On 26th April 2016 the House of Lords considered amendments made in the House of Commons to the Government’s Immigration Bill. Labour Peer Lord Dubs proposed an amendment (as an alternative to his previous one, rejected by MPs), that would require the Government to “make arrangements to relocate to the United Kingdom and support a specified number of unaccompanied refugee children from other countries in Europe”. The Bishop of Leeds, Rt Revd Nick Baines, spoke in support of the amendment:
The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, I was recently in northern Iraq, visiting internally displaced people and Syrian refugees. In a meeting with the United Nations office for the co-ordination of humanitarian aid, we were told that despite the generosity promised by many international donors, only 9% of the money had actually got through. That was not specifically applied to the UK. I do not know how much of the UK’s promised aid has gone but it was 9% overall. So when we hear about the amount of money that has been promised, it does not tell us how much has been delivered. Continue reading “Immigration Bill: Bishop of Leeds supports UK welcome for lone child refugees”

On 21st March the House of Lords considered the Government’s Immigration Bill at Report Stage. Labour Peer Lord Dubs tabled an amendment to require the Secretary of State to make arrangements for relocating 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children to the UK, from other countries in Europe. The Bishop of Chelmsford, the Rt Revd Stephen Cottrell, co-sponsored the amendment, speaking and voting in support. In the subsequent Division the amendment was agreed by 306 votes to 204.

The Archbishop of Canterbury: My Lords, while we would all agree that the situation is difficult for the French authorities, I am sure we also feel that it is significantly more difficult for the 300 unaccompanied children. I recently visited the Marsh Academy near Romney Marsh and saw a school and community fostering and caring with the utmost compassion for significant numbers of unaccompanied children. Given that example, does the Minister agree that issues of compassion should easily trump those of administrative efficiency and tidiness, and narrow definitions of family links, and that we should, therefore, take more children very quickly?
The Lord Bishop of Rochester: My Lords, as one of the bishops from Kent, may I take the Minister back to his previous answer? In fact, some 1,300 unaccompanied refugee children are housed in Kent, and the local authorities and the voluntary agencies are under very significant pressure. May I push him a little as to whether, in the light of the somewhat unencouraging response from other local authorities, Her Majesty’s Government intend to do anything else to ensure a more effective national dispersal programme—given that we are talking not just about this moment, but about the likely 10 years that will be needed to get a young person from the point of arrival to full integration, with all the work in education, language and healthcare needed to go with that, and the considerable investment required? Some assurance would help my colleagues in Kent.
The Lord Bishop of Norwich: My Lords, I rise from these Benches to support Amendment 227 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, and others.

You must be logged in to post a comment.