The Bishop of Gloucester received the following written answer on 3rd December 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Gloucester asked Her Majesty’s Government when they will publish the evaluation of the ‘Action Access’ alternative detention pilot.
Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have appointed the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) to independently evaluate this pilot.
NatCen will be publishing the evaluation on their website the aim is for the evaluation to be published by the end of the year.
“a policy that does not go beyond deterrence is not sufficient”
On November 25th 2021 the House of Lords debated a motion from Baroness Hoey, “That this House takes note of the number of migrants arriving in the United Kingdom illegally by boat“.
The Lord Bishop of Coventry: My Lords, I too am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Hoey, for securing this debate, especially at this time. I was helped this morning by the “Thought for the Day” from my colleague, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Leeds, in which he said that this is a time to dig deeper into our emotions and face the grief we feel at the loss of humanity. It is that sense of grief, our common commitment to the preservation and dignity of life, as well as to a passion for justice for those suffering the ills and evils of the world, which unites us. The noble Baroness, Lady Hoey, demonstrated that.
Our shared grief is the proof we do not really need of the humanity and vulnerability that unites us. These common concerns, which underpin both our aim to stop migrants making dangerous journeys and our grief today, are the same concerns and moral instincts that require us to sit back and face the reality that a policy that does not go beyond deterrence is not sufficient.
The following written question was replied to on November 22nd 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken following the remarks by the High Commissioner for Jamaica on 4 November: “from a human rights perspective I am deeply concerned about cases in which persons are being removed having lived in the UK since childhood and have no known relations in Jamaica or familiarity with Jamaica”. [HL3845]
Chris Loder: [76831] To ask the Member for South West Bedfordshire, representing the Church Commissioners, how many services the Church of England has conducted specifically for the purposes of Baptising people seeking asylum in each of the last five years.
On 27th October 2021, during a committee debate on the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, the Bishop of Bristol spoke in support of an amendment tabled by Lord Rosser which would seek to remove immigration officers from lists of people authorised to carry out data extraction from personal devices:
The Lord Bishop of Bristol: My Lords, some common themes are emerging. I rise in support of Amendment 107, which was tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, and to which I have added my name, alongside that of the noble Baroness, Lady Jones.
The inclusion in this Bill of immigration officers among those authorised to undertake digital extractions strikes me as extremely troubling, particularly in the absence of significantly more detail on the safeguards, including the meaning of “agreement” and the specificity of the data sought, and the relevant training and expertise of these officers. Voluntary provision and agreement to extract data must surely rely on a level of informed consent. If it is not, then “voluntary” and “agreement” are just empty words.
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?
On 12th May 2021 the House of Lords debated the Queen’s Speech. The Bishop of Durham spoke, focusing on its impact on children and young people, and on the proposals for immigration.
“My Lords, it is a privilege to be the first to speak from these Benches on Her Majesty’s gracious Speech. I look forward to the valedictory speech of my colleague, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth, who has served the House so well during his years as a Lord spiritual. I also look forward to the maiden speeches of the noble Baroness, Lady Blake, and the noble Lord, Lord Lebedev.
“I make my comments within a very specific framework: are the measures contained in the gracious Speech good for the children and young people of our land? At the outset of her tenure as Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza commented: ‘I want to see childhood right at the top of the Government agenda. That means every speech from the Prime Minister and Chancellor mentioning children, and every Government department constantly pushing to improve the lives of children’— so it was good to hear a range of references to children. Having the best start in life by prioritising early years is essential. There is no debate any longer that the months in the womb and the first 1,001 days of a child’s life are absolutely critical to lifetime development. Much deeper investment in all aspects of early years well-being—mental, physical, social and spiritual—is essential.
The Bishop of Durham asked a question on the government’s plan for supporting those seeking asylum in the UK on 14th April 2021, in response to a government statement on immigration:
The Lord Bishop of Durham [V]: I begin by declaring my interest as a trustee of Reset and a member of the RAMP Project, as in the register. The Minister knows that I have deep respect for her work, and I am extremely grateful for the co-working we have done on a range of issues over the last few years. There is much that I welcome on the refugee side in the Statement and the policy statement. However, I have some very deep concerns around the asylum side of this. I would almost divide it into one half good, one half bad. The specific question I would like to ask today is this: under the Government’s proposals, the route by which people seeking asylum arrive in the UK will be indicative of the leave they are granted and the support they receive throughout their time. What basic support package, even if less generous, will be available to those granted temporary protection for two and a half years, to ensure that they do not face destitution? How will such temporary systems enable effective integration, which is one of the things that the Statement and the policy statement seek to achieve? I look forward to some robust discussions with the Minister in the future.
The Bishop of Durham received the following written answers on 23rd March 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Durham asked Her Majesty’s Government what plans, if any, they have for an immigration centre for women on the former site of Hassockfield Secure Training Centre.
The Bishop of Bristol received the following written answer on 15th March 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Bristol asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office on 7 October 2020 (96911), what further plans they have to publish guidance on what constitutes reasonable grounds for missing the deadline for the EU Settlement Scheme.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.