Bills – Page 19 – The Church of England in Parliament

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:

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill: Bishop of Manchester supports amendments on power of the courts

During a debate on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration Bill on 4th March 2024, the Bishop of Manchester spoke in support of amendments 9 and 12 to the bill, tabled by Lord Anderson of Ipswich, which would allow the courts to take new factors into consideration when considering Rwanda’s safety in the future:

The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Ipswich, for sponsoring Amendments 9 and 12, to which I have added my name. They take up matters that I and the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, raised in Committee.

Votes: Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill

On 4th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration Bill) in the first day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill: Archbishop of Canterbury supports amendments on rule of law

On 4th March 2024, the Archbishop of Canterbury spoke in a debate on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, in support of a group of amendments seeking to ensure compliance with the rule of law in the application of the bill:

The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury: My Lords, at this stage of the debate on this group, we are looking at two distinct things. One is the question of whether Rwanda is safe. If, as the noble Lord just said, it is unquestionably safe, it seems to me that these amendments are not a problem because, at that point, the Secretary of State can easily say, “It’s safe”, and they will have evidence of that, for this and future Governments.

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration Bill): Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich supports amendments on modern slavery, right of return, and overall safety

On 4th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich spoke in the debate, supporting amendments on assessing Rwanda’s safety, establishing right of return for asylum seekers after relocation, and protection for victims of modern slavery:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich: My Lords, I shall speak in favour of Amendments 1, 3 and 5 tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti, to which I have added my name. I do not believe that we can enshrine in law a statement of fact without seeing and understanding the evidence that shows such a statement to be true, in particular when such a statement of fact is so contentious and for which the evidence may change. Ignoring for a second the strange absurdity of such declarations, we must also consider the real impact that this could have on the potentially vulnerable people whom the Government intend to send to Rwanda. As my most reverend friend the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is in his place, said at Second Reading,

Schools (Mental Health Professionals) Bill: Bishop of Winchester applauds measures to address mental health issues in young people

The Bishop of Winchester spoke in a debate on the second reading of the Schools (Mental Health Professionals) Bill on 1st March 2024, pointing out the need for a consistent, universally applied policy to improve student mental health, and the need to address the causes of mental health issues at a root level:

The Lord Bishop of Winchester: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for bringing this Bill to us for its Second Reading. We indeed face a crisis in this area and need to be aware of the long-term consequences of not addressing it.

The Bill would pave the way for just the kinds of interventions that are sorely needed. The NSPCC and our own Library briefing state that more than 20% of children and young people are living with poor mental health. CAMHS referrals are provided for only the most severe presenting issues, while early intervention, though widely recognised to be key to good long-term outcomes, is now a thing of distant memory. The sobering fact is that children are taking their own lives while they wait to be seen, and that is deeply shameful.

Last summer, the Church of England published the document Our Hope for a Flourishing Schools System, which makes specific mention of mental health, it being the issue school leaders most often raise with us. It states:

“Children’s mental health and wellbeing is prioritised and resourced generously by a society that invests in the long-term future of its nation by placing children first in funding and political direction. The fulfilling of a child’s potential should never be hindered, blocked or prevented by the system in which they find themselves”.

However, those words are, sadly, far from being the current reality.

Media Bill: Bishop of Newcastle calls for additional focus on language provision

The Bishop of Newcastle spoke in a debate on the second reading of the Media Bill on 28th February 2024, commending the bill and requesting that additional attention for language provision be included in the legislation:

The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, I am glad to be able to speak in this debate, and thank the previous speaker, the noble Lord, Lord Russell, for his comments. It is an honour to follow him.

In conversations I have had in recent weeks, it is clear that there is a strong desire across this House to ensure the Media Bill progresses positively through its legislative processes, in part because this is, as noble Lords have said, a Bill that acknowledges the vastly changed broadcasting landscape over the past 20 years. Given the rapidly developing technological nature of the communications landscape, it is understandable that the Bill aims to give flexibility and adaptability where needed. The point I wish to make is about the absence of clear statutory provision for languages in this Bill, in particular for Gaelic. Other noble Lords have already referred to this in the debate.

Media Bill: Bishop of Leeds welcomes legislation and highlights areas of concern around data use and metrics

On 28th February 2024, the House of Lords debated the Media Bill in its second reading. The Bishop of Leeds spoke in the debate, welcoming the bill whilst raising concerns on issues of metrics, language, prominence and genres:

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, it is a pleasure but somewhat daunting to follow the noble Lord, Lord Birt. I agree with every word he said. I strongly welcome the Bill. It is timely and necessary. The regulatory framework that governs public service media, not just broadcasting, is in urgent need of updating, given the accelerating changes in technology, media consumption and the wider media ecosystem in the 20 years since the Communications Act 2003. I commend the excellent Library briefing for this debate. It was very helpful.

A number of things that are on my mind have already been mentioned, so I will move swiftly on. As the noble Baroness, Lady Featherstone, and, I think, the noble Lord, Lord Lipsey, have already noted, I understand that the intention to drop Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act will almost certainly proceed. It was a manifesto commitment by the Government. However, I will not be the only person to want to put on record that arguments by press agencies about freedom of speech can ring somewhat hollow. Leveson worked on this for good reasons. Freedom of speech and press freedom must not be confused with press protectionism. Victims of press misrepresentation and abuse must be forgiven for suspecting that government can easily be captured by business.

Victims and Prisoners Bill: Bishop of Manchester supports amendment on transparency of public officials

On 26th February 2024, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Victims and Prisoners Bill. The Bishop of Manchester spoke in support of amendment 133 to the bill, which “would require public authorities, public servants and officials to act in the public interest and with transparency, candour and frankness when carrying out their duties in relation to major incidents,” arguing that introducing this statutory duty would allow for greater support for victims and survivors of major incidents and crimes:

The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, I rise to speak to this amendment to which I have added my name. I declare my interest as co-chair of the national police ethics committee.

Before turning to the amendment, I follow other noble Lords by recording the deep gratitude of both myself and many in the Church for the wisdom and friendship of Lord Cormack. On behalf of both the party he served and the Church he loved, over so many decades, Patrick wonderfully embodied that concept of “critical friend” which is so vital to the functioning of all institutions. We were all better for his wisdom and friendship, and we all learned much from his challenges. He may not have been subject to a duty of candour, but that never stopped him from being very candid in expressing his views. We will miss his contributions, here and elsewhere greatly.

The former Bishop of Liverpool advocated for a duty of candour in his report on the Hillsborough disaster, The Patronising Disposition of Unaccountable Power. That title tells its story. His report was produced over six years ago; a duty of candour was finally contained in the College of Policing’s Code of Practice for Ethical Policing in the last two months, for which I and many others are deeply grateful.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: