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:
Votes: Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill
Category: Bills
Legislation before Parliament
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.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark speaks to Bishop of Durham’s amendment on detention conditions for vulnerable individuals”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”.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments to limit the use of force and detention on pregnant women”Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments limiting detention of children on behalf of Bishop of Durham
On 7th June 2023, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill in Committee. The Bishop of Southwark spoke, on behalf of the Bishop of Durham, in support of a group of amendments tabled by Baroness Mobarik which would place limits on the detention of children:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I speak in support of Amendments 59, 63, 64 and 67 which, as has been demonstrated, have strong support from all quarters of this Chamber. It was the intention of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham to speak to these amendments but he is unable to be in the Chamber tonight.
I believe that the strength of opposition to any change in the current detention limits for both accompanied and unaccompanied children is because it is one of the most alarming and unedifying provisions in the Bill. Ministers have set out what they see as the need to detain children for immigration purposes in order to ensure that we do not inadvertently create incentives for people smugglers to target vulnerable individuals. Were this the case, then there would be a case for considering some sort of remedy. However, yet again we have been provided with no evidence that this is the case.
Building an asylum system with deterrence diffused throughout, as described by His Majesty’s Government, has led to this inappropriate proposal to restart detaining children, potentially for an unlimited period. As the noble Baroness, Lady Mobarik, said, it was a Government led by the party currently in office who took the brave decision to end the routine detention of children. That was against significant departmental pressure to retain the practice. How have we arrived, just 10 years later, at the conclusion that the well-being and welfare of children can now be sacrificed in consequence of the need to control migration?
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments limiting detention of children on behalf of Bishop of Durham”Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark speaks in support of amendments on detention facilities
During a committee debate on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Southwark spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by Lord German and the Bishop of Durham. The amendments focused on use of facilities used to detain migrants and sought to limit places of detention in the bill to those that are presently authorised for detention:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I support Amendments 61 and 62 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord German, and welcome the opportunity to discuss what rules and regulations His Majesty’s Government will adhere to when selecting a site for the purposes of detention. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham had intended to speak but is unable to be here for this group of amendments; I am glad to be here in his place. I am grateful to Medical Justice for sharing how existing legislation governs both the nature and operation of detention centres. As it is a detailed policy area, I will focus my time on the context for these amendments while also posing questions to the Minister.
First, as the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham explained at Second Reading, the Bill before us changes the nature and scope of detention considerably. It moves detention away from an administrative process to facilitate someone’s removal to a punitive system of incarceration intended thereby to deter asylum seekers from travelling to the United Kingdom. Deterrence, as we have seen, is a key theme stressed by the Government, albeit no evidence or impact assessment has been adduced in its favour. This shift towards incarceration signals a major transition in policy, but in embarking on this shift in the purpose of detention, the Government leave us with a lack of detail on what rules and guidance will be adhered to when the Secretary of State is selecting a place of detention.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark speaks in support of amendments on detention facilities”Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments aimed at providing housing and subsistence support to those deemed inadmissible to the UK
On 7th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in committee. The Bishop of Durham spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett which would set out regulations for financial and accommodation support available to people deemed “inadmissible” but still resident in the UK:
The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I refer to the register of interests and my involvement with the RAMP project and Reset.
I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, for tabling Amendments 57C to 57G to provide us with the opportunity to discuss issues relating to the level of support that will be provided for those declared inadmissible but who are unable to be removed from the country. I too am highly grateful to the Refugee Council for supporting us to probe this area of policy well, especially in the absence of an impact assessment.
Before I outline questions for the Minister, it is important to note that those deemed inadmissible will include not just those whose asylum cases would likely have been found valid but individuals who would not have qualified. In the absence of any return deals, this could leave the Government in the absurd position of needing to support at public expense those who could be appropriately returned to their own country.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments aimed at providing housing and subsistence support to those deemed inadmissible to the UK”Votes: Retained EU Law Bill (Revocation and Reform)
On 6th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Retained EU Law Bill following Commons amendments. Votes were held on motions to add additional amendments to the bill, in which a bishop took part:
Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments to ensure high standard of “safe” countries
On 5th June 2023, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill on the second day of the committee stage. The Bishop of Durham spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by Baroness Hamwee, Lord Carlile of Berriew, and Lord Alton of Liverpool that would ensure that, when removing migrants to “safe” countries, the country in question meets high definitions of safety:
The Lord Bishop of Durham: I apologise that I was unable to be present on day one of Committee and I arrived today rather later than I had planned, so was unable to speak earlier. However, I am grateful to my noble friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Coventry for so doing.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments to ensure high standard of “safe” countries”Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Coventry supports amendments covering human rights claims
On 5th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the second day of committee. On behalf of the Bishop of Durham, the Bishop of Coventry spoke in support of an amendment to the bill tabled by Lord Dubs which would require the Home Secretary to consider a protection claim or a human rights claim if the applicant has not been removed from the UK within six months of the claim being deemed inadmissible:
The Lord Bishop of Coventry: My Lords, I apologise for not being able to speak previously on the Bill, but I support Amendment 23 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, on behalf of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham, who has added his name to this little band, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, referred to them. I have been holding back in the hope that he would land, but his aircraft has been delayed.
Of course, it is right that every nation should have jurisdiction over its own borders and the ability to decide who may or may not have a credible claim to reside in the country, but Clause 4 ends any such due process which would consider the merits of an asylum application. By denying those who are deemed inadmissible from ever claiming asylum, as we have heard, thousands of men, women and children will simply not have their case heard, let alone assessed, regardless of how grave their protection needs might be—and regardless of the fact that there is no way to travel to the UK with prior authorisation in order to claim asylum in many cases. That point is made regularly in your Lordships’ House.
Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Coventry supports amendments covering human rights claims”Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports Bishop of Oxford’s amendments on safety and risk
On 25th May 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in committee. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by the Bishop of Oxford, Lord Clement Jones, and Lord Colville of Culross, which would introduce new duties to Ofcom to assess risk and monitor online safety:
My Lords, I shall speak in favour of Amendments 195, 239 and 263, tabled in the names of my right reverend friend the Bishop of Oxford, the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, and the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, who I thank for his comments.
My right reverend friend the Bishop of Oxford regrets that he is unable to attend today’s debate. I know he would have liked to be here. My right reverend friend tells me that the Government’s Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation, of which he was a founding member, devoted considerable resource to horizon scanning in its early years, looking for the ways in which AI and tech would develop across the world. The centre’s analysis reflected a single common thread: new technologies are developing faster than we can track them and they bring with them the risk of significant harms.
This Bill has also changed over time. It now sets out two main duties: the illegal content duty and the children duty. These duties have been examined and debated for years, including by the joint scrutiny committee. They are refined and comprehensive. Risk assessments are required to be “suitable and sufficient”, which is traditional language from 20 years of risk-based regulation. It ensures that the duties are fit for purpose and proportionate. The duties must be kept up to date and in line with any service changes. Recent government amendments now helpfully require companies to report to Ofcom and publish summaries of their findings.
Continue reading “Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports Bishop of Oxford’s amendments on safety and risk”
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.