Speeches – Page 69 – The Church of England in Parliament

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.

Building Safety Bill: Bishop of St Albans urges proportional approach

On 2nd March 2022, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Building Safety Bill in Grand Committee. The Bishop of St Albans spoke in favour of a proportional approach to new safety regulations, balancing the need for remediation of risk with the potential effects on leaseholders:

The Lord Bishop of St Albans: My Lords, I will add a few extra words to this. I apologise to the Committee; I am struggling, as I think a number of us are, as there are so many Bills going through that we are bobbing in and out of various Bills. It is frustrating for us that we cannot necessarily sit and follow everything through, but I think this probing amendment touches on some really important issues for us.

Not surprisingly, after the absolute horror of Grenfell, we are rightly trying to think about how we offer maximum safety for everybody. But safety comes at a cost, as we are all aware. As we work on a Bill that we hope will do its job for many years, we need to take an objective view on some of these areas, particularly on what the noble Earl, Lord Lytton, said about proportionality.

Health and Care Bill: Bishop of London speaks in favour of amendments on palliative care

On 1st March 2022, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Health and Care Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of London spoke in favour of an amendment regarding palliative care, and urged that this care should be delivered with consistency:

The Lord Bishop of London: My Lords, I declare my interests in the register. I join in thanking the Government for having listened in Committee. I hope that this will make a difference not just to the lives of those whose lives are shorter but also their families, so it is very welcome. I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, but also to my friend, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Carlisle, who put his name to Amendment 17.

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments proposed to ensure well-being and fair treatment of refugees and asylum seekers

During a debate on amendments to the Nationality and Borders Bill on 28th February 2023, the Bishop of Durham spoke in favour of several amendments:

by Baroness Hollins that sought to ensure the fair treatment of asylum seekers awaiting decisions on their cases by establishing a code of practice for professionals involved in the care of those seeking asylum, and introduce the need for a review of those services
by Baroness Stroud that would support the right to work for asylum seekers awaiting decisions for longer and six months
by Lord Coaker that would reduce the waiting time for asylum decisions

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I fully support the amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, and my noble and right reverend friend behind me here supports it as well. I will speak to the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, and the two amendments from the noble Baroness, Lady Hollins, which I fully support.

We may have 125,000 asylum seekers but let me focus on two. This is why I support both amendments. One is an asylum seeker who lives in my area who heard from the Home Office within the first three weeks of arrival then heard nothing for 12 months, in spite of inquiry after inquiry. That is why we need a code of practice. That is why we need better ways of working. It beggars belief what that says to him about how he is seen in our society and by our society. That is, of course, told time and again.

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.

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.

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:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: