concerns about the provision of SEND education in our area, so I am grateful to my constituency neighbour, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), for securing this important debate, and I congratulate him on his excellent speech. At the end of the summer and the start of the autumn, I organised a series of meetings for constituents with direct experience of the SEND system in Kent. I am grateful to the primary and secondary school headteachers and staff, as well as the representatives of local charity Differences Not Disabilities, who gave up their time to meet me. I especially thank the parents and carers who spoke so powerfully about the difficulties they have faced and, in many cases, continue to face with Kent county council in securing a suitable education for their children. I also appreciate the constructive and thoughtful way in which all attendees approached our discussions. As the Government look to bring forward their proposals for reform of the SEND system across England, my constituents urge Ministers to ensure that abrupt change is not made to those areas that are working well. Otherwise, there is a risk that the successful parts of the system could be lost. My constituents would also like reassurances regarding education, health and care plans. They do not want to see them scrapped and would like to see a personalised plan like EHCPs remain in the reformed system. There was strong feeling among my constituents about the need to strengthen early support for children and families and ensure that early intervention is not a one-off, but consistent. The headteachers and parents at my meetings were firmly of the view that when it comes to early intervention, a “little and often” approach will bring far greater benefits than waiting until a child falls behind or ends up needing specialist provision later on. My constituents want to see a national training programme introduced for EHCPs. If they were well written from the start, there would be no need for the constant reviews that currently take place. We also heard that in Kent, delays in the issuing of EHCPs are the norm, with too many being issued well beyond the statutory deadlines. My constituents were clear that when EHCPs are eventually issued, they are not well written, and key provisions are being left out—often those that involve money. There was also strong feeling among my constituents that the Reform administration at Kent county council does not properly take into account the views of parents when writing or amending EHCPs, nor give them the full information they are entitled to. That is also reflected when I make representations to the council on behalf of my constituents about the education of their children. I have to wait too long for responses and, when they do come through, often they are inadequate and cannot help my constituents. In one case, I wrote to the council in February and again in March on behalf of a constituent regarding their daughter. The family had moved to Kent in December, and the daughter, who has an EHCP, was not in school at that time. Although I received an acknowledgment from the council in March, I did not receive a full response until last month—some seven months after first writing to the council. My constituent’s daughter only secured a placement at a special school at the start of the new academic year in September. In another example, I wrote to the council in mid-July on behalf of a constituent who had expressed concern to me that her child was not in school. The council acknowledged my letter in August, but four months later, I am still waiting for a full response. The final example also dates from July, when I wrote to the council on behalf of a constituent to ask whether it intended to comply with a court order against it. I have recently received a reply asking if I could provide assistance by arranging and facilitating an effective and meaningful method of alternative dispute resolution. As with most issues, funding for SEND and how it is allocated is critical. I warmly welcome that, thanks to the Labour Government, Kent county council has received an increase of £15 million in funding for SEND provision. It is important that my constituents now start to see the difference from this increase in resources. In our discussions, my constituents expressed a strong belief that SEND funding for mainstream schools must be ringfenced. If money is allocated for a child’s support, it must be spent on that child’s needs, and not diverted elsewhere. Parents and teachers were clear that, instead of relying on new independent schools being built, Kent county council should be assisting local state schools in our area to adapt their facilities. With the right investment, my constituents expressed the hope that we could see more specialist hubs created in existing schools across Ashford, Hawkinge and the villages. Too many children at the moment have to travel long distances to receive their education. More specialist hubs in existing schools would allow more children to be educated closer to where they live. It was clear from my discussions that we also need to reform the tribunal system. I have evidence from casework of how adversarial it has become, with solicitors and representatives on both sides—that message came across loud and clear in my meetings about SEND provision. Parents told me how most cases now end up at tribunal, and the majority find in favour of the child. The high number of cases that end up in tribunal and the fact that so many are successful are a clear indication of parents’ dissatisfaction with how the system is operating in Kent and that it is not working properly. The headteachers I have met believe that effective reform of the way that tribunals work would mean that the money that is currently spent on unnecessarily taking some cases to tribunal could instead be allocated to state schools. I have written to the Secretary of State in more detail on some of the wider points that might be helpful as the Government bring forward their proposals, but I look forward to the Minister’s response to what Members and I have said in this debate about the situation in Kent.

  • 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. This debate is incredibly important, and I am grateful to all the members of the public from my constituency who signed the e-petition. I am also grateful to the parents and primary and secondary school headteachers who took the time to meet me at the one of the roundtables I hosted for constituents with direct experience of the SEND system. I appreciate how honest they were and the constructive way they approached our discussions. I have written a letter to the Secretary of State with all the feedback, and I am hearing that many Members of Parliament have done a similar exercise. I hope the Minister will take that into consideration when the White Paper is published. My constituents request that Ministers do not make any abrupt changes to the existing system, as some parents have fought for a long time, and some children have now started to get help, so any changes should not be abrupt. My constituents would also like reassurance regarding education, health and care plans. They do not want them to be scrapped; they would like a personalised plan, such as the EHCP, to remain in the reformed system. My constituents would like a national training programme to be introduced for EHCPs. If they were well written from the start, there would be no need for the constant reviews that currently take place. We also heard that in Kent, EHCPs are not being reviewed in time, and when they are eventually reviewed, key provisions are being left out—often those that cost money. It was clear that Kent county council is not consulting parents properly or giving them the full information they are entitled to.

  • 8 Sept 2025 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Pritchard. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) on his excellent speech introducing this petition. I am grateful to the 292 constituents of mine who signed the petition urging that any changes to indefinite leave to remain should not apply to those already in the UK or on a skilled worker visa. As we all know, the NHS is reliant on overseas workers. As of September 2023, around 20% of NHS England roles were filled by non-UK nationals. That includes one in three doctors and three in 10 nurses. In both the NHS and the social care sector, recruitment of overseas staff increased after the pandemic, with campaigns run in places such as Kerala in India. In 2022, 73,000 skilled worker visa applicants were sponsored in the health and care sector. While I support efforts to end the long-term reliance on recruiting internationally to fill such roles, it is important to acknowledge the invaluable role that skilled overseas workers play in our health and social care sector. As the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on adult social care, and as someone who came to this House from working in the NHS, I understand how important it is that we do not lose the skills of those who are already working in our health and social care sector. My constituents who work in the NHS have made the point that the cost of recruiting and training an overseas nurse is anywhere between £50,000 and £60,000, and roughly £250,000 for a doctor. They argue that this country has made that investment so that people can train, learn and work in our healthcare sector. However, the certainty they had about their lives in the UK has been thrown into doubt, and now they cannot plan for the future. I am grateful to the 168 constituents who signed the e-petition calling for Hong Kong British national overseas visa holders to be exempted from any change to the indefinite leave to remain. I am particularly grateful to one constituent who came to a recent surgery with a letter signed by 80 Hong Kong BNO visa holders living in Ashford, Hawkinge and the villages. Those who live in my constituency are making a positive contribution to our community. Many of them have joined the workforce, finding employment in healthcare, education and trade, with some opening their own businesses. They have enriched local towns and villages by volunteering and becoming actively involved with local groups. As most of them have young families, their children have joined and become settled in local schools. They left Hong Kong due to the suppression of freedoms, and came to the UK to rebuild their lives. In their letter to me, my constituents spoke about the current uncertainty in their lives, especially for those with school-age children. They hope that the Minister’s response to this debate might go some way towards giving them clarity about their status. I look forward to the Minister’s response to the points that I and others have made.

  • 22 Jul 2025 · Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment · Hansard source
    More

    I pay tribute to Sir David Amess. I wish to speak about a number of transport issues relating to my constituency. Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of welcoming the Rail Minister to Ashford, where we attended the opening of a new career and skills hub for Southeastern. After the opening, I took the Minister on a tour of Ashford International station, and the part of the station left abandoned since Eurostar decided in 2020 that international rail services would no longer stop at either Ashford or Ebbsfleet. Those parts of the station stand ready for international passengers to use once again. It was great to have the noble Lord Hendy reiterate his and the Government’s support for our campaign to have international rail services return to Kent. In my year in the House, the other transport issue I have raised just as regularly as the return of international rail to Ashford is the deployment of Operation Brock on the M20. I am sorry that it was necessary to present a petition to the House on the subject last week, on behalf of my constituents. It is hugely disappointing that Kent county council and the Kent and Medway resilience forum have introduced Operation Brock once again, and that it will remain in force until at least 4 August. The recent announcement that the Dart charge will increase from September has disappointed many of my constituents. If we take that together with the tolls now in place for the Blackwall and Silvertown tunnels, the result is that all those routes will now cost more. We should, of course, encourage people to take public transport wherever we can, and I recognise that the charges are in place to manage traffic numbers. However, many of my constituents will have no option but to pay the increased charge, as they have only one route to work available to them. Potholes are a blight on the roads in my constituency, just as they are in the constituencies of most Members. It is wrong that, as a result of under-investment by the Conservatives, our constituents have been expected to deal with the repercussions of poor roads and the maintenance backlog that has built up. I welcome the fact that the Government are committing additional resources to fix this problem; they are providing £500 million in extra funding for highway maintenance across the country this year, and Kent county council will receive up to an additional £16 million. If those problems are to be fixed, there will of course need to be roadworks, but I plead on behalf of my constituents for much better co-ordination to ensure that any disruption is kept to a minimum. I conclude by thanking you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as well as Mr Speaker, all my colleagues and the staff of this House.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Operation Brock · Hansard source
    More

    I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents, who are deeply frustrated by the regular deployment of Operation Brock. The decision by Kent county council and the Kent and Medway resilience forum to queue freight lorries on the M20 during the school holidays causes severe disruption for local residents and businesses, and is hugely expensive. My constituents do not object to Brock being deployed in emergencies, and reassurances were given that that would happen. However, it is still being regularly deployed as a precautionary measure, and it will come into force once again later this week. The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Transport Select Committee to launch an inquiry into the decisions taken by Kent County Council and the Kent and Medway Resilience Forum to regularly deploy Operation Brock, and into what work is being undertaken to find a long-term alternative. And the petitioners remain, etc.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the constituency of Ashford in Kent, Declares that the deployment of Operation Brock by Kent County Council and the Kent and Medway Resilience Forum to queue freight lorries on the M20 causes severe disruption for residents and local businesses; further that although reassurances had been given that Operation Brock would only be deployed in emergencies, it has been used regularly as a precautionary measure; and further that a better, long-term solution needs to be found. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Transport Select Committee to launch an inquiry into the decisions taken by Kent County Council and the Kent and Medway Resilience Forum to regularly deploy Operation Brock, and into what work is being undertaken to find a long-term alternative. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003095]

  • 15 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: South-east England · Hansard source
    More

    Many constituents have raised concerns about the new Reform administration’s plans in my constituency. It is even thinking about cutting transport for vulnerable young people who cannot get to school. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is very concerning that the council, without a proper plan, has brought in an external agency to look at how to save money, and that it is unacceptable to cut the transport budget for those vulnerable children?

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: 7Culture, media and sport7Defence and foreign affairs: 5Defence and foreign affairs5Democracy and constitution: 13Democracy and constitution13Economy and business: 22Economy and business22Education and skills: 11Education and skills11Environment and energy: 9Environment and energy9Health and care: 42Health and care42Housing and planning: 3Housing and planning3Immigration and borders: 6Immigration and borders6Justice and policing: 5Justice and policing5Social security and pensions: 7Social security and pensions7Transport: 9Transport9Unclassified: 4Unclassified4
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 sport7
Defence and foreign affairs5
Democracy and constitution13
Economy and business22
Education and skills11
Environment and energy9
Health and care42
Housing and planning3
Immigration and borders6
Justice and policing5
Social security and pensions7
Transport9
Unclassified4

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