Bills – Page 18 – The Church of England in Parliament

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill: Bishop of Bristol supports amendment on due regard for international and domestic law

On 16th April 2024, during a debate on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, the Bishop of Bristol spoke in support of an amendment tabled by Lord Coaker, which would stipulate that the bill should have due regard for international law, the Children Act 1989, the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Modern Slavery Act 2015:

The Lord Bishop of Bristol: My Lords, I welcome the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, particularly the detail of the inclusion in it of the Modern Slavery Act 2015; it is a detail except for those who have been, or may well have been, trafficked. There are as many as 4,000 people in the national referral mechanism whose cases are currently to be determined. That is absolutely right and proper under current legislation, and that legislation should be taken into account as part of the implementation of this Bill.

Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill: Bishop of Manchester expresses concerns over changes to charity financing

On 27th March 2024, the Bishop of Manchester spoke at the second reading of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill, welcoming the legislation whilst expressing concern over its impact on those freeholders that are charities:

The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, I begin by declaring my interests. I am no longer a church commissioner, as my time finished at the end of last year, but I am paid and—if the Lord spares me—will be pensioned by the Church Commissioners in due course. The commissioners are freeholders, not least of the Hyde Park Estate, which has been in continuous Church ownership and care since around the 11th century, when it belonged to the monks of Westminster Abbey. I guess, if I am going to echo a word that we have used several times today, that makes it genuinely feudal. I also own one leasehold flat in the West Midlands, as set out in the Members’ register.

Victims and Prisoners Bill: Bishop of Gloucester moves amendment to facilitate data collection on families and prisons

On 25th March 2024,the Bishop of Gloucester gave a speech and moved the following amendment during a debate on the Victims and Prisoners Bill:

172: After Clause 56, insert the following new Clause—

“Data collection in relation to children of prisoners: The Secretary of State must collect and publish annual data identifying—(a) how many prisoners are the primary carers of a child,(b) how many children have a primary carer who is a prisoner, and(c) the ages of those children.”

The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Farmer, tabled this amendment, to which I am very pleased to add my name in support and to move it today in this final stage of Committee on the Bill. In his absence, I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the noble Lord for his commitment to the families of prisoners. This is also an issue which I know my right reverend friend the Archbishop of Canterbury cares deeply about, as well.

This amendment was selected for Report stage in the other place but not discussed. Introduced by Harriet Harman, it is an important progress chaser to the Government’s response to the 2019 report from the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which she then chaired. This proposed new clause would require the Secretary of State to collect and publish annual data, identifying how many prisoners are primary carers of a child or children, how many children have a primary carer in prison, and the ages of those children. Its inclusion would be highly appropriate for this Bill, which focuses on both victims and prisoners.

When a parent is committed to custody, their child should not also receive a sentence; they should not be punished or overlooked as a result of their parent’s crime.

Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill: Bishop of Worcester welcomes legislation

On 22nd March 2024, the Bishop of Worcester spoke in a debate on the Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill (a private members bill tabled by Lord Holmes of Richmond), supporting the aims of the bill and calling for robust approach to AI regulation:

The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, I guarantee that this is not an AI-generated speech. Indeed, Members of the House might decide after five minutes that there is not much intelligence of any kind involved in its creation. Be that as it may, we on these Benches have engaged extensively with the impacts and implications of new technologies for years—from contributions to the Warnock committee in the 1980s through to the passage of the Online Safety Bill through this House last year. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, for this timely and thoughtful Bill and for his brilliant introduction to it. Innovation must be enthusiastically encouraged, as the noble Baroness, Lady Moyo, has just reminded us. It is a pleasure to follow her.

That said, I will take us back to first principles for a moment: to Christian principles, which I hope all of good will would want to support. From these principles arise two imperatives for regulation and governance, whatever breakthroughs new technologies enable. The first is that a flourishing society depends on respecting human dignity and agency. The more any new tool threatens such innate dignity, the more carefully it should be evaluated and regulated. The second imperative is a duty of government, and all of us, to defend and promote the needs of the nation’s weak and marginalised —those who cannot always help themselves. I am not convinced that the current pro-innovation and “observe first, intervene later” approach to AI get this perennial balance quite right. For that reason, I support the ambitions outlined in the Bill.

Votes: Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill

On 20th March 2024, the House of Lords debated Commons Reasons and Amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill. Votes were held on motions to the bill, in which Bishops took part:

Victims and Prisoners Bill: Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich expresses concern over human rights protections

During a debate on the Victims and Prisoners Bill on 12th March 2024, the Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, on behalf of the Bishop of Manchester, spoke in support of removing clauses 49-52 from the bill on the basis that they would potentially weaken human rights protections in the UK through disapplication of certain rights to prisoners:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, my right reverend friend the Bishop of Manchester regrets that he cannot be here today to speak to the amendments to which he has put his name.

The basis of our opposition to Clauses 49 to 51, to echo points made by the noble Lord, Lord German, and the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, is that human rights need to be applied universally, even when disapplication might seem expedient. We know that, when people are marginalised, it is then that human rights protections are most necessary and, as such, the disapplication of rights to prisoners, who rely on independent courts and the justice system to guarantee basic minimum standards of fairness and respect, is particularly egregious. The Law Society has warned that these clauses

“significantly weaken the system of human rights protections in the UK”.

My right reverend friend and I add our voices to these concerns.

Victims and Prisoners Bill: Bishop of Leicester supports aftercare provision for IPP prisoners

On 12th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Victims and Prisoners Bill. The Bishop of Leicester spoke in support of amendments 165 & 166 to the bill, which would ensure provision of aftercare for those subject to IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentences:

The Lord Bishop of Leicester: My Lords, I support this group of amendments and it is a pleasure to follow noble Lords and benefit from their considerable wisdom—I am in awe of the learning and wisdom on display this evening. I do not want to repeat a lot of what has been said, so I will keep my speech very short.

I have one or two reflections on Amendments 165 and 166, to which my right reverend friend the Bishop of Gloucester has added her name. She is a regular visitor to prisons across the country and supports the network of chaplains in our prisons who have direct evidence in relation to the mental health of prisoners.

Votes: Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill

On 11th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which a Bishop took part:

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports amendment providing additional protection to unaccompanied children

On 6ht March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in the final day of the report stage. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of amendment 34 to the bill, tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett, which would seek to restore the jurisdiction of the courts to review removal decisions taken on the basis of age assessments of unaccompanied children:

The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I rise also to support Amendment 34. I will keep my comments brief because I fully support the statements from the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, and the noble Lord, Lord Dubs. But please do not mistake my brevity with the level of importance that should be attached to this issue. Safeguarding is not some burdensome requirement but a moral and legal imperative. It is for this reason that I repeat the request that I made in Committee for a child’s rights impact assessment to be published.

It is welcome that the Government have excluded unaccompanied children from the Rwandan partnership, but to safeguard potential children effectively, this commitment must be more than a mere intention; it must be operationally put into practice. This amendment would help mitigate the risk of a person being sent erroneously—when they are, in fact, a child—by sensibly awaiting the result of any age assessment challenge before their removal. When it comes to a child, we cannot allow harm to be addressed retrospectively, as surely it is the role of any Government to prevent harm, regardless of the immigration objective. Trauma, as we have heard, simply cannot be remedied.

Votes: Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill

On 6th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in the final day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which bishops took part:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: