Jas Athwal
MP for Ilford South · Labour · United Kingdom
“It must also mean understanding student loans, the first debt many young people will ever take on, so that they can make a genuinely informed decision about whether university is the right path for them.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this important debate on an issue that matters greatly to my constituents.”
“Young people seeking to go to university do not have a proper understanding of what they are signing up to. They are either unaware of the scale of the student debt they may incur or are misled into believing that student loans are not real loans.”
“If we are serious about improving financial inclusion, helping young people to save and building financial resilience, we cannot ignore their single biggest financial commitment, which many of them make before they have even entered the workplace and can end up feeling for the majority of their working lives.”
“It is cheaper to pick up from people’s doorsteps in a controlled manner than from the streets once the waste has been dumped. Redbridge council has implemented not only that policy, but the wall of shame, which is an approach that has been adopted by other councils: naming and shaming to expose the waste cowboys who impose their mess on u…”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for securing this incredibly important debate. I pay tribute to the South Park Users Group in Ilford South.”
The complete record
Every one of 278 lines we hold for Jas Athwal, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 6.
“The hon. Lady makes a valid point. I wholeheartedly agree that the system is rigged against working women who take time out to have children, so we need to make it fairer. A graduate constituent of mine told me that she was the first woman in her entire lineage to go to university and get a degree, but she feels that that proud moment in her family’s history has been taken away from her by the regret that she has accrued a huge debt. The issue is not an isolated to Ilford South. As we hear from hon. Members across the Chamber, all across the country a whole generation feels bled dry by a system that keeps taking from them. Another constituent told me that he left university with £64,000 of debt. Four years of repayment later, he now owes more than £99,000. This is not shared sacrifice, but a structural imbalance.”
“Neither will knee-jerk reactions: some of the proposals I have heard, such as cutting the interest rate without addressing the structural flaws, offers only headlines, not solutions. Those who designed the system cannot now pretend they bear no responsibility for its consequences, when they had 12 years to get it right. Equally, suggesting we cut certain courses, as some have suggested, simply because the graduates on those courses repay less, confuses economic return with social value.”
“So what must change? Not the principle of contribution, because their education has to be paid for, but the fairness of the design. The Minister and the Government urgently need to reconsider the following, and I hope hon. Friends will add to this list: first, whether freezing thresholds is justified in a cost of living crisis; secondly, whether to raise the threshold to alleviate hardship and make the system fairer; thirdly, whether RPI remains an appropriate benchmark for interest calculations; and fourthly, whether a 9% repayment rate disproportionately affects middle earners and should be reduced. Perhaps it should be a combination of all of the above, because tinkering at the edges will not suffice.”
“I agree, and I will make that point shortly. This is not only a graduate issue, but a fiscal time bomb. In 2024-25, write-offs recorded in Department for Education accounts rose to £310 million, up from £121 million the year before. The longer this system continues without reform, the more unstable it becomes for borrowers and Governments alike, and then where is the ambition? Every pound earned above the threshold attracts a 9% deduction, on top of existing taxes. The marginal deduction rate that many middle earners face is far higher than the headline rate suggests. Perception shapes behaviour. If progression feels like it is punished, and if promotion feels like a heavy deduction rather than a reward, morale suffers. This generation did what we asked of them—they studied, trained and qualified—but many feel let down and misled.”
“I wholeheartedly agree. Some of those suggestions have made me cringe. University enriches our society, expands horizons and fuels innovation, and today’s young people deserve to have the same choices as those who now seek to restrict them. It is our duty to reform a flawed system that is unfairly trapping millions of young people in debt. Student loans were presented as an investment; for too many, they now feel like a sentence.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. I agree that the Government need to be applauded for doing a lot of things right, but we are asking them to go further. For many, especially those on plan 2, their loan feels like a sentence—a sentence that lasts 30 years, a sentence that previous generations never faced on this scale, and a sentence that shapes life decisions, from postgraduate study to starting a family. We cannot build a confident, dynamic economy on graduates’ unrest—once quiet, but now hard to ignore. We cannot speak of opportunity while allowing aspiration to accumulate compound interest. We say that those with the broadest shoulders must bear the greatest burden, so let us ensure that that principle applies here. Graduates are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for fairness and consistency.”
“I thank hon. Members for taking part in the debate. I will add just one point, which is that IFS calculations suggest that a graduate would need to earn £63,000 a year just to keep a £50,000 loan from growing. That is an astronomical figure just to stop the interest from growing. All I would say to the Minister is that being in government gives us the ability to fix what is wrong. The graduate loan system is not working, so my humble request is that we please fix it. Question put and agreed to. Resolved , That this House has considered student loan repayment plans.”
“T7. Soaring car insurance costs are pricing young people off the roads. One constituent was recently quoted £3,000 and another £5,000. They are far from unique. What are the Government doing to bring down the cost of driving and make insurance affordable for young people again?”
“Does the Minister agree with me about the importance of the Northern Ireland Executive and the Government sharing knowledge, expertise and best practice as we all seek to improve outcomes for children in all our schools?”
“Last year, the UN working group on arbitrary detention ruled that Mr Lai has been unlawfully and arbitrarily detained. In 2022, the same UN working group concluded the same thing about Jagtar Johal. Today, Jagtar turns 39, but instead of celebrating, he is languishing in a foreign prison like Jimmy Lai. I caution the Government that if we do not stand up for our citizens unlawfully imprisoned abroad, we risk becoming beholden to the whims of others, rather than standing on firm principles. How are the Government making meaningful representations to our Indian and Chinese counterparts to bring these British citizens home?”
“That was the framework they relied on when they uprooted their lives, and changing it after the fact plunges families into uncertainty.”
“I accept the Government’s diagnosis that our immigration system is no longer fit for purpose. It was allowed to fail under a Conservative Government that lost control of the system, left people waiting in limbo and offended our sense of fairness. Now, in government, we must restore order—but restoring order must never mean abandoning fairness. British fairness is clear: when people play by the rules, we honour our side of the bargain. Changing the five-year ILR route retrospectively for those already on that pathway breaks that principle and is wrong. Since the White Paper’s publication I have had countless constituents asking for just one thing: that we do not change the rules for those who have already complied with them.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the Petitions Committee for securing this important debate. I speak today because Ilford South ranks second in the country in terms of the number of residents who signed the petition calling for the five-year ILR route to be maintained. In short, I say: “Don’t change the rules—don’t move the goalposts mid-game.” When I was seven, my parents left the life they knew in the Punjab so that their children might have a better future. Life here was tough. We had to work hard. The values of sacrifice, hard work and contribution are still alive in families across Britain today: families who have come here lawfully and fill vital skills shortages, who give up stability, work hard, pay their taxes and contribute fully to British life. Let us not let them down.”
“He planned his future around the existing rules; now that future is in doubt. Those are the human consequences of shifting the goalposts mid-game. My constituents are asking not for leniency, but fairness. Britain succeeds when it rewards contribution, values fairness and keeps its word. It is true that we must control our immigration system, but control must never come at the cost of fairness, because a country that changes the rules after people have kept to them is not restoring trust, but breaking it.”
“My hon. Friend makes a pertinent point and I absolutely agree with what she has said. We cannot overlook the fact that children will be adversely affected. Nearly 3,000 residents in Ilford South signed the petitions. They are not asking for special treatment; many have never claimed benefits and do not intend to. They are simply asking that the rules they came under are upheld. A constituent of mine called Amandeep, an engineer, told me that his employer will not sponsor him for 10 years. He has a young baby and—a point one of my hon. Friends made—forcing him to leave would destabilise his family. Pranav, aged 19, has an offer from the University of Oxford but, because he and his mother fall months short of the five years, they now face waiting another five years for settlement.”
“Many girls in my constituency, some as young as 12, have told me that they face misogynistic abuse and sexual harassment in school from boys of a similar age. Some have even told me that reports of their experiences have fallen on deaf ears with the school leads, some often saying, “You should be flattered.” Will the Leader of the House please condemn such words from school leads, and allow for the Education Secretary to lay out what steps her Department is taking to tackle the scourge of misogynistic abuse in schools and academies?”
“But survival alone was not justice, and silence was never safety, so the lesson of the Holocaust is clear: when hatred is tolerated, it grows; when lies go unchallenged, they spread; when humanity is divided into us and them, violence is never far away. That is why this House must be unequivocal: we will not excuse antisemitism. We will not tolerate fascism. We will not stand by while people are dehumanised, in our politics, in our communities or in our public life. Because remembrance demands resolve—resolve to speak when others stay silent, to act when others hesitate and to defend our shared humanity every time it is threatened. We owe that to Susan Pollack; we owe it to the six million; we owe it to the future. If “never again” is to mean anything at all, it must mean now and it must mean us.”
“The Holocaust did not begin with the gas chambers; it began with words—with lies repeated until they sounded like the truth, with people labelled as “other”, with hatred normalised, and with silence excused. That is why remembrance alone is not enough, because “never again” is not a slogan; it is a test—a test of whether we challenge antisemitism when we see it and when it is inconvenient to do so, whether we confront fascist rhetoric when it masquerades as opinion, and whether we defend human dignity when it costs us something. Six million Jews were murdered not because the world did not know, but because too many looked away. Susan Pollack survived Auschwitz. She survived Bergen-Belsen. She survived an attempt to erase her humanity.”
“By then, she said, “dehumanisation killed any thoughts in our heads.” For an entire year, she did not speak. She once recognised somebody from her village. The next day, that woman was dead. When liberation came, Susan told me something that must never be ignored: there was no joy at being liberated. She had lost her parents, 50 members of her family, her entire community. She did not even know whether her brother was still alive. Liberation could not undo what had been destroyed. That was Susan’s experience, and it was the experience of 6 million Jewish people and millions of others, systematically murdered because hatred was allowed to rule.”
“In May 1944, she and her family were transported by cattle trucks to Auschwitz-Birkenau. She was 15. Somebody whispered to her, “Don’t say you’re younger than 15,” so when she was asked, she said, “15 and a half.” She later learned why. Children under 15 were sent with their mothers directly to the gas chambers. Susan lost her mother, and with that loss came horrors beyond language: mothers watching their children die; children searching for protection that could not come; entire families murdered in minutes. That is what hatred looks like when it is given power. The cruelty did not stop. Susan’s hair was shaved, she was inspected—yes, inspected—starved and silenced. She watched people die, not by accident but by policy. She was later sent to Bergen-Belsen.”
“She is a Holocaust survivor who recently turned 95, and whom I had the privilege of meeting and interviewing. Susan was born in Hungary. Long before the camps, hatred crept into her life: graffiti on walls, Jewish students barred from universities, and her brother being beaten at a boy scout meeting. Each sign carried the same message: “You do not belong.” Then came the order. Susan’s family were forced from their home. They were told that they were being resettled. She clung on to that word, because hope—even false hope—was all she had. A letter followed; all Jewish fathers were ordered to attend a meeting. Susan’s father went, desperate to protect his family. He was beaten, forced into a lorry and taken away. Susan never saw him again. To this day, she does not know how or where her father died. Then came Susan’s turn.”
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) for opening the debate, and everybody else who has spoken so compassionately, with clarity and authenticity. The feeling that has come out is clear for everyone to see. The Holocaust inflicted pain on a scale that most of us will never truly comprehend—pain that did not end in 1945, and that still echoes through families, memory and generations of the Jewish community. This is not history at a distance; this was cruelty by design. It was mass murder, carried out deliberately on an industrial scale. Its trauma did not disappear; it was inherited. Today, I will speak about one survivor—one voice that we must listen to while we can. Her name is Susan Pollack.”
“We must take a firm and sustained approach, and fully empower Ofcom, so that this moment of technological progress does not become a major step backward for women’s safety.”
“We must be proactive, not reactive, because the ways in which women and girls are degraded and denied bodily autonomy online are constantly evolving. We must enforce safety by design, and it must mean more than administrative box-ticking. Tech firms must be able to demonstrate that they have seriously considered the harms their products may cause, and that they have meaningfully mitigated those risks. There is so much more I could say on this, particularly in the case of Grok and Meta’s smart glasses. Even a moment’s serious reflection would have made it glaringly obvious that these technologies could be exploited. This failure has already cost thousands of women and girls their sense of safety and dignity online.”
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Sir Mark Hendrick) for securing this hugely important debate. At the start of the year, many of us were horrified by the ease and speed at which thousands of women and children had their bodily autonomy violated, simply for existing online, but we should not kid ourselves that this was a one-off or an isolated scandal. Digital abuse of women and girls is not an anomaly; it is systemic. Only a few weeks ago, it was reported that Meta’s smart glasses are being used to secretly film women without their consent. This is not accidental misuse; it is foreseeable harm. Before these technologies are embedded in the fabric of everyday life, we have a duty to regulate and legislate so that women and girls do not become the tragic cost of a tech revolution that prizes innovation over safety.”
“Two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of hosting a roundtable with the Jack Petchey Foundation, where young people from London and Essex spoke powerfully about the barriers they face, including feeling that there are fewer opportunities for them. What steps is my right hon. Friend’s Department taking to deliver on the Government’s targets for two thirds of young people to be in university or an apprenticeship, so that young people can gain the skills they need to achieve their goals?”
“I welcome the Home Secretary’s statement, which I hope will deliver a more joined-up approach to tackling some of the most serious crimes. However, we know that the police still have significant work to do in rebuilding public trust. Will the Home Secretary outline how the reforms will help raise standards, increase numbers and strengthen public confidence in our police?”
“My constituent Ahmad, a senior skilled worker at Queen’s hospital, has not seen his wife, Israa, for two years as she remains trapped in Gaza. Ahmad applied for a spousal visa, but Israa has been unable to enrol her biometrics because the Gaza visa application centre has been closed since 2024 and no safe route to an alternative centre exists. The original application has expired and the second one faces the same barrier with no access to a visa application centre. Israa’s home has been bombed, leaving her without shelter or basic necessities. Will the Leader of the House urge the Home Secretary to consider alternative arrangements, such as deferred biometrics, so that those lawfully working here can evacuate their spouses from Gaza?”
“T4. Although I welcome recent efforts to get a grip on the outrageous driving test backlog, more needs to be done. I urge the Secretary of State and the DVSA to take further steps to safeguard the online booking system from profiteering by restricting driving schools from booking tests in bulk and by removing the test swapping features to stop reselling at huge mark-ups.”
“Will the Leader of the House make time for the Minister responsible to make an urgent statement on the steps the Government are taking to ensure that the concerns of patients with learning disabilities are treated seriously, so that no one else suffers in the way Juliet did?”
“In 2020, my constituents Christine and Francis Saunders experienced the worst loss any parent can endure when their daughter, Juliet, died at only 25 years old after signs of bowel perforations were dismissed. Juliet’s death was avoidable; had she received timely treatment, she would have had an 80% chance of survival. Juliet lived with Cornelia de Lange syndrome—a condition that causes learning disabilities and physical health complications—and her tragic death is not isolated. Many people with learning disabilities are routinely failed by healthcare services, and they are more than three times as likely to die prematurely from treatable causes.”
“The first duty of any Government is to ensure the safety and security of all its citizens. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that the detention of Jagtar Singh Johal violates international law. I ask the Leader of the House to urgently press the Foreign Secretary to update the House on what efforts have been made by the Government on the release of the British citizen Jagtar Johal.”
“Can the Secretary of State assure me that unregistered, unregulated settings are looked at very quickly and that the lessons learned from this particular case are shared among all settings across the entire country, so that everybody learns the lessons—not just this particular setting or chain?”
“I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for the urgency and respect that she has shown this particular case. May I put on the record that I agree with the sentiments of this House about the urgency with which we need to deal with this particular case and potential future cases, which we must stop? The police have to be commended, but the trigger point was the whistleblower—that is where it started. We have to look at two things, because the pain that is being suffered by the parents is unimaginable, and the trauma of the children will be felt for years and generations to come.”
“Many such nudification apps are widely available and advertised specifically to appeal to young men and boys, operating on a premium business model and encouraging users to share the app with others. A few weeks ago, the Government announced an updated curriculum—”
“I know that the Government are working hard to tackle the growing prevalence of such gender-based abuse, including by criminalising the creation and sharing of intimate images and deepfakes through the Online Safety Act, but we must do more. First, we need a joined-up approach between the Home Office and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to ensure that women and girls are protected from technology-facilitated abuse and that the advancement of AI technology does not come at the cost of women. I desperately urge the Government to enforce an outright ban on nudification apps, as recommended in Baroness Bertin’s pornography review.”
“This debate is about sexual violence in London, but this type of technology-facilitated abuse transcends borders and regions. With these technologies, the perpetrators do not even need to be in the presence of those who they choose to victimise. Ten years ago, we could not have conceived of this type of crime; now teachers have to tackle a crime that did not even exist when they were growing up, unequipped with guidance to support pupils, parents or themselves. That scares me. I think about the constituents who have written to me. This is a new type of crime that they will have to hope that they are safe from. This is a new way in which men can assert power, control and entitlement over women and women’s bodies.”
“What gives anybody the right to sexually assault, rape and then kill somebody simply walking home? A young law graduate with a career in front of her was taken in her prime. Sadly, there is a new form of sexual violence that shows these rape myths for the empty victim-blaming narratives that they are. The growing prevalence of technology facilitates the creation of non-consensual sexually explicit deepfakes. Recently, there have been growing reports of boys as young as 12 using nudification apps to create deepfake nudes of their classmates and teachers. Girls are seeing realistic images of their faces superimposed on to a naked body that they do not recognise. Such images are then often sent to their friends, classmates and even family members, shattering girls’ self-esteem, body confidence and trust in others for years to come.”
“Women and girls who do experience sexual harassment or violence are blamed for it: blamed for walking alone at night, for wearing the wrong item of clothing or for sending the wrong signal. In my constituency of Ilford South, a young woman called Zara Aleena was walking home. CCTV footage showed another young woman running into a shop because she saw the horrible monster who was following her; she felt threatened and went into the shop for safety. A second woman on the same journey, on the same fateful night, ran to her home. She was on the main road, Cranbrook Road, and she lived very close. She ran home, and she too was safe. That meant that the monster moved on to Zara, who was tragically killed. She was only walking home—that was her crime; she was simply walking home.”
“Since becoming an MP, I have received many distressing emails from constituents, some as young as 14, who have recounted their experience of sexual violence and harassment: women and girls who told me that this time they had escaped, but they dreaded to think what might have happened if they had not. Women and girls should not have to live their lives as a series of lucky escapes, constantly feeling relieved that on this occasion they were not assaulted. To be able to walk around safely without fear is a bare minimum—it is a basic human right. Yet the lived reality of so many women and girls in London and across the UK is a cycle of fear and relief, with their terror assuaged only by a sense of gratitude that they are safe—this time, at least.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum) for securing this debate. I admire her courage and her continued fight for a better future when it comes to tackling violence against women and girls. I support her quest to make the lives of women and girls safer. In 2023, the Metropolitan police recorded 8,800 cases of rape, which translates to a staggering 24 reported rapes per day. However, when we consider that recorded rapes make up only about 20% of cases of sexual violence, we realise that the true extent of this crime is—shamefully—much larger. Nearly every woman in London has a story to tell. Hundreds of thousands of women carry around the hurt and trauma of sexual violence, even if their stories never make it on to the front pages.”
“My questions to the Minister are: why do the majority of women not report crime? Why is the prosecution rate so low? Why do men feel it is okay to inflict pain on women and girls?”
“There is virtually no dry land left; there is no new safe space to create new camps—there is nowhere else to go. We cannot allow the pretence of a ceasefire to slow our efforts to fulfil the humanitarian obligations to Gaza, or to excuse a lacklustre approach to supporting civilians. The humanitarian degradation and destruction in Gaza and the west bank remain as urgent as ever. I know that the Minister cares immensely and works tremendously hard. Does he agree that we have entered a situation where the Israeli Government can claim the moral high ground of operating under a ceasefire deal while continuing their assault on Gaza? If so, what representations has he made to Israel and our American partners to urge Israel to act in accordance with its moral obligation under international and humanitarian law and let aid flow into Gaza?”
“Regardless of the constant violations and airstrikes, and the continued starvation, the illusion of a ceasefire has allowed many to take a moral holiday from the crisis in Palestine. They are patting themselves on the back for having solved this international crisis. Meanwhile, children are still paying the price and most families in Gaza remain trapped in crowded makeshift camps with little or no aid. We must be under no illusions: as we approach winter, the situation for civilians will only get worse. In the last few weeks, rainstorms and flooding have plunged Gazans into further misery, destroying the little shelter they have left. Tents have been broken; mattresses have been soaked. Because Gaza’s sanitation system has collapsed, much of the water saturating tents, mattresses and even food supplies is contaminated with sewage.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McVey. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for introducing this debate. I would like to turn the debate back to what it is supposed to be about, which is the suffering in Palestine. For the people there, there is no ceasefire. Bloodshed, slaughter and starvation remain the reality on the ground. Since the ceasefire was supposedly agreed, 63 children have been killed, according to UN sources—that is two children every day who have been murdered under the so-called ceasefire agreement. Those children who are alive are almost certainly suffering in some other way. They are injured or grieving, having lost their parents, friends or loved ones.”
“I welcome the Government’s ambitious mission to reduce violence against women and girls. Many survivors who experience sexual assault will never go to the police or press charges due to appallingly low conviction rates and fears of being retraumatised during court proceedings. Given the alarming statistic that one in four women over the age of 16 have been sexually assaulted, what steps are the Government taking to make reporting and pressing charges a more realistic prospect for survivors?”
“My constituent Michelle would like to move closer to her children, but as a leaseholder, she is trapped in her property. There is only a short term remaining on her lease, and she has tried to extend it, but the freeholder is demanding a sum that is disproportionate to the property value. On top of that, she would have to cover the freeholder’s administrative fees, making the cost entirely unaffordable. For constituents like Michelle, who are essentially subject to the whim of the freeholder, leasehold reform could not be more urgent. Can the Leader of the House ask the relevant Minister to provide an update on the Government’s plans to fix the broken freehold system?”
“The Metropolitan police have decided not to close a small section of the eastbound A12 during the annual remembrance service at Ilford war memorial, although it has done so for decades. That choice diminishes the solemnity of the occasion and the memory of those who gave their life for our freedom. In comparison, the community across Europe honour their fallen at Menin gate without hesitation every single day. Simply pausing traffic once a year for two minutes for the parade to pass is surely not beyond us. Will the Leader of the House assist me in urging the Metropolitan police to think again and reverse this deeply regrettable decision?”
“That is why this World Stroke Day we need to focus our efforts on prevention and awareness. We need to continue promoting a healthy lifestyle to all, and ensuring that those from ethnic minorities have the same awareness about stroke, so that they can benefit from better health outcomes. World Stroke Day provides us with the opportunity to pay tribute to carers at home and in the NHS, to raise awareness of the signs of stroke—remember the FAST acronym—and to acknowledge the bravery and perseverance of stroke survivors. I say to the Minister, “Please end the postcode lottery and improve the care in the community.” Stroke strikes indiscriminately, so the 10-year plan must address the inadequacies and differences across the country. I appeal to the Minister to reach out.”
“The NHS campaign demonstrates that stroke signs can be less pronounced, like someone being unable to finish reading a bedtime story to their grandchild or someone suddenly feeling that they are unable to smile. I was particularly pleased to hear that the new campaign has been making its way to ethnic minority TV channels and on to social media to raise awareness. Researching for this debate, I came across an alarming study revealing that ethnic minority patients tend to have strokes about five years earlier and are at least twice as likely to face serious complications or death. The study highlighted the fact that that disparity co-exists with many chronic health conditions such as increased rates of diabetes, a condition that also increases the risk of stroke.”