Speeches – Page 37 – The Church of England in Parliament

Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Oxford welcomes amendments on artificial intelligence, stresses importance of future-proofing

On 6th July 2023, during a debate on the Online Safety Bill, The Bishop of Oxford spoke in support of a group of amendments to the bill focusing on the development of artificial intelligence, whilst raising concerns about whether the bill was sufficiently future proofed given the rapid movement of technology:

The Lord Bishop of Oxford: My Lords, I warmly welcome this group of amendments. I am very grateful to the Government for a number of amendments that they are bringing forward at this stage. I want to support this group of amendments, which are clearly all about navigating forward and future-proofing the Bill in the context of the very rapid development of artificial intelligence and other technologies. In responding to this group of amendments, will the Minister say whether he is now content that the Bill is sufficiently future-proofed, given the hugely rapid development of technology, and whether he believes that Ofcom now has sufficient powers to risk assess for the future and respond, supposing that there were further parallel developments in generative AI such as we have seen over the past year?

House of Commons Debate: Bishops in the House of Lords

On 6th July 2023, a debate was held in the House of Commons on the motion That this House has considered the matter of bishops in the House of Lords, organised by the All-Party-Parliamentary Humanist Group. Andrew Selous MP, the second Church Estates Commissioner, spoke in the debate:

Tommy Shepherd MSP (SNP, Edinburgh East): I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of bishops in the House of Lords.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Davies. Some people, perhaps including members of my party, might wonder why a member of the SNP has secured a debate on the House of Lords, so I want to make it clear from the outset that my principal role here today is as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary humanist group, which comprises more than 150 Members of both Houses and has representatives from all the main political parties. I moved the motion in that capacity.

Aaron Bell MP (Con, Newcastle-under-Lyme): As secretary of the same group, I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this debate, which is not only overdue, but timely: as he knows, yesterday in the Lords, there were amendments to the Government’s legislation. I suspect he agrees with the principle of those amendments—he and I differ on that—and he probably agrees with me that the archbishop who tabled them is a very distinguished Member of that House, but does he share my sense of unease about somebody who has not been elected or appointed, and who is merely in the Lords in his capacity as a bishop, potentially changing the law of this country?

Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Manchester voices support for collaborative production of the bill

On 6th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of Manchester spoke in favour of a government amendment to the bill introducing a new introductory clause setting out the purpose and duties of the act, and voiced his support for the collaborative way in which the bill had been produced:

The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, I too support the Minister’s Amendment 1. I remember vividly, at the end of Second Reading, the commitments that we heard from both Front-Benchers to work together on this Bill to produce something that was collaborative, not contested. I and my friends on these Benches have been very touched by how that has worked out in practice and grateful for the way in which we have collaborated across the whole House. My plea is that we can use this way of working on other Bills in the future. This has been exemplary and I am very grateful that we have reached this point.

Hansard

Illegal Migration Bill: Archbishop of Canterbury urges creation of 10-year strategy for tackling refugee crises and human trafficking

On 5th July 2023, the Archbishop of Canterbury moved his amendment 168A to the Illegal Migration Bill, requiring the Secretary of State to implement a 10 year strategy for collaborating internationally to tackle refugee crises affecting migration by irregular routes, or the movements of refugees, to the UK, and for tackling human trafficking to the UK:

The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury: My Lords, I rise to move Amendment 168A, tabled in my name. I shall also speak to Amendment 168C, which is consequential to it. I am very grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth and Lord Blunkett, and the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, for co-signing it. This amendment is a combination of the two amendments that I put forward in Committee. It requires the Secretary of State to produce a 10-year strategy for tackling the global refugee crisis and human trafficking in collaboration with international partners. As I explained the rationale behind this in detail in Committee, I will be very brief.

In aid of this amendment I want to quote the Foreign Secretary, who spoke to an Italian newspaper a couple of days ago. He said that

“there needs to be an international response to this because it is an inherently international issue”.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham tables amendment to mitigate caps for safe and legal asylum routes

On 5th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the final day of the report stage. The Bishop of Durham spoke in support of his amendment 162, which would exclude schemes for those displaced from Ukraine, the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) and the Hong Kong BN(O) routes from the safe and legal routes cap proposed in the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I again note my interests as laid out in the register. I will speak to Amendment 162. In Committee, I explained the well-intentioned nature of this amendment and hoped it would have afforded the Minister the opportunity to clarify that any cap placed on safe and legal routes would exclude current named schemes already in operation. I appreciate the Minister’s comments. He said:

“The cap will not automatically apply to all current and new safe and legal routes that we offer or will introduce in the future.”—[Official Report, 4/6/23; col. 1980.]

But, with respect, how can local authorities reflect on accommodation provision for new routes without excluding their current commitments from this assessment?

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham moves amendments reinstating right of appeal against age assessments

On 5th July 2023, during a report-stage debate on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Durham tabled amendments which would reinstate the right of appeal against age assessments in respect of putative children who would otherwise be subject to removal under the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I rise to speak to Amendments 156A and 161. Due to a technicality, Amendments 156 and 157 were not formally withdrawn, but they will be withdrawn, so it is Amendment 156A which is under consideration. I note my interests as a trustee of Reset and with the RAMP project, as laid out in the register.

I thank the usual channels for changing business on Monday so that this item was first today rather than last on Monday. We noted previously that, both during the Nationality and Borders Bill and during this Bill, age assessments have been talked about at 2 am and just after midnight. I am truly grateful to the usual channels for hearing my plea about not being last on the agenda again.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham moves amendment to ensure safeguarding of migrant children in local authority care

On 3rd July 2023, during a debate on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Durham tabled amendment 89, which would “limit the Secretary of State’s power to transfer a child out of local authority care and into accommodation provided by the Secretary of State, by providing that they may only do so where to do so is necessary to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child.”

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I declare my interests as laid out in the register. I will speak to Amendment 89, and I am grateful to my noble friends from differing Benches—the noble Lords, Lord Coaker and Lord German, and the noble Baroness, Lady Helic—for their support. It is a damning indictment that an amendment of this nature is even required, as it proposes such a basic safeguard to ensure the well-being of unaccompanied children. It requires that, if a child is to be transferred from local authority child protection systems, a justification should be provided as to why it is in their best interests to be looked after by the Home Office rather than the local authority.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Gloucester backs amendments regarding detention of pregnant women

On 3rd July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the second day of the report stage. The Bishop of Gloucester spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett which would seek to prevent the current 72 hour limit on detention of pregnant women from being removed:

The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: My Lords, it is a great pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, who expertly outlined why the amendment is needed.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Manchester supports amendment preventing removal of LGBT+ people to countries where they might face persecution

The Bishop of Manchester spoke in support of amendment 37 to the Illegal Migration Bill, tabled by Lord Etherton, on 28th June 2023. The amendment would prevent the removal of LGBT people to third countries where they might be persecuted:

The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, we cannot countenance a situation in which people who sought asylum here because of a well-founded fear of persecution in their country of origin are then removed to a third country where they may face a similar, or even greater, level of risk. For that reason, I join others in supporting Amendment 37.

It was my privilege earlier this year to be invited to attend a reception on the Parliamentary Estate, where I met a group of LGBTQI+ women who had sought and gained asylum in this country. Their stories were harrowing. By contrast, their efforts to rebuild their lives here in Britain were inspirational.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford speaks to amendment in support of amendment to safeguard unaccompanied children

On 28th June 2023, during a debate on amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of amendment 14, tabled by Lord Dubs and supported by the Bishop of Durham, that would ensure that asylum and human rights claims by unaccompanied children are not subject to the bill’s inadmissibility regime:

The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I support both amendments in this group, but I am particularly pleased to be able to speak in support of Amendment 14, to which my right reverend friend the Bishop of Durham is a co-signatory, although he is unable to be present today.

The Bill will prevent potentially thousands of children ever claiming refugee protection in the UK, however serious their protection needs may be and, disturbingly, regardless of the fact that they may not have had any say in the decision to travel here irregularly. Let us be absolutely clear: this means that vulnerable unaccompanied children who have fled unimaginable horrors will arrive to find that they will be detained and then potentially accommodated by the Home Office outside the established care system. All of this is not in order for their asylum cases to be heard and assessed but simply to deter others.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: