Windrush Day

Debate between Dawn Butler and Joy Morrissey

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

It is an absolute and wonderful pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) and her beautiful tribute to the Windrush generation and her constituents. I know how much they appreciate the fact that she calls for this debate in Parliament every single year, and I concur with her on the beautiful exhibition in Portcullis House. However, I slightly disagree on raising the Windrush’s anchor. I have had this conversation with Sir Patrick Vernon, and I would prefer the money to be spent on a learning centre and an educational trust. I feel that would be a more worthwhile spend of money.

My mum and dad came here on British passports. They would be considered part of the Windrush generation, and they are extremely proud of coming on their British passports. The way they were taught English in school was way better than how we were taught English in school, and we often got into trouble for how we spoke, because we were not speaking the Queen’s English. I remember being in the garden with my father one day and asking him to sing the national anthem. He started singing “God Save the Queen”, but I wanted him to sing the Jamaican national anthem, because I wanted to learn it. There is a deep history there. As my hon. Friend said in her moving speech, some politicians are trying to divide us, but there is so much that unites us.

The Windrush scandal has been such a painful time. The first time I heard of it was when Winston, as I will call him, came to see me in my surgery. He had been working for the council for 40 years and was looking forward to his retirement, but when it was time for retirement, he was told that because he was not legally here, he would not have access to his pension. I was absolutely stunned by that. Sometimes constituents do not tell us the full story, and I thought that maybe there was more to it, but on further investigation I found that it was just a complete injustice.

Winston was embarrassed and ashamed. I would say to him that it was not his embarrassment or shame to carry, because this was something done to him by the British Government. However, there is a lack of understanding of the pride that this generation brings with them, as seen in how they carry themselves, how they speak and how they dress. People carrying things in a plastic bag is a no-no in the Jamaican community. If it is see-through, it is called a scandal bag, and is embarrassing because nobody should see what someone has in their bag. There is a lot of pride, which is why this has caused such embarrassment and shame.

I asked Jacqui McKenzie, who is the head of immigration, asylum and Windrush cases at Leigh Day, about the cases she is currently dealing with. The first issue, she said, is the excessive delay, with some people waiting four years. Many of them are very elderly, and the stress of the wait has caused illnesses such as dementia. We should hold our heads in shame. There are problems with claims for loss of earnings and the impact on people of a life lived in limbo, waiting for a decision, or in shame, waiting for the Government to acknowledge they belong in the country. That has a profound effect, and the fact that it is not considered is unacceptable. People were sacked from their jobs and they did not get their promotions. Some people could not find places to live or to rent, and as I have mentioned, they did not get their pensions. All of this is unacceptable.

Caseworkers are currently not sufficiently trained. Constituents have told me that caseworkers have said to them, “Whereabouts is that?” or, “Are you sure?” when they present information. Teachers have contacted me saying that they can vouch for the West Indian children they taught in their schools if we need evidence, and that is how the community is coming together to try to right these wrongs.

Jacqui also mentioned the misinterpretation of demonstrating lawful status, which has led to cases being refused incorrectly. For example, two brothers, now in their 30s, applied for indefinite leave to remain in 2008 as children of settled Windrush parents. The Home Office wrongly refused their application, but years later the Home Office admitted it had made a mistake. However, it has not corrected the knock-on effects that the error caused, and those brothers are still waiting for justice five years later.

I have constituents who went to Jamaica to visit family or bury a relative, and when they went to the airport, they were told they could not come back and they were stuck in Jamaica. We have cases of people stuck in Jamaica for 10 years—10 years! One resident who is stuck in Jamaica has plenty of evidence, but he has been refused compensation based on having no lawful status, which is wrong. He was offered £10,000, but then was told that giving him that amount of money was a mistake, which has retraumatised him, and he is now showing signs of dementia.

There are problems with requests for updates, and there is a lack of transparency and a lack of care. All of this is unacceptable. As my hon. Friend mentioned, there is also a discrepancy between claimants in decision making. In exactly the same cases, sometimes in the same family, when people have presented their information, they have been given different awards. Some get no award, some get £10,000 and some get £40,000. All this shows that the system is not fit for purpose.

The scheme should be moved from the Home Office, which should never have been the administrator of a scheme when it was responsible for the injustice it has inflicted on others. We also need a truly independent appeal mechanism, as well as more experienced staff. At the moment, constituents have to go to the ombudsman, which means they have to go to their MP, who has to sign the application, so we need a straightforward appeal system. The current system is built to retraumatise people who have been wronged.

Lastly, we need a Windrush inquiry. We really need to know and understand the cause of the scandal, but also why it is still ongoing. We should be providing redress instead of causing trauma. Next year is the 10th anniversary of this scandal, and the consequences and injustices are still ongoing. It is our job to do this, and when the Minister gets to her feet, I hope she will commit to our putting these injustices right.

[Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)]

rose—

International Women’s Day

Debate between Dawn Butler and Joy Morrissey

Thursday 12th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Joy Morrissey]

I thank the hon. Member for that point. Many women from all kinds of different ideological perspectives have contributed to this debate, and I thank them.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

We should also recognise that some people have also been transphobic. We must be mindful that a lot of trans people feel very vulnerable at this time; some have committed suicide. Can we also hold them in our thoughts in this debate?

[Joy Morrissey]

I thank the hon. Member for that very nuanced contribution. I also thank her for being the first female of colour at the Dispatch Box, leading the way, and Chairman of a Select Committee. She is someone who all Members of this House, from every party, respect and admire; I thank her for everything she does.

As we try to protect young women and girls, there has been no clearer or more scandalous a failure than the rape gangs scandal that we are confronting now. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) and my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) who have raised this matter in Parliament, along with Alex Stafford, who is no longer in this place, and the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson)—a cross-party effort—who have raised this issue time and again, while very few other Members of this House did. I commend them for being brave enough to do so. [Interruption.] Yes, there are so many I am not able to thank today, but I want to recognise them as best as I can. Baroness Casey has said that too many shied away from the issue of ethnicity in the rape gangs scandal. Those hon. Members did not, and that shows real leadership by Members in a cross-party way to protect women and girls.

This International Women’s Day, let us unite in clear determination. Where Nancy Astor led in confronting injustice for the voiceless, the parliamentarians of today will follow. We will speak up for the right of women to women-only spaces. We will make sure that, no matter the community, ethnicity or religion involved, we will never again let a scandal like the rape gangs go unchallenged. As someone who has fought for years for women and girls and fought against sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation, I think that every Member of the House should look at how we can protect women and girls, no matter who or where they are. I believe that is something we can all agree on.

For International Women’s Day to matter, it must be more than symbolic. It must combine celebration with action. It must be a further catalyst for rights, justice and action for women and girls. It must harden our resolve to ensure safety for all women and girls. It must set in clear focus our collective determination that this will be a country in which women and girls from every race, religion and creed are able to contribute their talents, with the certainty that we will keep them safe. For rights, justice and action, our women and girls deserve nothing less.