asylum – Page 5 – The Church of England in Parliament

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: Archbishop of Canterbury tables amendment requiring government collaboration strategy to tackle global refugee crisis

On 14th June 2023, the House of Lords debated committee amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill. The Archbishop of Canterbury tabled an amendment that would insert a new clause requiring the Secretary of State to have a ten year strategy for collaborating internationally to tackle refugee crises driving people to enter the UK as refugees:

The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury: My Lords, I hope this section may be a bit shorter. As the noble Lord, Lord Deben, already knows, because he just said it, I am rising to introduce Amendment 139D tabled in my name and Amendment 144B, which is consequential to it. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, and the noble Lords, Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth and Lord Blunkett, for co-signing it. I have had letters of apology from the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, and the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett, who are not able to be here for very good and sufficient reasons.

I particularly appreciate when we come to this that the Government are taking action—I am not suggesting for a moment that they are not. The Chişinău statement made in Moldova recently by the Prime Minister was striking, as were the recent raids by the National Crime Agency in tackling criminals involved in this area.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham advocates for removal of clauses which would strip support from victims of modern slavery

On 12th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the fourth day of committee. During the debate, the Bishop of Durham spoke in support of the removal of clauses 22 to 24, and clause 27, from the bill, on the grounds that these clauses withdraw essential protections and support from victims of modern slavery:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I rise to support the removal of Clauses 22 to 24 and 27, as proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and my right reverend friend the Bishop of Bristol. As the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, noted, many of the arguments are similar to those related to Clause 21, so we will not repeat them.

Clauses 22 to 24 carry through the logic of Clause 21 and remove protections and support from those who, crucially, have already been identified and assessed as having reasonable grounds to be considered a victim of trafficking or modern slavery. These victims are not self-identified or -assessed. They have to be referred by a first responder agency, such as the police, and assessed by the competent authority.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments limiting detention of children on behalf of Bishop of Durham

On 7th June 2023, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill in Committee. The Bishop of Southwark spoke, on behalf of the Bishop of Durham, in support of a group of amendments tabled by Baroness Mobarik which would place limits on the detention of children:

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: My Lords, I speak in support of Amendments 59, 63, 64 and 67 which, as has been demonstrated, have strong support from all quarters of this Chamber. It was the intention of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham to speak to these amendments but he is unable to be in the Chamber tonight.

I believe that the strength of opposition to any change in the current detention limits for both accompanied and unaccompanied children is because it is one of the most alarming and unedifying provisions in the Bill. Ministers have set out what they see as the need to detain children for immigration purposes in order to ensure that we do not inadvertently create incentives for people smugglers to target vulnerable individuals. Were this the case, then there would be a case for considering some sort of remedy. However, yet again we have been provided with no evidence that this is the case.

Building an asylum system with deterrence diffused throughout, as described by His Majesty’s Government, has led to this inappropriate proposal to restart detaining children, potentially for an unlimited period. As the noble Baroness, Lady Mobarik, said, it was a Government led by the party currently in office who took the brave decision to end the routine detention of children. That was against significant departmental pressure to retain the practice. How have we arrived, just 10 years later, at the conclusion that the well-being and welfare of children can now be sacrificed in consequence of the need to control migration?

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments aimed at providing housing and subsistence support to those deemed inadmissible to the UK

On 7th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in committee. The Bishop of Durham spoke in support of amendments to the bill tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett which would set out regulations for financial and accommodation support available to people deemed “inadmissible” but still resident in the UK:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I refer to the register of interests and my involvement with the RAMP project and Reset.

I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, for tabling Amendments 57C to 57G to provide us with the opportunity to discuss issues relating to the level of support that will be provided for those declared inadmissible but who are unable to be removed from the country. I too am highly grateful to the Refugee Council for supporting us to probe this area of policy well, especially in the absence of an impact assessment.

Before I outline questions for the Minister, it is important to note that those deemed inadmissible will include not just those whose asylum cases would likely have been found valid but individuals who would not have qualified. In the absence of any return deals, this could leave the Government in the absurd position of needing to support at public expense those who could be appropriately returned to their own country.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Coventry supports amendments covering human rights claims

On 5th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the second day of committee. On behalf of the Bishop of Durham, the Bishop of Coventry spoke in support of an amendment to the bill tabled by Lord Dubs which would require the Home Secretary to consider a protection claim or a human rights claim if the applicant has not been removed from the UK within six months of the claim being deemed inadmissible:

The Lord Bishop of Coventry: My Lords, I apologise for not being able to speak previously on the Bill, but I support Amendment 23 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, on behalf of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham, who has added his name to this little band, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, referred to them. I have been holding back in the hope that he would land, but his aircraft has been delayed.

Of course, it is right that every nation should have jurisdiction over its own borders and the ability to decide who may or may not have a credible claim to reside in the country, but Clause 4 ends any such due process which would consider the merits of an asylum application. By denying those who are deemed inadmissible from ever claiming asylum, as we have heard, thousands of men, women and children will simply not have their case heard, let alone assessed, regardless of how grave their protection needs might be—and regardless of the fact that there is no way to travel to the UK with prior authorisation in order to claim asylum in many cases. That point is made regularly in your Lordships’ House.

Bishop of Durham asks about the proposed Illegal Migration Bill

The Bishop of Durham received the following written answers on 23rd May 2023:

The Lord Bishop of Durham asked His Majesty’s Government whether there have been any changes to asylum screening interviews since 7 March.

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con, Home Office): There have been no changes to the asylum screening interview template since 7 March.

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham highlights threats to safeguarding and potential breaching of the refugee convention

On 10th May 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in its first reading. The Bishop of Durham spoke in the debate, pointing out risks to child safeguarding and potential breaches of the refugee convention if the bill was enacted as written:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: I declare my interests as a member of the RAMP project and a trustee of Reset.

When looking to engage with a Bill, Members decide whether to focus on the detail or address the underlying principles behind the proposed legislation. This Bill leaves me with no choice but to start with the latter, as it asks fundamental questions about who we are as a nation. In order to supposedly reduce channel crossings, are we really prepared to consent to “extinguishing”, as the UNHCR puts it, the right to claim asylum and withholding support for victims of trafficking, and indefinitely detaining thousands of asylum seekers, including children and pregnant women? We have been left to consider the Bill’s provisions without an impact assessment, but these consequences will potentially lead to an unjustified intolerable level of harm which does not reflect who we are as a nation.

Bishop of Leicester asks about management of the UK asylum system

The Bishop of Leicester received the following written answers on 27th March 2023:

The Lord Bishop of Leicester asked His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the cost of using and converting (1) RAF Scampton, (2) MDP Wethersfield, (3) the Northeye site, and (4) the Bibby Stockholm barge for asylum-seeker accommodation; and what assessment they have made of the value of the contracts to the agencies managing these sites.

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con, Home Office): The United Kingdom has a legal obligation to provide asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute with accommodation and other support whilst their claim for asylum is being considered.

Bishop of Durham asks about asylum decisions by the UK government

The Bishop of Durham received the following written answers on 17th April 2023:

The Lord Bishop of Durham asked His Majesty’s Government how many individuals have been granted temporary protection since the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 came into force; and what proportion of such individuals were under the age of 18.

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con): The Home Office publishes data on asylum in the ‘Immigration System Statistics Quarterly Release’ on GOV.uk. Data on initial decisions on asylum applications, by age, can be found in table Asy_D02 of the ‘asylum and resettlement detailed datasets’ on GOV.uk. Information on how to use the datasets can be found in the ‘Notes’ page of the workbooks. The latest data relate to the year ending December 2022. Data for the year ending March 2023 will be published on 25 May 2023.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: