Speeches – Page 65 – The Church of England in Parliament

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in debate

On 14th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its third reading. The Bishop of Durham spoke briefly in the debate, expressing support for amendments whilst raising concerns about the reception and timing of the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I support all the amendments because they all seem to make complete sense in terms of tidying up, including those in the Government’s name. I too was disturbed by the announcement about the devolved legislatures—it expresses the deep unease about the Bill out in the country as a whole. I ask the Minister to take away from this House a real concern that this is not the right time to press ahead and that Ukraine has raised questions about the Bill and whether some kind of pause ought to be considered.

Hansard

Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill: Bishop of Leeds raises ethical concerns

On 9th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill in its second reading. The Bishop of Leeds spoke in the debate, raising concerns about the background to the bill, which was introduced in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine:

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, I welcome this Bill and the speed with which it is being brought to us, but I share some of the concerns that have been represented already. I do not intend to go into any of the detail of matters that have already been spoken about; I am sure other noble Lords would be better at that than I might be.

I hesitate to bring an ethical argument because, in my experience in this House, ethical arguments simply get ignored. Indeed, one Minister replied to an ethical argument made on a different Bill by saying, “We will not listen to strictures on morality from anyone.” That led me, at the next stage—on Report—simply to say that that implies there is no place in politics for ethics. But it is my ethical concerns, which one might represent as cultural, that cause me to stand now.

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Chelmsford speaks on amendments relating to visa penalties

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the 3rd day of its report stage. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in the debate, raising concerns regarding amendments tabled by Baroness Williams of Trafford which would “allow visa penalties to be extended to countries that present a risk to international peace and security, or whose actions lead or are likely to lead to armed conflict or a breach of humanitarian law.”

The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, for his comments and I will add a few further thoughts.

I appreciate that the intent of these proposed new clauses is to bring additional sanction pressure on Russia, and perhaps also other states which threaten peace and security. However, I ask whether there are any concerns that, in practice, this provision may make it more difficult for a critic of, for example, the Putin regime, to reach the UK in safety. Such a person—perhaps one of those involved in the courageous protests against the current war—might seek to reunite with family in the UK for their own safety. They would require a valid visa, not least since the Bill makes it so much harder for those arriving without a visa to apply for refugee status. Is the Minister at all concerned that additional costs and barriers to obtaining a visa may invertedly hurt people seeking to escape authoritarian regimes, and who would be eligible for a visa to come here, more than it would actually hurt the regime itself?

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of St Albans speaks in support of amendments on modern slavery

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debted the Nationality and Borders Bill in the 3rd day of the report stage. The Bishop of St Albans spoke in support of several amendments on modern slavery:

My Lords, I will speak to Amendments 67 and 68 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Alton. I spoke to these amendments in Committee because I was concerned that Clause 59 was effectively raising the reasonable grounds threshold for identifying a victim of modern slavery. With respect to the Government, I confess that I remain unconvinced by their desire to alter reasonable grounds thresholds, and was not adequately assuaged in my fears that this could erect an unnecessary barrier to victims accessing the national referral mechanism.

The noble Lord, Lord Alton, made the argument in Committee that reasonable grounds decisions on the standard of “suspect but cannot prove” would allow the Modern Slavery Act to be more in line with ECAT. I am not a legal expert so this may well be the case. However, I made the point that since we currently use “maybe” as it exists within the Modern Slavery Act, as opposed to “is” or “are” as proposed by the Government —indeed, rather than “has been” as appears in ECAT—in supposedly bringing ourselves in line with ECAT we would effectively raise the threshold for access to the NRM.

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Bristol speaks in support of amendments on modern slavery and protection of overseas domestic workers

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its report stage. The Bishop of Worcester spoke in support of amendments to the bill that would remove certain clauses relating to victims of modern slavery, and moved an amendment intended to protect overseas domestic workers:

The Lord Bishop of Bristol: My Lords, I support the amendments in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, to remove Clauses 57, 58 and 62 from the Bill, to which I have added my name. I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, on her appointment and give thanks for all the work she does, even when we do not always entirely agree across these Benches.

As we have heard, Clauses 57 and 58 would make it appreciably more difficult for people to be recognised as victims of modern slavery and receive support. In Committee, the Minister responded to my concerns about these clauses by saying that, far from deterring victims, this will

“encourage genuine victims to come forward”.—[Official Report, 10/2/22; col. 1843.]

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Durham speaks in support of amendments

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its 3rd day of reports. The Bishop of Durham tabled amendments to the bill and spoke in support of other amendments:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I support Amendment 64A, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, to which I have added my name.

I declare my interests in relation to both RAMP and Reset as set out in the register. I am very grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Neuberger and Lady Lister, and the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, for outlining all the arguments for why this amendment is the right route to take. On Amendment 64, I hear the words about safeguarding but it is a dangerous route to take.

The needs of children have been starkly left unaddressed in so many areas of the Bill. The policies proposed to determine the age of the child are particularly concerning. The child and their best interests, rather than deterrence, must be the starting point in designing these policies. I support the amendment because it is imperative that such assessments are up to standard and based on scientific evidence. We should be seeing help for local authorities to improve their practice through multiagency working so that social workers conduct these assessments and that they are better supported with appropriate funding and training. Making the process stricter will lead to more children being treated as adults. This is extremely concerning given that they will then be placed alone in adult accommodation, with no support or safeguarding.

Health and Care Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in support of amendment to provide for a review on social prescribing

On 7th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Health and Care Bill in the third day of the report stage. The Bishop of Durham, on behalf of the Lord Bishop of London, spoke in support of amendment 114, tabled by Lord Howarth of Newport, that would introduce a new clause on creative health into the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I rise to speak to Amendment 114 in the absence of my right reverend friend the Bishop of London, who is having to self-isolate due to having tested positive for Covid—which seems to be a bit of a theme of the first two amendments.

Members of the House will know that my noble friend is very involved, and was very involved in Committee, in speaking about health inequalities. Today, we want to share and highlight the strength of social prescribing and especially the role of faith organisations in helping to deliver this. There is evidence from the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Arts, Health and Wellbeing and the National Academy for Social Prescribing. But everyone who sits on these Benches would be able to tell you stories of where faith communities and local charities aid and assist with health improvements through activities which happen through them. Through cultural, creative, art, nature—all sorts of—interventions, people find health relief and are moved forward in improving their health.

Bishop of Leeds asks about environmental consequences of increased use of lithium ion batteries

The Bishop of Leeds asked a question about plans for disposal of lithium ion batteries as more of them come to be used in e-bikes and scooters, during a debate on safety standards on 3rd March 2022:

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, however these things are regulated, we are building up a massive resource of batteries that one day will have to be disposed of, with the environmental risks that they bring as well. What assessment have the Government made of how in the long term we will deal with what could before too long become a problem?

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of London speaks in favour of amendment to protect migrant victims of crime

On 2nd March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill on the second day of the report stage. The Bishop of London spoke in support of an amendment to the bill which would prevent immigration data about victims of crime who report offences from being shared:

The Lord Bishop of London: My Lords, I have added my name to Amendment 58A. I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, for introducing this new amendment. In Committee, I tabled an amendment looking to create a data firewall for survivors of domestic abuse. This amendment, however, is helpful in that it is broader in its scope and gets to the critical underlying principle: namely, that victims and witnesses of crime should not need to fear coming forward on account of their migration status. I and my colleagues on this Bench, including the right reverend Prelates the Bishops of Gloucester and Bristol, have highlighted these concerns, notably during the passage of the Domestic Abuse Bill.

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in favour of greater protection for children and vulnerable groups

On 2nd March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the second day of the report stage. The Bishop of Durham spoke on several amendments to the bill, including:

Amendment 35, which would prevent offshoring of asylum seekers
Amendments 40-45, moved by the Bishop of Durham on behalf of the Bishop of Gloucester, which relate to the standard of proof applied to vulnerable people seeking asylum
Amendments 48 & 49, which would promote more safe routes for asylum seekers and targets for resettlement

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, in rising to support Amendment 35 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Kirkhope, to which I have added my name, I declare my interests in relation to both RAMP and Reset and set out in the register. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, for the way she introduced this amendment, and I fully support all her points.

I set out my reasons for supporting this amendment in Committee. However, a significant concern for me now is that the Minister was not able to give assurance that children in families would be excluded from offshoring, nor that families would not be split up in the process. This is deeply concerning. I appreciate that the policy document of 25 February sets out that exemptions will depend on the country where people are being offshored and tat publicising exemptions will fuel the movement of the most vulnerable not subject to offshoring.

However, I would set out that, for children, onward movement to any country after an often traumatic journey to the UK, in addition to the trauma in their country of origin, is simply never in their best interests. All the concerns I set out in my Committee speech regarding the monitoring of the practice of offshoring processing centres are especially true for children.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: