parliamentaryunit

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham advocates for removal of clauses which would strip support from victims of modern slavery

On 12th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the fourth day of committee. During the debate, the Bishop of Durham spoke in support of the removal of clauses 22 to 24, and clause 27, from the bill, on the grounds that these clauses withdraw essential protections and support from victims of modern slavery:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I rise to support the removal of Clauses 22 to 24 and 27, as proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and my right reverend friend the Bishop of Bristol. As the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, noted, many of the arguments are similar to those related to Clause 21, so we will not repeat them.

Clauses 22 to 24 carry through the logic of Clause 21 and remove protections and support from those who, crucially, have already been identified and assessed as having reasonable grounds to be considered a victim of trafficking or modern slavery. These victims are not self-identified or -assessed. They have to be referred by a first responder agency, such as the police, and assessed by the competent authority.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham requests clarification on use of digital methods such as video conferencing in immigration procedures

During a committee debate on the Illegal Migration Bill on 12th June 2023, the Bishop of Durham raised a point of clarification to Lord Murray of Blidworth (the Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Migration & Borders), on the use of remote methods such as video-conferencing to conduct immigration procedures, asking whether such methods were as effective as in person interviewing and interventions:

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con, Home Office): Amendment 90, spoken to by my noble friends Lord Randall and Lord McColl, relates to the presumption that it is not necessary for a person to remain in the UK to co-operate with an investigation. It is one of the enduring legacies of the Covid pandemic that much more can now be done remotely. We all see this in the changes to the way we work. Even now, some Members of your Lordships’ House take part in debates by videolink. It is simply no longer the case that a victim of crime needs to be in face-to-face contact with police or others to assist with an investigation. There is no reason why, in the majority of cases, such co-operation cannot continue by email, messaging and videoconferencing. The presumption in Clause 21(5) is therefore perfectly proper.

(…)

The Lord Bishop of Durham: Sorry—it has taken me a little while to contemplate but is the Minister effectively saying that the use of video and email and so on is as good as in-person interviewing and in-person interventions? I really think that needs to be rethought.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks on importance of safeguarding victims of modern slavery and human trafficking

On 12th June 2023, during the fourth day of committee debates on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Durham spoke in support of proposals by Baroness Hamwee to remove clauses 21, 25, 28 & 28 from the bill, in order to safeguard victims of modern slavery and human trafficking who would otherwise be subject to removal under the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I declare my interests with RAMP and Reset and, like the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, did at the outset of the debate, I hope that will stand for the other times I speak later on different groups.

I support all the amendments, but I am speaking in support of the proposal of the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, that Clauses 21, 25, 26 and 28 be completely removed. This is supported by my noble friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Bristol, who we heard earlier is unfortunately unable to be here today. Bishops across England have had the privilege of working very closely with the large sector of faith-based charities and projects that work with victims of slavery. We have heard a lot about the Salvation Army, but I want to highlight the Clewer Initiative, which is our own project raising awareness and helping support victims. The feedback that has been coming from the Salvation Army, from Clewer and from other groups in relation to the modern slavery provisions of the Bill ranges from trepidation to outright horror.

Rather euphemistically, the Explanatory Notes refer to what is proposed in this and the following clauses as “a significant step”. I suggest that the complete disapplication of all support, replaced with detention and removal, is drastic in the extreme. I cannot see how such a step could be justifiable, but for it even to be defensible would require the most robust and extensive level of proof of its necessity. I do not think that has been shown.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports removal exemptions for victims of sexual exploitation and trafficking

On 12th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the fourth day of the committee stage. The Bishop of Southwark spoke in the debate, support of amendment 88, tabled by Lord Coaker and supported by the Bishop of Gloucester, which would aim to prevent victims of sexual exploitation and trafficking from being removed under the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, Amendment 88 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, is supported by my right reverend friend the Bishop of Gloucester, who regrets that she is unable to be here today. There is much similar ground in this amendment to others, but this amendment focuses specifically on victims of sexual exploitation.

The Bill directs that victims of modern slavery, including victims of sexual exploitation, shall be subject to detention and removal to their own country or to a third country. As we have heard, the principal exception to this is if the Secretary of State is satisfied that the individual is co-operating with criminal proceedings and that their presence in the United Kingdom is necessary for this to continue. We know that the Government have committed to victims of sexual violence and exploitation in this country. The UK ratified the 2011 Istanbul Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence only last summer and there has been much work done over the past few years to increase awareness and tackle perpetrators. To deny those who have arrived here safety and protection is a regressive move.

Research tells us that women who have been exploited often arrive confused, not always having been aware of their final destination or even that they were going to another country. They may have been exploited by their traffickers during the flight. The notion of removing them to a safe third country that contains their abusers is cruel and unnecessary. The moral basis of legislating for and the axiomatic assumption of the detention and removal of such women, as there is in Clause 21, is at best dubious. I support this amendment.

Bishop of Durham asks about progress of negotiations over the future of the Chagos Islands

The Bishop of Durham received the following written answer on 12th June 2023:

The Lord Bishop of Durham asked His Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Statement by the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs on 3 November 2022 (HCWS354), what progress they have made, and what steps they still plan to take, to resolve outstanding issues in relation to the exercise of sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory/Chagos Archipelago, including those relating to the return of former inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago.

Votes: Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill

On 8th June the House of Lords debated Commons amendments to the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill. Votes were held on further amendments to the bill, in which a bishop took part:

Bishop of Leeds asks about building resilience in education

The Bishop of Leeds asked a question on teaching controversial topics and conflicting opinions in schools during a debate on updates to the national curriculum:

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, does the Minister agree that resilience is not something primarily that is taught? It is something that develops as you take what is thrown at you in the experiences of life. To that end, is any thinking going on in government about future curricula which allow for children in our schools, particularly secondary schools, to be exposed to opinions and things with which they do not agree in order that they are able to live in a world of conflicting dogmas and opinions, and do not have to run away from them?

Church Commissioners Written Answers: Clergy Ordination & Retirement, Clergy Vacancies, Leicestershire, Church Security, and Energy Cost Grants

On 8th June 2023, Andrew Selous MP, representing the Church Commissioners, gave the following written answers to questions from MPs:

Clergy: Ordination and Retirement

Damien Moore MP (Con, Southport): To ask the Member for South West Bedfordshire, representing the Church Commissioners, whether the Commissioners are taking steps to reduce average lengths of time between (a) the retirement and enthronement of bishops in dioceses and (b) the retirement and consecration of priests in parishes.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark speaks to Bishop of Durham’s amendment on detention conditions for vulnerable individuals

On 7th June 2023, during a committee debate on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Southwark spoke in support of the Bishop of Durham’s amendment 78, which would allow exceptions to the bill’s proposed ouster of judicial review during the first 28 days of detention, for vulnerable individuals such as children, pregnant women, and those with mental health issues:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I will speak to Amendment 78, tabled by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham, who is unable to be here at this early hour. I know that he is grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Lister and Lady Neuberger, for their support.

A statutory regime of clinical screening for people at risk of harm in detention and for healthcare professionals to be able to report concerns to the Home Office has been a cornerstone of safeguarding in immigration detention since 2001—and rightly so. This amendment looks to ensure that this process does not become inconsequential by preventing the necessary legal oversight of detention decisions. Given the technical nature of the issues relating to medical reporting in detention centres, I will focus my comments on the context of this amendment and set out a few key questions for the Minister.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments to limit the use of force and detention on pregnant women

On 7th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in committee. The Bishop of Southwark spoke in support of amendments to the bill; in the name of the Bishop of Gloucester, Baroness Lister of Burtersett, and other peers; that would place limits on the detention of pregnant women and the use of force against children and pregnant women:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, it is a great pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, who has expertly outlined why these amendments are needed. My good friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Gloucester has added her name in support of Amendments 68 and 70, and regrets she is not able to be here to give her support in person. I share her concern about the impact of detention on pregnant women in particular, impact which we know is considerable. Others will rightly draw attention to the impact on children, and the suggestion of the use of force against either group is unspeakable. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons advises that there

“is no safe way to use force against a pregnant woman, and to initiate it for the purpose of removal is to take an unacceptable risk”.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: