On 1st March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Health and Care Bill in the first day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:
Votes: Health and Care Bill
Category: Bills
Legislation before Parliament
Votes: Nationality and Borders Bill
On 28th February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the first day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:
Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports right to work for asylum seekers
During a debate on the Nationality and Borders Bill in the first day of the report stage, on 28th February 2022, the Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of an amendment tabled by Baroness Stroud that would allow for the right to work for people seeking asylum who had been resident in the UK for six months:
The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I give my strong support to Amendment 30 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud. She has eloquently made the case for this amendment, so I do not intend to take a great deal of the House’s time, but I wish to add a few brief remarks in support.
At Second Reading, I raised the question of how different our migration policy might be if we stopped looking at asylum seekers as either victims without agency or criminals seeking to exploit us and instead as future citizens and neighbours. In this light, the right to work for asylum seekers who have waited six months or more for a decision represents an excellent opportunity. It would be good for asylum seekers and for the soul of this nation. Such people are often left without agency or dignity. Their identity becomes limited to a sort of victim status. Being unable to work leaves them dependent on the state or at risk of falling in with illegal labour exportation.
Continue reading “Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports right to work for asylum seekers”Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham tables amendment to restrict use of accommodation centres for families and vulnerable groups of asylum seekers
The Bishop of Durham tabled an amendment to the Nationality and Borders Bill on 28th February 2022, seeking to restrict the use of accommodation centres for asylum seekers falling under certain categories, such as families and vulnerable adults. The amendment was not moved to a vote, following a response from the government with more information on proposed accommodation:
The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I have tabled Amendment 29, with the noble Baroness, Lady Lister. I declare my interests in relation to RAMP and Reset, as set out in the register.
I have tabled this amendment again because in Committee we did not have as satisfactory a response to our questions as we had hoped on the basic details of what these accommodation centres will look like. We do not know how many or where these will be. We do not know how many people will be accommodated in each one. I am not assured that the previously terrible, and now still wanting, conditions provided at Napier will not be repeated. We are being asked to agree to the use of accommodation centres without any information or reassurances of what they will look like, where they will be, and so on. We can only go on what we see as existing provision on MoD sites. That makes me very concerned—I remind the House that I had the privilege of visiting Napier barracks recently—and gives me strong reason to call for their use to be restricted, so that the vulnerable groups set out in this amendment cannot be accommodated in them. I continue to believe that placing people seeking asylum in housing in communities is much better for everyone.
Continue reading “Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham tables amendment to restrict use of accommodation centres for families and vulnerable groups of asylum seekers”Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham opposes differential treatment of refugees
On 28th February 2022, during a debate on the Nationality and Borders Bill, the Bishop of Durham spoke in support of an amendment to clause 11 of the bill tabled by Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, to remove the differentiation of refugees within the clause. The Bishop further expressed opposition to clause 11 in its entirety:
The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, if the names had not been filled on Amendment 28 then I would have added my name to it. I remind the House of my interests as set out in the register, both in RAMP and Reset.
In Committee I laid out the understanding of the two groupings proposed and argued that almost no one will actually qualify as being in group 1. I had no repudiation offered to that argument. As the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, said, Ukraine is currently illustrating the problem precisely. I was also concerned in the response to the debate in Committee by some of the language of discretion within the two groupings.
We need a simpler, more efficient asylum system, and I continue to be convinced that what is proposed will provide a more complex, slower process. Fundamentally, I am with all those who oppose the two-group system, as it creates a fundamental injustice for fair treatment of all refugees, regardless of how they arrive.
Today, a letter signed by over 1,000 leaders from all the major faith communities of this country was delivered to the Prime Minister. I quote from that letter:
Continue reading “Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham opposes differential treatment of refugees”Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports amendment on citizenship
On 28th February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of an amendment tabled by Baroness D’Souza to remove clause 9 from the bill. Clause 9 would have, in limited cases, removed the existing requirement for the government to provide notification prior to removal of citizenship:
The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: Thank you. My Lords, I am grateful for the suggestion that the House might like to hear from the Lords spiritual. I support the amendment in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady D’Souza, which proposes that Clause 9 should not stand part of the Bill. We debated this at some length in Committee. It is somewhat disappointing that the Government have not taken the opportunity to reconsider more fully. I will not delay the House by repeating the arguments, but I will briefly speak about trust.
Continue reading “Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports amendment on citizenship”Building Safety Bill: Bishop of St Albans tables amendment
On 28th February the House of Lords debated the Building Safety Bill in the 3rd day of committee. The Bishop of St Albans spoke in support of his amendment 50A, which aims to strengthen tenants rights to consult with landlords over building safety, and require landlords to set up tenants associations to facilitate this:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans: My Lords, I rise to speak to Amendment 50A in my name and those of the noble Lords, Lord Blencathra and Lord Young of Cookham. Let me say how much I support the sentiments and intentions of the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, who has done us a real service.
I, too, do not want to die over the details of this amendment. I hope that this will stimulate a really vigorous debate so that we can all work together on how we get these sorts of commitments in the Bill. I and others on my Benches want to work with the Government and others to achieve this. If someone else can turn up with much better solutions, that is great.
Throughout the cladding and fire safety crisis, we have heard many stories of landlords imposing outrageous and sometimes astronomical building safety charges on leaseholders and tenants. Often this has been done by managing agents acting on behalf of the freeholder. Leaseholders and tenants have reported a complete lack of accountability and transparency throughout this process and have been unable to challenge or even scrutinise the charges imposed on them.
Continue reading “Building Safety Bill: Bishop of St Albans tables amendment”Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in support of amendment on Chagossian citizenship
On 28th February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of Durham spoke in support of an amendment tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett, which would provide a pathway to British Citizenship for former residents of the Chagos Islands and their descendants. The amendment was approved in a vote.
The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I hold my hands up: I am one of those who, as the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, mentioned earlier, did not know much about this issue before we started this debate. However, I followed it and pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, for the way in which she has led this. It is quite clear that it is completely unjust and needs to be dealt with. I hope that the Minister has noted that, while in most debates, many of us around this House and the noble Lord, Lord Horam, will not agree, we agree on this one completely—100%. There is no justification for anything other than accepting this amendment.
Building Safety Bill: Bishop of St Albans speaks in favour of amendments to protect leaseholders and social housing
On 24th February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Building Safety Bill in the second day of committee. The Bishop of St Albans spoke in favour of a number of amendments relating to leaseholder protections and the proposed building safety levy:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans: My Lords, I shall speak to Amendment 35. I was expecting others to speak to it first, but I shall address it briefly. I declare my interest as a vice-president of the Local Government Association. I, too, am an enthusiastic amateur and rise with great hesitation. I also apologise for arriving fractionally late and going in and out, but I have amendments about to run on the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, so I have been trying to balance things in two places.
Whenever a new tax is applied to an industry or business, it is extremely rare that a given organisation simply chooses to absorb that additional cost. In the overwhelming majority of instances, the tax will be passed on to the consumer as a price rise. Businesses rarely undermine their own bottom line when there is little competitive advantage for doing so and where the cost can be simply passed on to the consumer without hurting the demand for their product.
The market is such that there is a massive, chronic shortage of supply of homes in the UK. This undersupply means that, in reality, developers know that demand will not greatly suffer as a result of the building safety levy. They will not absorb the tax. I fear it will simply be priced on top of the cost of new properties. After all, this is the free market, and we cannot escape the fact that that is likely to be the consequence of the levy.
Continue reading “Building Safety Bill: Bishop of St Albans speaks in favour of amendments to protect leaseholders and social housing”Elections Bill: Bishop of Coventry questions necessity of photo ID
On 23rd February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Elections Bill in its second reading. The Bishop of Coventry spoke in the debate, highlighting potential risks of the introduction of photo ID for voters:
The Lord Bishop of Coventry: My Lords, I too join in thanking the noble Lord, Lord Moore, for his subtle and penetrating speech. I do so as someone who originates from Sussex, albeit the western part.
I shall address just one aspect of this Bill—the introduction of photographic ID. Other noble Lords have already raised specific issues presented by this clause. I echo their concerns, and I question whether photo ID is consistent with the UK’s democratic heritage. The fundamental duty of government as we know it is to ensure that all citizens have access to the resources they need to play a full part in the democratic process. Any action that risks reducing democratic engagement, especially one which excludes a significant sector of society, needs the most careful consideration, and it should be based on very sound evidence.
Continue reading “Elections Bill: Bishop of Coventry questions necessity of photo ID”
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.