Gurinder Singh Josan
MP for Smethwick · Labour · United Kingdom
“I welcome the Minister’s statement and the ministerial team’s engagement with Members to understand the concerns of our businesses. I have previously raised the challenges faced by downstream producers in my Black Country constituency.”
“This issue has raised a great many concerns in my constituency and across the Black Country. I have been working closely with my colleagues in Sandwell in particular, and we have had many meetings with local companies and communication with my hon.”
“In the King’s Speech, the Labour Government made it clear that our key priorities are national security, economic security and energy security. Those three priorities have one thing in common: the promise of jobs for communities across the whole UK.”
“At the beginning of the month, I attended the NATO Parliamentary Assembly spring session in Lithuania with representatives of NATO and other allies, including Ukraine.”
“I, too, thank the Home Secretary for her statement. As an Amritdhari Sikh, I wear the five Ks every day as part of my religious observance, including the kirpan, and as a Sikh, I really struggle to express the feelings of sheer horror that this case has generated within me, my family and my friends. It absolutely has been a horror.”
“I am relieved that our criminal justice system and the courts came to the same conclusion, and that sentiment is shared universally across the Sikh community. This case has raised many aspects of concern for my constituents—Sikh and non-Sikh—including issues of safety and knife crime, and the freedom to practise one’s faith.”
The complete record
Every one of 120 lines we hold for Gurinder Singh Josan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“I welcome the Minister’s statement and the ministerial team’s engagement with Members to understand the concerns of our businesses. I have previously raised the challenges faced by downstream producers in my Black Country constituency. Pargat Housewares, which uses steel suitable for kitchenware, was facing a 60% hike in raw materials costs, and Hadley Industries is already looking to reduce headcount, which means knock-on effects in its supply chain. I welcome the increase in quotas and the removal of the majority of categories from the scope of the measure, but will the Minister explain how the Department has been and will be working with individual businesses to understand their concerns and support them going forward?”
“In the King’s Speech, the Labour Government made it clear that our key priorities are national security, economic security and energy security. Those three priorities have one thing in common: the promise of jobs for communities across the whole UK. The defence growth deal stands to unlock some 50,000 new jobs across the UK, including 500 well-paid skilled jobs in Wales. Will the Secretary of State tell the House how defence spending is having a positive impact in Wales?”
“This issue has raised a great many concerns in my constituency and across the Black Country. I have been working closely with my colleagues in Sandwell in particular, and we have had many meetings with local companies and communication with my hon. Friends the Member for Tipton and Wednesbury (Antonia Bance) and for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes). Hadley Industries, a large employer, is already considering downscaling its number of employees. Pargat Housewares in my constituency, another large employer, is a significant manufacturer of pots, pans and bakeware—in fact, it is one of the largest manufacturers in the UK, supplying most of our superstores and exporting. However, steel suitable for kitchenware is not manufactured in the UK in significant quantities and at competitive prices.”
“At the beginning of the month, I attended the NATO Parliamentary Assembly spring session in Lithuania with representatives of NATO and other allies, including Ukraine. As you will be aware, Mr Speaker, the Labour party has a strong tradition, going back to Ernest Bevin, of maintaining a strong and effective defence for our nation both within NATO and independently. After 14 failed Tory years, and considering that other NATO countries are well ahead of us in the proportion of GDP they are spending on defence, what will the Minister do to ensure our armed forces receive the transformation they require to face modern-day threats, with an industrial sector to provide support, so that we do not betray Labour’s strong defence tradition?”
“I am relieved that our criminal justice system and the courts came to the same conclusion, and that sentiment is shared universally across the Sikh community. This case has raised many aspects of concern for my constituents—Sikh and non-Sikh—including issues of safety and knife crime, and the freedom to practise one’s faith. Will the Secretary of State meet me and colleagues to discuss these issues further?”
“I, too, thank the Home Secretary for her statement. As an Amritdhari Sikh, I wear the five Ks every day as part of my religious observance, including the kirpan, and as a Sikh, I really struggle to express the feelings of sheer horror that this case has generated within me, my family and my friends. It absolutely has been a horror. The senseless murder of Henry Nowak should be condemned in its entirety by everybody. A young man’s life has been taken in his prime, and I wish to express my and my constituency’s full sympathy with and condolences for the family of Henry Nowak, who have shown incredible dignity in their grief. I totally condemn the action of Vickrum Digwa, the mindless, senseless murder and the lies. There is simply no religious justification for his actions.”
“Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, yet research shows that the average small business cannot start its real work until 2.36 pm on a Wednesday because of the time lost to administrative tasks. My own experience is that business owners need to engage regularly with various departments and agencies for all manner of reasons, and proving their identity can be a time-consuming task, so will the Secretary of State consider introducing a unique business passport—effectively, a unique digital ID for businesses—to cut administrative burdens and free up small businesses to deliver growth?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for meeting me recently to view 1,000 paper cranes folded by residents in Bearwood in recognition of the diversity of Smethwick, where neighbours and communities just get on with each other. Residents in my constituency and across Sandwell benefit from the lowest council tax in the west midlands and investment in new leisure centres and parks, and all our libraries are kept open. Sandwell is the third-best council in the country for fixing potholes and has expanded breakfast clubs and free school meals and ensured cheaper school uniforms for our children. Does the Prime Minister agree that this is all down to well-run Labour-led Sandwell council and the changes brought about by this Labour Government, which were opposed at every opportunity by the Tories and Reform?”
“Last week in the emergency debate I spoke about the appointment of Peter Mandelson, the approach taken by the Prime Minister as details have become available, and the vetting process overall. Today, I want to address the motion and why I feel it is premature. In doing so, I believe that three principles of this House are key to our considerations today: transparency, due process and proportionality. A privilege motion is a serious matter and a tool available for Parliament to use in such circumstances. Although a privilege motion is to address such matters, its use also impacts on the integrity of the House and its procedures. Deploying a privilege motion prematurely or in the absence of full and proper grounds has the ability to impact negatively on the integrity of the House.”
“My point is about our consideration of the motion. The fact that Mr Speaker made the decision means we are here discussing it. I am putting a case forward about why I think it is premature to vote on the motion today. Just because the Leader of the Opposition and others have decided to table it does not make it right; it is clearly a political and partisan process. I am clear that any allegations or concerns must be addressed, and it is clear that the Prime Minister is of that view, too. It is why we have the Humble Address, ongoing inquiries by the Foreign Affairs Committee and even an ongoing police investigation. It is right and proper that all allegations are examined thoroughly and that these processes are allowed to run their course. I suggest that while those things are ongoing, the privilege motion is premature.”
“The Prime Minister has apologised from the very outset in the House and outside it, for the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson, and his apologies have been full, wholesome and without equivocation. He has also specifically apologised to the victims of Epstein. The Prime Minister has repeatedly answered questions in the House and outside, and has shown a willingness to be held accountable.”
“The right hon. Gentleman should understand that we are here today only because of things that have been determined, whether from the release of papers through the Humble Address or from evidence people have given to the Foreign Affairs Committee. For him to say that those processes have no relevance is wrong; they absolutely have full relevance. My whole case is that we should let those processes complete in their entirety. That is why I believe this motion is premature. Given that those processes are already taking place, this privilege motion is premature. More than that, this motion is a clear attempt to bypass those processes. Whatever one’s view of the substantive issues, there are some points on which we should all agree. The Prime Minister has been forthcoming in addressing the allegations, both in the House and outside.”
“It is incumbent on all of us to give consideration to due process and proportionality. Diverting from the high standards that voters expect of the House risks damaging confidence in Parliament itself. Substantial parliamentary and other processes are already under way. We should not pre-empt those processes, which is what this motion has the potential to do, but should allow them to be completed. That is in the best interests of Parliament and in the best interests of transparency, due process and proportionality, and that is why I call on Members to vote against the motion.”
“I am a humble Back Bencher, and I would not disagree with my Chief Whip in respect of his decisions on how to apply the whip. That is a matter for him. All the inquiries that I have mentioned are ongoing, and are being robustly pursued. I fear, therefore, that the motion risks setting an unhealthy precedent, namely that unproven allegations alone are sufficient to utilise one of Parliament’s most serious procedures. That is not something with which any of us should be comfortable. The naked politicising of this process will not serve Parliament well. My further fear is that while Opposition Members are seeking to utilise this procedure in this way, some of them will already be looking into what other procedures they can use to extend the process in the same partisan fashion.”
“While that is the case, the apology offered by the Prime Minister on repeated occasions in this House and outside has been full, wholesome and without equivocation. Most importantly, the Prime Minister has repeatedly and rightly apologised to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein for making the appointment in the first instance.”
“Friends, whose experience of No.10, I suspect, has been purely about attacking No.10 or in a disciplinary capacity, claiming to have real insight into the culture there. At the core of the current debate is the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the USA. Clearly, Peter Mandelson’s background of resigning twice from a ministerial office has been a matter of public record, but while there are other allegations about his conduct, not all of them were in the public domain at the time. Many recent revelations have led to his dismissal from the post of ambassador, action in relation to his peerage, and referral to the police, which is an ongoing process. It is clear to all that Peter Mandelson should never have been appointed to the role.”
“I want to address three aspects in my remarks: first, the appointment of Peter Mandelson in the first instance; secondly, the approach taken by the Prime Minister as details have emerged over the last few months; and finally, the vetting process overall. The debate so far has been characterised by collective amnesia on the Opposition Benches. We have seen some amateur dramatic theatrics, and the leader of the Liberal Democrats has demonstrated why he is such a risk to trade and industry with one of our largest trading partners. We have seen the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), who sits on the Opposition Benches, choosing to lecture Labour Members about traditions in the Labour party. We have even seen some of my hon.”
“No, I will not. While the initial appointment has been, and I suspect will continue to be, a matter of debate, the Prime Minister’s apology cannot be faulted.”
“In a bit. I want to address the wider approach taken by the Prime Minister in this case and other allegations against senior figures in this Administration, which I think is relevant.”
“I will come back to the hon. Gentleman in a second. This Prime Minister promised a change in the approach to dealing with such matters. An approach that embraces transparency and is robust and timely is essential in maintaining public trust and confidence in the Government, in politicians and in this House.”
“I have a better understanding of the culture in No. 10 than my hon. Friend does. I absolutely expect that the British public understand that the apology put forward by the Prime Minister has been full and unequivocal and that he has not messed about on that.”
“That action has been robust and speedy, and the ongoing commitment to the Humble Address will ensure full transparency. That is in marked contrast to how the previous Government handled such matters.”
“I will take more interventions in a few minutes. On every occasion when an allegation has been levelled, whether in relation to Peter Mandelson or the previous Deputy Prime Minister, the approach of this Prime Minister and this Government has been in marked contrast to the approach taken by successive Tory Prime Ministers. We saw then a real refusal to accept that allegations were valid. We saw a refusal to address allegations in a timely fashion by referring them for investigation. Investigations were dragged out and there was a refusal to accept their findings. In the case of Peter Mandelson, as information about the allegations has have been forthcoming, the Prime Minister has come to the Dispatch Box again and again. He sacked Peter Mandelson, and he has taken action again and again.”
“We need to ensure that the vetting system is fit for purpose, and a balance between confidentiality and response at the appropriate level is essential. The current balance is clearly not correct, and I welcome the steps being taken by the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister in that regard. Let me end by saying that this whole episode has exposed issues of judgment and process, and I suspect that the debate will long continue in relation to both. There is much to commend in the judgment taken by the Administration as information became available. Whatever the merits of the case, and whatever people feel about what is being discussed, I hope that some of those approaches in relation to transparency, timeliness and robust action will continue.”
“I believe strongly that the vetting process followed by Government and Departments should be robust and should have the confidence of those subject to vetting, as well as the Departments employing them, their colleagues and the wider public. Clearly, to maintain that confidence requires a high degree of anonymity and confidence in that process. It is also the case that any information thrown up as part of that vetting process is acted on appropriately by Government or by Departments in a timely fashion, but there is a fundamental dilemma in expecting the Government, or the Prime Minister in this case, to act on information that was never made available to Government or Ministers. That is the fundamental issue here.”
“The Prime Minister presented the House with the information that he had at that time. Further questions about that should be directed to the Prime Minister. Fundamentally, the Government will not take any lessons from the Conservatives, who, over a number of years, presided over the trampling of trust and confidence in politicians and in this House into the ground again and again. While I suspect that this House has not seen the last of the Peter Mandelson issue, I am hopeful that the change in approach towards allegations taken by this Prime Minister and this Government, moving towards transparency, timeliness and robust action, is one that will continue in the future. There is a lesson there for all of us. Finally, I want to address the vetting process.”
“I thank the Prime Minister for his statement and for the clarity contained within it, and for his apology again. Despite the protestations of Opposition party leaders and Opposition Members, and including some Members on the Government Benches too, I am sure that everybody in this House agrees that the Government of the day should take the advice of our intelligence and vetting services and act on it. In view of everything we have heard—this is the fundamental question for me—how can the Government act on intelligence service and vetting advice if Ministers never get to receive that advice?”
“T8. Can I first take this opportunity to wish a very happy Vaisakhi to the Sikhs around the world who are celebrating it? Vaisakhi is a cultural celebration, but it is also the time of the Amrit Sanchar, the baptism ceremony. Residents in my Smethwick constituency are benefiting from the investment in and changes to the NHS introduced by this Labour Government; the benefits include shorter waiting times and shorter ambulance waiting times. Can the Secretary of State tell us what progress has been made in implementing the Government’s 10-year plan for the NHS?”
“In times of increasing division, there is no place for divisive rhetoric, and the Government clearly have a role to play in supporting cohesion. The Tories clearly failed in that respect; we have heard again of their inability to embrace the United Kingdom of today. I welcome the definition of anti-Muslim hostility. Racism against Muslims, Jews and people of all backgrounds, including Sikhs, is sadly increasing and needs to be tackled. Many hate attacks on Sikhs are recorded as Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hatred, and it is important that that data is disaggregated. However, the United Kingdom is a very diverse country, so can the Secretary of State outline how his proposals will support people of all backgrounds, including in less diverse communities such as rural and coastal communities and smaller towns?”
“T3. I recently visited the Lodge community centre in West Bromwich to meet five of the 25 young people who had arrived in the UK from Gaza to receive specialist medical attention—they were with their families at a fun day put on by the Yemeni Community Association. I spoke with them about their community in Gaza and their journey here to the UK. Can the Minister tell the House what learning the Department has taken from the programme so far, in particular about the support required by the young people and their families while they are in the UK, and whether it is the intention to expand the project further?”
“As somebody who has engaged in many safety advisory groups over the years as an event organiser, it is clear that the rules need changing, that there must be more transparency and that the ability to manipulate their proceedings must be removed. Will the Home Secretary provide more information about the review into safety advisory groups that she has announced?”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement. The west midlands is an incredibly diverse area, and this whole episode has had a significant impact on community cohesion and confidence in West Midlands police, particularly among the Jewish community but among all communities. I therefore add my voice to the calls for the chief constable to resign his position forthwith, and others involved in this shameful episode should also consider their position. The police have a duty to act without fear or favour. Engaging with selected people or organisations is always a recipe for disaster, particularly as community groups very often have their own agendas.”
“I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. The unity of the House in opposing those states who would do us harm is a key foundation of our strong national security framework. Does the Secretary of State therefore agree that when a senior leader in Reform accepts Russian bribes and when the shadow Attorney General is actively working to undermine a key policy in support of Ukraine, that damages public perception of the unity of purpose of the House and, in doing so, impacts our national security?”
“Will the Minister commit to support calls from Karma Nirvana and around 60 other organisations, including Sikh Women’s Aid, for a statuary definition of honour-based abuse, to recognise honour as an aggravating factor in criminal sentencing, and to require multi-agency guidance to identify honour-based abuse?”
“I thank the Minister and all those in Government who worked so hard on this strategy. The shadow Minister, through her rhetoric, does her best to demonise whole communities, but the Minister is right to recognise that abuse occurs in all communities. However, she will be aware of the need to be sensitive to cultural differences experienced by women and girls from different communities. The Minister has already recognised the value of by-and-for organisations working to provide culturally sensitive support for women and girls, and I trust that that support for those organisations will continue, but one area where progress needs to be made is in relation to honour-based abuse.”
“I thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for her excellent Budget statement. I would take the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat) and his colleagues more seriously on defence spending if the Conservatives had not wasted 14 years and cut back our defences to the bare minimum.”
“The British Private Equity and Venture Capital Association has just said: “We are delighted to see the Government signalling that the important EIS and VCT incentives will be reformed to support businesses as they scale, as well as early stage investments”. Business confidence is there. People want to see the change that we are making, which will support growth in our economy. If we get that right, that future will deliver for my constituents and for the UK, and I am proud to stand with the Government on that.”
“It is interesting that Conservative Members have talked a lot about growth and business confidence. The Venture Capital Trust Association organised an open letter signed by 250 signatories, which included me and other Members of this and the other House, but the majority of signatories were from various start-ups and businesses, including the founders of Quantexa and Matillion, which are both billion-dollar-valued tech firms. They asked for changes to the VCT and EIS schemes, which have not been updated in more than 10 years. I would take the Opposition more seriously if they had not been asleep on their watch when in power.”
“If we do that and get it right, we will bring good quality jobs back to our communities that allow people to buy a house and a car and to support their kids through university—the decent standard of living that people aspire to. If we get it right, we will also remove the opportunity for dog-whistle scaremongering by the nakedly populist opportunists in Reform and others who want to take advantage of economic uncertainty to peddle division. A choice has been made by the Chancellor and this Labour Government to commit to increased defence spending, with an understanding that we will not just buy everything from America; we will make it here. There is also the investment in green energy, nuclear energy, the industrial strategy, semiconductors and AI. All those things will support and deliver growth in our economy.”
“Therefore, as well as the choices being made by the Chancellor and this Labour Government to cut NHS waiting lists, cut the debt and cut the cost of living, they are working to ensure that the UK becomes less reliant on other countries and more self-sufficient in defence, energy security and many other areas. The recall of Parliament in April to save the Scunthorpe steelworks was a defining moment, with the realisation that we cannot be reliant on the US or China for steel and that we need to maintain our own capacity. I see the change delivered in last year’s Budget and this year’s Budget as being about a necessary reindustrialisation of our country to ensure that we are more self-sufficient.”
“We have seen the impact of President Trump’s tariffs, the Ukraine war, Russia and China, and the mess that the Tories made of Brexit. Many Labour Members have understood that the old way of doing things—leaving everything to free markets and global trade—is not working for families and workers in the UK. Essentially, we all want to buy things cheap, so they end up being made abroad, where labour costs and conditions are much lower. That in turn has meant that whole industries in the UK have shut down, with the loss of good quality jobs.”
“There is over £100 million in Government funding for five new research hubs, including one in Birmingham. We scrapped the ban on onshore wind and unblocked solar schemes—we have new solar schemes for schools in Smethwick. We are having lower business rates, along with the National Wealth Fund and the warm homes plan to deliver lower energy bills, with £150 off bills announced today. The child poverty taskforce was established, and 5,350 children in Smethwick will benefit from the lifting of the two-child limit. Change is happening, and my constituents are benefiting from it, but all that is in the face of a world that is changing around us. Over the last year, global challenges have impacted the UK in an unprecedented way.”
“The Labour Government have already done so much to fix the mess, and the change is beginning to be felt in my constituency; I will go through some of those things. My constituents benefited from £20 million of plan for neighbourhoods funding in Smethwick. We have seen wage increases and growth upgraded to 1.5%. Rail fares and prescription charges have been frozen, the fuel duty freeze has been extended and pensions are increasing. We are seeing breakfast clubs and free school meals, along with more GPs and nurses. There is the 10-year NHS plan, and railways are coming back into public ownership—people said that could never be done, but it is happening. We are seeing local control over bus services, new protections for renters, and homes for heroes. We have launched the Border Security Command.”
“I will make my points. I will focus on the benefits of the Budget and the choices made by the Chancellor for people in my constituency. It is worth first reminding ourselves of the disgraceful situation in which the Conservative party left the economy in July last year and the scale of the mess the Labour Government are having to deal with. The economy was broken, with high interest rates, high unemployment, borrowing and debt beyond our means, growth stagnating, and strikes across our public services in various sectors. The NHS was on its knees, with record waiting lists and a crisis in midwife services and mental health services—I could go on—and we had a debilitating cost of living crisis, with no plan to make things better for ordinary families in my constituency.”
“I recently met representatives of BUUK, a multi-utility infrastructure provider that constructs and operates essential utility assets, and can provide all utilities as a one-stop shop. In view of the Department’s progress on new towns, and the need to rapidly scale up house building, what consideration has the Department given to using innovative delivery models, such as BUUK’s site-wide deployment of utility infrastructure, and thus reducing bureaucracy, streamlining delivery, improving accountability and allowing house builders to get on with building?”
“The Minister will be aware of the important role played by specialist “by and for” organisations in supporting victims from minority communities and bringing crucial cultural awareness to the table. Sikh Women’s Aid recently held an all-women’s meeting in which it focused on the trauma and fear generated by recent racially aggravated attacks in the west midlands, including in my constituency. Will the Minister outline what steps the Home Office is taking to ensure that specialist community support services, including “by and for” organisations such as Sikh Women’s Aid, are properly resourced so that victims from all backgrounds—whether white working-class girls or Sikh women and girls—can receive culturally-sensitive support?”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement, which I fully support. My constituency, like hers, is incredibly diverse, with people originating in countries across the world settled and contributing to our communities. One thing that people from all backgrounds have in common is that they detest the unfairness that the Conservative party allowed to creep into our asylum and immigration system. They also detest the demonising of their neighbours by members of Reform. Does the Home Secretary agree that the choice is clear: a choice between the chaos, handed over by the Conservatives, of a system taken advantage of by those who can pay the people smugglers, and a system of fair and safe legal routes for those who need them?”
“A key ingredient in strengthening the industrial base is the innovation that our companies bring to the table. A&M EDM Ltd in my constituency is a specialist engineering company working with aerospace, automotive, Formula 1 and other industries. When I visited recently, it was testing a drone engine that it had designed and built, with most parts being produced in house. What routes are available to companies such as A&M EDM Ltd to bring that innovation, specialist engineering capacity, and research and development ability to the defence industrial supply chain?”
“T3. Cryptocurrencies and digital assets are held by an increasing number of UK citizens—over 8 million people, according to recent figures—and the UK has the potential to be a world leader in this field, supporting our growth mission. Can the Minister detail what steps he has taken to ensure that we rapidly put in place a regulatory regime that gives confidence to the industry to develop and to companies to be based in the UK, while providing protection for consumers?”
“We promised 2 million more appointments, and we have delivered 5 million, along with 2,000 extra GPs, 6,500 more mental health workers, 7,000 more doctors, and 13,000 more nurses and midwives. The cancer diagnosis standard has been met, GP satisfaction is up and waiting lists are down. The brand-new Midland Metropolitan University hospital has opened in my constituency. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is the difference that a Labour Government make, and that we are only just getting started?”