On 14th April 2026, the Bishop of Southwark spoke in support of two regret motions regarding the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules published on 5th March 2026, expressing concern regarding the impact of the changes on refugees, family reunion, and discourse surrounding migration:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, it is a privilege to follow noble Members of this House speaking with wisdom, compassion and conviction. I understand that, in the current polarised climate, the Government want an immigration policy that is not only capable of exercising control over migration into this country but is demonstrably seen to be doing so. In that endeavour, the recent summary of immigration statistics, published for the year ending 31 December 2025, indicates a marked reduction in inward migration in most categories, although that of illegal channel crossings—itself not the largest category by some margin—remains stubbornly immune to downward pressure.
I wish to offer some observations from these Benches that, while sympathetic to where Ministers find themselves, none the less owe a debt of gratitude to the regret Motions from the noble Lords, Lord German and Lord Dubs, for making it possible to have this debate—for which I express thanks.
First, my episcopal colleagues and I do not dispute the function of the Executive in exercising immigration control. However, we assert the contribution that migration has made to the United Kingdom. With a declining birth rate and rising economic inactivity, it is likely to play a continuing, vital part. Secondly, we deplore rhetoric that creates images of the “other” and imputes images of rampant criminality on migrants and asylum seekers. That is utterly reprehensible and disgraceful.
Thirdly, I understand the point made about visa pauses because of the switch from various nationalities from visa routes to asylum applications, but apart from the very modest numbers involved, given that the grant of asylum is given in most such cases, what is the point that the Government are trying to make? Is it that the criteria in the refugee convention are no longer adequate for the task, or is it that the Government think that Home Office staff are applying them incorrectly and with too great a liberality, so all possibility of getting anywhere near the United Kingdom must be denied to these people?
Fourthly, we have heard the concerns about the 30-month leave to remain and the anxiety that this imports into a category of people who dearly wish to put anxiety behind them, and the inhibition this puts on integration. I would rather hear about the expansion of in-person English classes.
Finally, the denial of family reunion to those given refugee status is a major concern. For most of us, family means the nurture, happiness and support which enables us to face the trials of life. This is true for refugees, and I find references to family reunion under other routes unsupported by any evidence and difficult to comprehend. I call on the Minister to announce the recommencement of family reunion in this category. I support the regret Motions in the names of the noble Lords, Lord German and Lord Dubs.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.