Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

Debate between Jas Athwal and Graham Stringer

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jas Athwal]

I absolutely agree. I have been saying for the last 10 years that that should be done. The Government finally acting is a real positive; we are going in the right direction.

Fly-tipping blights our area, but when the council removes it quickly, people feel it is okay to dump rubbish on our streets because someone will pick it up. We cannot win either way; it becomes a vicious cycle. The more that people see the local area as a dumping ground, the more some feel enabled to fly-tip, meaning that the problem spirals unless it is fully tackled.

I know from working with my local council that decisive steps are being taken to tackle this blight on our communities. For instance, it maintains free bulky waste collection, removing a lame excuse for fly-tipping. 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 us. That sends a clear message that such behaviour is unacceptable in Ilford South and that those who fly-tip on our streets will be held accountable.

I welcome the decisive actions the Government have already taken to support local authorities battling fly-tipping, from expanding council powers to crushing the vehicles of serial fly-tippers and making offenders clean up the very streets and parks they have ruined. We need to go further to target the very worst offenders. The council needs to be able to set larger maximum fines to generally deter serial fly-tippers and to demonstrate that although fly-tipping may seem inconsequential to them, it is one of the worst forms of antisocial behaviour. With tough enforcement, councils could use extra revenue to fund detection—

[Graham Stringer (in the Chair)]

Order. Your time is up. Before calling the Front-Bench spokespeople, I remind hon. Members that although there are often good reasons for being late to a debate, it is a courtesy to both the Chair and other hon. Members participating in the debate to put in a note explaining those reasons. I call Sarah Dyke.

Violence against Women and Girls: London

Debate between Jas Athwal and Graham Stringer

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)]

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.

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.

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. 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.

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.

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. 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—

[Graham Stringer (in the Chair)]

Order. I draw the hon. Member’s attention to the time. He is beginning to run into that allotted to other hon. Members. I assume he will draw his remarks to a conclusion.

[Jas Athwal]

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?