On 7th June 2021, the Bishop of Oxford spoke at the second reading of the Environment Bill, welcoming the legislation and urging that the power of the Office of Environmental Protection be built up and maintained:
The Lord Bishop of Oxford: My Lords, it is a real honour to speak in this debate and share in the passion and expertise of this House in favour of clear, swift, accountable action to safeguard the environment and combat climate change. It is a particular pleasure to pay tribute to my colleague, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Salisbury, who makes his valedictory speech today, to which I look forward. I thank Bishop Nicholas for his leadership within the Church of England, this House and more widely on climate questions. That leadership has played a key role in our national Church’s commitment to net zero by 2030.
The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of reports of Ethiopian Orthodox priests being murdered in Tigray; and what assessment they have made of religious freedom in Ethiopia.
The Bishop of Durham received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that all children, not only those at a crisis point, have access to nature.
Lord Benyon (Con, DEFRA): Defra recognises the crucial importance of having good access to green spaces for health and well-being. The 25 Year Environment Plan sets out our comprehensive and long-term approach to protecting and enhancing our natural landscapes in England for the next generation, and to helping people improve their health and wellbeing by connecting with nature.
The Bishop of Durham received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked Her Majesty’s Government whether, as part of their Comprehensive Improvement Plan in response to the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, they have a stated aim to increase case escalation where there are ethical considerations.
Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con, Home Office): The ethical decision making model, developed in response to Recommendation 17 of the Windrush Lessons Learned Review, is designed to support staff to flag possible unintended consequences to ensure that services and policies are delivered in the way that Ministers intended.
The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the study by Alan M Emond et al Gambling by young adults in the UK during COVID-19 lockdown, published on 18 April, what assessment they have made of the reported correlation between higher rates of gambling and COVID-19 lockdowns.
The Bishop of Southwark received the following written answer on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the article in the Guardian Home Office letter wrongly tells British citizens to apply for settled status, published on 17 May, what assessment they have made of the accuracy of their databases regarding citizenship status; and what remedial action they are taking in relation to this matter.
The Bishop of Leeds received the following written answers on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Leeds asked Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of comments made by the Human Rights Defender of the Republic of Armenia on 12 May about encroachments by the Azerbaijani army into the territory of Armenia.
The Bishop of Durham received the following written answers on 7th June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked her Majesty’s government, further to the report commissioned by the Treasury The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review, published on 2 February, what steps they are taking to ensure that all children understand how nature contributes to the UK economy.
Baroness Berridge (Con, DfE): The department is currently working with Her Majesty’s Treasury to contribute to a full response to the Dasgupta Review.
On 27th May 2021 the House of Lords debated the Government’s Immigration Rules and Statements of Changes to them. A Motion to Regret the Statements was moved by Lord Green of Deddington, though not put to a vote. His Motion read:
“That this House regrets that the Statements of changes to the Immigration Rules (HC813, HC1043 and HC1248), published respectively on 22 October 2020, 10 December 2020 and 4 March, do not provide clear and comprehensible descriptions of the changes proposed, nor of their likely effect. Special attention drawn by the Secondary Legislation Committee, 33rd and 40th Reports, Session 2019–21.”
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I too am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Green of Deddington, for securing this important debate on his Motion to Regret. Last year, several Members of your Lordships’ House cautioned against the major extension of the Government’s capacity to make law with minimal recourse to Parliament in the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Act. Today, at the initiative of the noble Lord, Lord Green of Deddington, and not of Her Majesty’s Government, we have 90 minutes to examine three statutory instruments relating to the Immigration Rules, one of which runs to 507 pages. All three were subject to the negative resolution, which involved little or no scrutiny of such important areas of life. Your Lordships’ House last defeated Her Majesty’s Government by praying against a negative resolution 21 years ago. Is the Minister satisfied with the level of scrutiny that these statutory instruments have received? Would she agree with me that it would have been better to publish them first in draft and to seek the views of both Houses in a debate?
You must be logged in to post a comment.