Warinder Juss
MP for Wolverhampton West · Labour · United Kingdom
“While visiting St Peter’s collegiate academy in my constituency, I spoke with Moses and Nana, pupils at the school. I was struck by how engaged they were with their schooling, and by their inquisitive nature, ambition, and desire to learn and succeed.”
“I am really pleased that the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister were able to discuss Sudan at the NATO summit, because it is the biggest humanitarian crisis the world is facing. However, did she also have the opportunity to discuss the situation in Gaza and the west bank?”
“The Solicitor General has just mentioned the early victims’ right to review, or the VRR. As a west midlands MP, I am proud that we were the first area in the country to trial the scheme for victims of rape and serious sexual offences.”
“Wolverhampton community radio—101.8 WCR FM—in my constituency provides a vital service for people across the city. It gives a platform to local voices, community groups, charities and volunteers, and keeps residents informed about the issues that matter to them most.”
“I am really grateful to the Prime Minister for his heartfelt statement and apology. As a man of faith, I struggle to see what possible religious justification there could have been to take babies away from young mothers just because they were not married, and I have to feel a sense of shame that religion could be used in such a way.”
“I welcome the Minister’s strong condemnation of the annexation of land in Gaza and the west bank. What reassurance can he give to Members of this House that no military components that we have sold to Israel—not just bombs and bullets—have been used in this further illegal settlement expansion?”
The complete record
Every one of 402 lines we hold for Warinder Juss, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 9.
“Yes, the measures are all about getting timely justice, which is why I will support the Bill. This Labour Government inherited a system on the brink of collapse, and in which cases like my constituent’s are all too common. We must all recognise that action is sorely needed, and I welcome the Government’s commitment to reform. I thank Sir Brian Leveson for his detailed and thoughtful review—part 1 was completed last July, so the Bill is not being rushed. His review has played a significant role in shaping the reforms in the Bill. I know that there are mixed opinions about the proposed changes to jury trials, but the independent review of the criminal courts was carried out because of the truly appalling backlog in our criminal justice system. I have heard of trials in the most seriously affected courts being listed into 2030.”
“I therefore welcome this Government taking concrete steps to address the crisis that we have inherited, and I will support this Bill. Although I have concentrated on jury trials, there are other measures in the Bill that I welcome, such as the move away from the presumption of parental involvement in family courts, which will allow the Government to put the best interests of children first. We need drastic action, and we need to take it now, so I welcome everything the Government are doing.”
“Absolutely. I have had discussions with Sir Brian Leveson on a number of occasions, and he confirms that no one measure will achieve the reforms we need; we need to take a number of measures, of which the restriction in jury trials is just one, to achieve what we are trying to achieve. I also welcome the additional safeguards for victims in rape and serious sexual offences cases, drawing on recommendations from the Law Commission. These new procedures will ensure that vulnerable victims of these horrific crimes are protected throughout the justice process, prevent further trauma, and ensure a move away from lines of questioning that perpetuate harmful rape myths and stereotypes. The backlog in our courts and the delays denying justice to victims require bold and drastic action, and we need to take that action now.”
“I recently had the pleasure of visiting Base 25, a dedicated charity supporting young people with special educational needs and disabilities, to formally launch its new youth café provision in my constituency. Among the vital services it provides is the Government-funded WorkWell programme, which supports young people in returning to education, employment or training. Will the Leader of the House join me in commending the wonderful work that Base 25 does? Does he agree that we need to make more use of community-based organisations, such as Base 25, to support our schools with SEND provision, so that our young people and their families can receive the co-ordinated and effective help that they need to achieve the best possible outcomes?”
“10. What assessment the Church of England has made of the potential impact of the conflict in Sudan on the Christian population in that country.”
“Earlier this year I attended the Open Doors world watch list launch, at the request of my Wolverhampton West constituents, who are gravely concerned about the situation in Sudan. The event confirmed the extreme levels of persecution against Christians in that country, with reports of forced conversions, physical punishment, the destruction of churches and sexual violence. Given that the conflict seems to be getting worse, with the country rising nearly 10 places on the Open Doors watch list in the past five years, can my hon. Friend please outline what steps are being taken to supply international aid and support to Christians being persecuted in Sudan?”
“Last weekend, the Wolverhampton Wanderers player Tolu Arokodare was subjected to appalling racist abuse on his social media profiles and three other premier league players shared similar experiences. I wrote to the Minister for Online Safety, my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan), this week to request a meeting to discuss what can be done to stop this racist abuse of our black footballers so that the perpetrators are punished for their disgusting behaviour and social media companies take their share of responsibility. Will the Leader of the House please join me in condemning this horrible abuse and expressing full support and solidarity to Tolu? Will he also reach out to the Minister to ensure that the requested meeting is scheduled as soon as possible?”
“The National Bureau of Economic Research has said that, because of Brexit, the economy is 6% to 8% smaller than it otherwise would be. At the first Black Country Chamber of Commerce meeting I went to, most of the businesses were talking about the adverse effects of Brexit. Would my hon. Friend agree that the step forward now is to carry on and make the most of the agreement that the Government have made with the European Union, with a view to growing the economy and backing British jobs?”
“This week is Heart Unions Week, hence the badge on my lapel instead of the Wolves badge that I normally wear. Last Saturday, I was with the Wolverhampton, Bilston and District Trades Union Council handing out information about joining a trade union to passers-by in Wolverhampton city centre. Will the Leader of the House please join me in celebrating the vital work that our unions do in improving the lives of working people across the country, and the work that they did with the Government for us to deliver the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation through the landmark Employment Rights Act 2025? Does he agree that one of the best decisions our constituents can make is to join a trade union, for dignity and security in the workplace?”
“I ask the Minister to please respond to the Hughes report, enact Dr Hughes’s recommendations and ensure that justice can finally be delivered for these women.”
“When pursuing legal claims for compensation for these women, I was always acutely aware that compensation and legal costs would ultimately fall on the NHS. A compensation scheme as recommended by the Hughes report would save the excessive costs of litigation that the NHS would have to pay out—money that could then be used for the treatment of patients. I would also like the Government to consider alternative approaches such as an insurance-style levy paid by companies when they bring new products to the market, which would create a dedicated fund for future claims and thereby protect our vital NHS resources while incentivising manufacturers to ensure that their products are of the highest safety standards. We cannot leave these women in limbo waiting to receive the redress they so clearly deserve.”
“Although I have constituents who have been affected, before becoming an MP I worked as a solicitor and specialised in representing women who had been given plastic polypropylene mesh implants for vaginal mesh surgery as a quick fix to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, without being properly advised by the doctors who gave the treatment. All those women did was trust a medical professional who told them they were receiving the gold standard of care, as we all would. The mesh then eroded, cut through vaginal tissue and caused chronic pain, loss of mobility and sexual disfunction, and often resulted in relationship breakdown. Many of those women were unable to continue working and suffered life-changing injuries. Their lives were ruined.”
“Alongside delivering justice for the victims of the mesh and sodium valproate scandals, I urge the Minister and her Department to commit to doing everything possible to prevent future scandals of this sort and to better protect our constituents and communities. I also welcome the work of campaign groups such as Sling The Mesh, and urge the Government to consider making yellow card reporting mandatory so that potentially harmful products can be identified sooner, and action can be taken before damage is done. I have a particular interest in this debate.”
“We often hear that justice delayed is justice denied, yet we continue to deny justice to the women who have suffered. Redress must be delivered swiftly. The Hughes report recommends a two-stage non-adversarial redress scheme to provide both financial and non-financial support to women who have suffered avoidable harm due to pelvic mesh and sodium valproate. Although financial compensation is of course vital—a two-stage scheme would involve a quick initial payment followed by a more tailored scheme for the payment of compensation—just as important is access to appropriate support, including specialist healthcare, and a formal acknowledgment, with an apology, of the harm endured by these women. Dr Hughes laid out in detail how such a scheme can be implemented, and it is for the Government to put one into effect as soon as possible.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship again, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green) for bringing this issue to the House. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson) for her tireless commitment to this campaign and for her leadership in chairing the First Do No Harm all-party parliamentary group. Like many Members here, I was present in the debate a year ago on the first anniversary of the Hughes report. Although it has been two years since the publication of the report, the Government have sadly still not responded to it, and justice has still not been delivered for the many women impacted by pelvic mesh and sodium valproate. In the very first paragraph, Dr Henrietta Hughes makes it clear that the report must lead to Government action.”
“In my constituency, almost one in five households have been living in fuel poverty, struggling to heat their homes this winter. I welcome the Government’s commitment to lifting 1 million more households out of fuel poverty by 2030, which will have a significant impact on my constituents. Will the Minister please outline what other tangible changes my constituents can expect to see over the next year thanks to GB Energy, so that by the time we come to next winter they can feel comfortable that they can now afford to heat their homes?”
“Last week, at a City of Wolverhampton council meeting in my constituency, when discussing the removal of face coverings under a public space protection order, a Reform councillor asked a hijab-wearing Labour cabinet member, Obaida Ahmed, whether the order extended to the removal of religious garments like burkas for the identification of criminals—comments that clearly shook Councillor Ahmed. Will the Leader of the House please join me in condemning such disgraceful and divisive questioning, and stand in solidarity with Councillor Ahmed and all those from whichever party who refuse to let prejudice and discrimination undermine efforts to make our communities safer?”
“The UN’s “Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory” concluded that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza strip under the 1948 genocide convention, and human rights organisations such as the International Association of Genocide Scholars—which has already been mentioned—Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Oxfam have expressed the view that genocide has been committed by Israel under international law. Israel has also recently revoked the licences of 37 international NGOs.”
“What the Palestinian people have endured is cruel, inhumane and completely unacceptable. We know that, last year, it was an Israeli Government blockade that led the United Nations and others to declare a famine in Gaza. We know that the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu for war crimes. We know that more than 90% of the homes across Gaza have been damaged or destroyed.”
“We are fortunate to have enough distinguished lawyers in this House to decide whether there is at least a risk of genocide having occurred and to conduct that risk assessment, as has been requested in this debate. When do we decide that enough is enough? When do we decide that enough innocent people have been killed and enough suffering has occurred for us to consider that an ally of ours, Israel, may be committing genocide under international law, and to take decisive, concrete action to prevent that genocide by the Israeli Government?”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. It seems quite clear that the reason the licences have been revoked is to prevent aid from going through, which leads to the assumption, at least, that there might be a risk of genocide taking place. The UN genocide convention requires states “to prevent and to punish” genocide. I will repeat the definition in article II of the convention, which is that genocide is any act “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part”— I emphasise the words “in whole or in part”— “a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. We cannot stand by and pretend that it is for an international court to decide whether or not genocide has occurred in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and we cannot turn a blind eye as innocent Palestinian people continue to suffer.”
“Does the hon. Member consider that part of the problem as to why dentists do not offer NHS appointments is because contracts have not been updated and perhaps they feel that when they do NHS work they are not properly paid?”
“The hon. Gentleman will know my constituency well, because he was previously the MP there, and that it is a largely urban area including a city centre. Even my constituents, however, have had serious problems with bills and birthday cards not arriving, and hospital appointments being missed because of the post being late, while one constituent confirmed that his business has been affected adversely. I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s speech and that rural areas have particular challenges, but does he agree that poor postal services are a nationwide issue affecting all communities, and that we need to address it as such?”
“In my constituency, the Safer Wolverhampton Partnership works with keyholders such as the council, police, healthcare, housing and education providers. The Way Youth Zone also provides support, stability and a safe place for young people. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to adopt a co-ordinated and holistic approach to addressing city centre safety, with appropriate funding for youth services?”
“I welcome the action that the Government are taking to reduce the court backlogs, especially for cases involving violence against women and girls. What consultation has taken place with victims organisations and charities regarding the plans to restrict jury trials? We must ensure that these victims are kept at the heart of any reforms to the courts system, so that they can be satisfied that timely justice will be delivered.”
“Does my hon. and learned Friend agree, as a fellow lawyer, that it is rather unusual to bring retrospective legislation into effect? There have been previous cases where legislation has been made retrospective, but that has been to punish crime. We are talking about ordinary, decent people who have come to this country to better not only their own lives but our lives and those of the rest of the community. Does he agree that it is absolutely wrong to have the law applied retrospectively, and that it puts the legal system to shame?”
“Our diversity and multiculturalism are what makes our country great. We should protect legal migrants, not only to enable them to better their lives but to better our lives, too, so that everyone who lives in this country and who calls her home can prosper.”
“Making the proposed immigration reforms retrospective not only undermines the basic premise that the law should be stable and understandable but destroys confidence in the entire system and betrays those who came to this country in good faith. To apply these rules to those who are already here and working towards their settled status is inherently unfair. The strength of feeling about the issue is obvious, as evidenced by the number of people in the Chamber today. On 17 December last year, more than 800 migrant members of the largest trade union in this country, Unison, attended one of the largest lobbying events in Parliament’s history, engaging with more than 100 MPs. These people are here legally; we should be making it easier for them to become settled citizens, not more difficult.”
“The changes that we are discussing today will have an impact on real lives. We must remember that throughout our discussions. Over a thousand of my constituents have signed the petitions. They wonder why people who have made this country their home and who live as model citizens—earning a living, paying their taxes and giving a huge amount back to their communities—are now having the rug pulled out from underneath them. One of my constituents, Subhranshu Kumar, is a highly skilled worker who completed his master’s degree here in the UK. Just 14 months away from reaching his settled status, he now finds himself in limbo. He was planning to buy a house next year, but now feels he cannot do that. He is not asking for special treatment; all he wants is for the rules that existed when he decided to come here to remain in place.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I find myself declaring an interest, because I am an immigrant myself. I was born in east Africa. My parents moved to this country with my two elder brothers: we came to Wolverhampton, and I am very proud to call myself a Wulfrunian and to have the privilege of representing the amazing people of Wolverhampton West, a community in which one in four people, like me, were born outside this country. This debate is not just about politics; it is about humanity. It is about people who have fled persecution. It is about people we need in this country to work in our NHS, care homes, shops, universities and other places. They are not just seeking a better life for themselves; ultimately, they are contributing to our communities and our economy, just as my family have done.”
“For the past nine years, the church of St Chad and St Mark in my Wolverhampton West constituency has welcomed Iranian refugees into its congregation who have fled the persecution of the oppressive Iranian regime. Last week, we heard the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister speak about the total abhorrence of the killings, the violence and the repression to which protesters in Iran have recently been subjected. That has mainly been by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, who have also intimidated and harassed dissidents abroad. When will this Government proscribe and ban the IRGC as a terrorist organisation, as other countries have done already?”
“My hon. Friend has made some excellent points. Tettenhall in my constituency is a significantly populated suburb of Wolverhampton, where residents face similar problems to those highlighted by my hon. Friend. Constituents say that they have little or no signal and they struggle to make contact with family and friends. The other day, a constituent told me that he had difficulty contacting the emergency services because there was no mobile phone connectivity. My hon. Friend is right to say that very often the problem is considered to be in rural areas but that more densely populated areas, such as Tettenhall, have similar problems. Does my hon. Friend agree that in this day and age we need to ensure that there is connectivity everywhere?”
“The hon. Gentleman is being generous with his time. On his last point, there has been no new legislation to deal with antisocial firework use for over two decades. Some 557 of my constituents signed these petitions. Since being elected I have dealt with 150 separate cases in my constituency of Wolverhampton West; constituents have raised a number of issues, including fireworks going off at midnight or at 6 o’clock in the morning. Does the hon. Member agree that, as a start, the least this Government could do is what the first petition asked for—reduce maximum noise levels from 120 dB to 90 dB? Decreasing the volume of fireworks is one step forward to take now.”
“I have spent many years celebrating with fireworks in my garden, as my hon. Friend mentioned, and I have had the pleasure of having firework displays with my children. However, does she agree that things have got a bit too far in that we are seeing fireworks throughout the year? Of course, we expect fireworks to go off during events such as bonfire night, Diwali and new year, but they are happening throughout the year and at all times of the day. Does she agree that it is time to limit the period during which fireworks can be used?”
“My hon. Friend is making some excellent points. A constituent of mine has a dog that is terribly frightened whenever fireworks are going on. She is simply saying, “Can we not have some kind of a limit, where fireworks don’t go off after 11 pm, for example?”. She recalls an occasion where she had to get up at four o’clock in the morning to go to work, but could not because she had been disturbed by fireworks during the night. My hon. Friend makes an excellent point about public displays; as someone who has enjoyed having fireworks in the garden, I get much more joy now from going to a public display, being with other people and seeing much better fireworks than I would be able to at home. Does she agree that the problem is that we have no control whatsoever and that steps need to be taken now?”
“I remember walking around Featherstone and Oakwood prisons, near my constituency of Wolverhampton West, and seeing how well the incentivised substance-free living units appeared to be working. The Government’s own data suggests that prisoners on such units are 30% less likely to be involved in violence or self-harm. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s decision to consolidate these living units, instead of expanding them, is a missed opportunity to improve safety and rehabilitation?”
“Although I am a proud Wolverhampton Wanderers fan and, as a season ticket holder, regularly go to football games, for much of my life I was prevented and discouraged from going to a football game. I was told that because I wore a turban and because of the colour of my skin, I would be attacked. Can the Home Secretary assure the House that we will never again have a situation in this country where football fans cannot go to a game because their safety cannot be guaranteed?”
“Does my hon. Friend find it surprising, as I do, that whereas there are duties of care on workplaces, prisons, hospitals and colleges, and owed by manufacturers to consumers, no duty of care is owed by universities to students?”
“I am really sorry to hear the case of the hon. Lady’s constituent. When I first raised this issue in the House last May, I mentioned that over the previous 10 years one student had taken their own life every four days in England and Wales. When Natasha took her life in April 2018, she was at least the 10th student to have committed suicide at that university since October 2016. Does the hon. Lady agree that as parliamentarians we cannot just sit aside and do nothing on this matter?”
“However, there are other reasons—to do with legal costs and time limits—why, in order to achieve justice, it should be possible to pursue a claim in negligence where a university has been negligent.”
“In February 2018, a university employee received an email from Natasha, saying: “I’ve been having suicidal thoughts and to a certain degree attempted it.” At that time, Natasha had been diagnosed with chronic social anxiety disorder, but the university continued to mark her down on her assessments. The court confirmed that there were other ways of eliciting information from the student rather than having oral assessments. It concluded that, had there been a duty of care in existence, there would have been a breach of that duty, and the university would consequently have been negligent for its actions. Natasha’s claim succeeded only under the Equality Act 2010 on the grounds of disability discrimination, because the university failed to make reasonable adjustments based on her disability.”
“There are well-established principles of negligence that state that, where a duty of care exists and that duty is breached, resulting in injury and/or financial loss that was reasonably foreseeable, negligence has occurred. I will bring the tragic case of Abrahart up again. In Natasha’s case, there was reasonable foreseeability of Natasha’s health suffering and her having a psychiatric disorder, but it was held that the university was not negligent because the university did not owe Natasha a relevant duty of care. In October 2017, university staff became aware that Natasha was struggling and was experiencing anxiety and panic attacks in response to oral assessments.”
“I was a personal injury and clinical negligence solicitor for more than 30 years before I became an MP, and I find it shocking that the common law does not impose a duty of care on universities to exercise reasonable care and skill for the wellbeing, health and safety of their students when they are teaching them or providing education-related services. That also applies to taking reasonable steps to prevent injury, including psychiatric injury, when such a statutory duty exists in prisons, hospitals, primary and secondary schools, and colleges or further education. Duty of care in negligence also exists in other situations: doctor to patient, solicitor to client, manufacturer to consumer, and one road user to another.”
“That duty of care is applied in workplaces and colleges, and higher education should be no exception. After I raised this matter in the House last May, I got a response from the Minister for Skills, Baroness Smith of Malvern, who said that a duty of care may arise in certain circumstances, and that such circumstances would be a matter for the courts to decide, based on the facts and context of the case being considered, and would be dependent on the application by the court of accepted common-law principles. I became an MP to be a legislator. As MPs, we cannot absolve ourselves from our duty as legislators by saying that it is for the courts to clarify uncertainties in the law. It is for us not only to clarify the law, but to make it stronger and sensible.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing this important debate. Currently, there is no general duty on universities to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm to adult students. With much of the University of Wolverhampton in my constituency of Wolverhampton West, I have been working closely with the university’s director of student life and designated safeguarding lead to address this issue. Campaigners are not asking for strict liability or for universities to take the form of a parent. They are asking for something fair and simple: where a university becomes aware of a foreseeable risk of serious harm to one of their students, it should take reasonable steps to reduce and prevent that risk.”
“More importantly, it will give clarity to judges to ensure that justice is achieved and there is access to justice. Universities will also be given clarity about their responsibilities, so that they can take appropriate action to prevent the loss of young lives in their institutions. A statutory duty of care for universities would define expectations, embed accountability and promote prevention. It would not burden universities unnecessarily, but would align them with the responsibility already expected in other sectors. This is about fairness, clarity and saving lives, and Parliament must act to close this duty gap. Students and their families deserve better, universities need certainty and the courts need clarity. As parliamentarians, let us make that happen.”
“My hon. Friend makes a valid point, and I agree. There will be cases where a student is vulnerable and action needs to be taken, but where that student may not have been diagnosed with a disability. It does not feel fair that in those circumstances the university should not take any steps to deal with the student’s vulnerability. It cannot be right that there is currently no duty on universities to take reasonable steps to protect the welfare of their students and prevent them from suffering harm when it is reasonably foreseeable that a failure to act will result in harm. Establishing such a statutory duty of care would ensure that the law in this country was brought in line with the position in other common-law countries, like the United States and Australia.”
“Many hon. Members have mentioned the need for universities to have extra funding to meet this statutory duty of care. Does the hon. Member agree that it is not always an issue of funding, but can be one of mindset? In Natasha Abrahart’s case, the matter could have been dealt, with without the need for extra funding, just by finding another way to elicit that information from Natasha rather than exposing her to oral assessments when the university was aware that she was suffering from chronic social anxiety disorder.”
“The Opposition are keen to rely on Magna Carta to defend jury trials, but Magna Carta also states that justice should not be delayed. Sir Brian Leveson reported that jury trials are taking twice as long as they did in 2000 because criminal cases are now much more complex and can involve thousands of pages of electronic evidence. We are putting more pressure—financial and otherwise—on jurors, and it is now much more difficult to support and guide them. There is clearly a case for reform. I understand that one recommendation made by Sir Brian Leveson was to have jury trials replaced by a judge and two magistrates, so could that be a possible compromise to reduce the delays?”
“Any prisoner absconding is, of course, bad news and something that should not happen, but does the Minister agree that it is a symptom of the broken-down prison system that we inherited from the previous Government and something that we are now trying to sort out? Can she confirm that the rate of prisoners absconding is lower under this Government than it was under the previous Government?”