The Bishop of Durham received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked Her Majesty’s Government whether, as part of their Comprehensive Improvement Plan in response to the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, they have a stated aim to increase case escalation where there are ethical considerations.
Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con, Home Office): The ethical decision making model, developed in response to Recommendation 17 of the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, is designed to support staff to flag possible unintended consequences to ensure that services and policies are delivered in the way that Ministers intended.
The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the study by Alan M Emond et al Gambling by young adults in the UK during COVID-19 lockdown, published on 18 April, what assessment they have made of the reported correlation between higher rates of gambling and COVID-19 lockdowns.
The Bishop of Southwark received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the article in the Guardian Home Office letter wrongly tells British citizens to apply for settled status, published on 17 May, what assessment they have made of the accuracy of their databases regarding citizenship status; and what remedial action they are taking in relation to this matter.
The Bishop of Leeds received the following written answers on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Leeds asked Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of comments made by the Human Rights Defender of the Republic of Armenia on 12 May about encroachments by the Azerbaijani army into the territory of Armenia.
The Bishop of Durham received the following written answers on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked her Majesty’s government, further to the report commissioned by the Treasury The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review, published on 2 February, what steps they are taking to ensure that all children understand how nature contributes to the UK economy.
Baroness Berridge (Con, DfE): The department is currently working with Her Majesty’s Treasury to contribute to a full response to the Dasgupta Review.
On 27th May 2021 the House of Lords debated the Government’s Immigration Rules and Statements of Changes to them. A Motion to Regret the Statements was moved by Lord Green of Deddington, though not put to a vote. His Motion read:
“That this House regrets that the Statements of changes to the Immigration Rules (HC813, HC1043 and HC1248), published respectively on 22 October 2020, 10 December 2020 and 4 March, do not provide clear and comprehensible descriptions of the changes proposed, nor of their likely effect. Special attention drawn by the Secondary Legislation Committee, 33rd and 40th Reports, Session 2019–21.”
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I too am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Green of Deddington, for securing this important debate on his Motion to Regret. Last year, several Members of your Lordships’ House cautioned against the major extension of the Government’s capacity to make law with minimal recourse to Parliament in the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Act. Today, at the initiative of the noble Lord, Lord Green of Deddington, and not of Her Majesty’s Government, we have 90 minutes to examine three statutory instruments relating to the Immigration Rules, one of which runs to 507 pages. All three were subject to the negative resolution, which involved little or no scrutiny of such important areas of life. Your Lordships’ House last defeated Her Majesty’s Government by praying against a negative resolution 21 years ago. Is the Minister satisfied with the level of scrutiny that these statutory instruments have received? Would she agree with me that it would have been better to publish them first in draft and to seek the views of both Houses in a debate?
On 27th May 2021 the Bishop of Leeds asked a question about holding Azerbaijan to account for its actions in the border region with Armenia.
The Lord Bishop of Leeds [V]: My Lords, just to add to the catalogue, on 12 May this year Azerbaijani armed forces also invaded the border area of the Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia. On the ground, the constant incursions and the violations of human rights are perceived with impunity. Does the Minister believe that Minsk is working and is ultimately viable, and what more can the UK and its allies do to hold Azerbaijan to account?
On 27th May 2021 the Bishop of Blackburn asked a question he had tabled on the link between covid-19 rates and high levels of poverty.
Question Asked by The Lord Bishop of Blackburn: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made as to whether there is a correlation between areas with high COVID-19 infection rates and high levels of poverty; and if there is such a correlation, what steps they intend to take to address this as part of their levelling up agenda.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Care (Lord Bethell) (Con): My Lords, the facts are heartbreaking. Covid, like many diseases, has hit hardest those who are most vulnerable: the poorest, the most disabled and those who work in some of the most difficult jobs. The vaccine rollout and community testing programmes have shown what the country can do, but there is much more to be done. That is why we are publishing a levelling-up White Paper, and health inequalities will be central to that.
The Lord Bishop of Blackburn: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and the work that he and colleagues are doing in a fast-changing scene. We know that it is not easy. Does he agree that care for the poorest, most disadvantaged and most vulnerable in the community is one of the signs of a healthy society? Can he be more specific about how equality of opportunity in the levelling-up agenda will be rolled out?
Asked by The Lord Bishop of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the statement by the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches of Jerusalem on 11 May that the violence in Jerusalem “violates the sanctity of the people of Jerusalem and of Jerusalem as the City of Peace”; and what plans they have to call on relevant parties (1) to halt further violence, and (2) to ensure the safety of worshippers. [HL192]
On Wednesday 26th May the House of Lords questioned Government on the local travel arrangement plans and the lack of consultation that had caused some confusion. The Bishop of Blackburn spoke from the experience of this in his diocese.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.