Tag: migration

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports amendment guaranteeing UK’s international obligations

On 28th June 2023, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in support of amendment 5, tabled by Baroness Chakrabarti, which would replace clause 1 of the bill with a new clause ensuring compliance with the UK’s international obligations under human rights, refugee, child protection, and anti-trafficking conventions:

The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I support Amendment 5 also tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti. In Committee a comprehensive debate took place, during which different cases were made by distinguished lawyers across the House about the place of international law as it relates to our domestic lawmaking. Notwithstanding the different interpretations, I wish to reflect on the moral imperative for us to take seriously the commitments we have made in past decades. Those commitments have value in themselves, but they have also come to define the country that we are and aspire to be. They are part of why we are trusted by much of the international community and held in high regard.

Treaties such as the refugee convention and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child set out clearly the rights of people who, due to their particular circumstances, may not be able to speak up for themselves. In many cases, this country has led the way in drafting the treaties named in the amendment. We should be proud of our involvement in advocating for the rights of every single human being. Anything that affirms our conviction that we are all created in the image of God, worthy of value, dignity and safety, should be commended.

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Chelmsford supports amendment guaranteeing UK’s international obligations”

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.

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Archbishop of Canterbury tables amendment requiring government collaboration strategy to tackle global refugee crisis”

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments focused on transparency

On 14th June 2023, during a committee debate on the Illegal Migration Bill, the Bishop of Durham spoke in support of a number of amendments designed to ensure transparency of reporting regarding the success of the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, the Minister ought to welcome Amendments 132, 134 and 135, because they simply ask for transparency of reporting back on the success of the Bill. The introduction says:

“The purpose of this Act is to prevent and deter unlawful migration, and in particular migration by unsafe and illegal routes”.

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments focused on transparency”

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham moves amendment to exclude certain groups from cap on safe and legal migration routes

On 14th June 2023, the House of Lords debated the Illegal Migration Bill in the fifth day of committee. The Bishop of Durham moved his amendment 128B to the bill, which would “exclude the 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.”

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I remind the Committee of my interests with the RAMP project and as a trustee of Reset, as laid out in the register. In moving Amendment 128B, I am grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Stroud and Lady Lister, and the noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, for their support, which, in itself, I hope demonstrates that this whole business of safe and legal routes is a matter about which there is common mind across the House and that we all agree that we need safe and legal routes. I am therefore looking forward to the next couple of hours—as I anticipate it might be—as we explore these issues, because this is really a debate about what is the best, how and when.

This amendment is a straightforward and well-intentioned addition to ensure that any cap placed on safe and legal routes excludes current named schemes already in operation. I hope, therefore, that it is a simple amendment that the Government will be able to accept to help provide clarity. Before I explain the rationale behind the amendment, I should like to comment on the importance of safe and legal routes. Since the pandemic, and following the end of the vulnerable persons resettlement scheme, I have despaired as I have witnessed the breakdown of our contribution to global efforts to support refugees to find sanctuary. 

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham moves amendment to exclude certain groups from cap on safe and legal migration routes”

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.

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

Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham requests clarification on use of digital methods such as video conferencing in immigration procedures

During a committee debate on the Illegal Migration Bill on 12th June 2023, the Bishop of Durham raised a point of clarification to Lord Murray of Blidworth (the Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Migration & Borders), on the use of remote methods such as video-conferencing to conduct immigration procedures, asking whether such methods were as effective as in person interviewing and interventions:

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con, Home Office): Amendment 90, spoken to by my noble friends Lord Randall and Lord McColl, relates to the presumption that it is not necessary for a person to remain in the UK to co-operate with an investigation. It is one of the enduring legacies of the Covid pandemic that much more can now be done remotely. We all see this in the changes to the way we work. Even now, some Members of your Lordships’ House take part in debates by videolink. It is simply no longer the case that a victim of crime needs to be in face-to-face contact with police or others to assist with an investigation. There is no reason why, in the majority of cases, such co-operation cannot continue by email, messaging and videoconferencing. The presumption in Clause 21(5) is therefore perfectly proper.

(…)

The Lord Bishop of Durham: Sorry—it has taken me a little while to contemplate but is the Minister effectively saying that the use of video and email and so on is as good as in-person interviewing and in-person interventions? I really think that needs to be rethought.

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Durham requests clarification on use of digital methods such as video conferencing in immigration procedures”

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?

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Southwark supports amendments limiting detention of children on behalf of Bishop of Durham”

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.

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

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.

Continue reading “Illegal Migration Bill: Bishop of Coventry supports amendments covering human rights claims”

Bishop of Durham asks about immigration detention under the proposed Illegal Migration Bill

The Bishop of Durham received the following written answer on 5th June 2023:

The Lord Bishop of Durham asked His Majesty’s Government:

  • whether additional detention sites to detain those subject to the duty to remove under clause 2 of the Illegal Migration Bill will operate under the Detention Centre Rules 2001.
  • whether an individual subject to the duty to remove under clause 2 of the Illegal Migration Bill will be considered for release from detention if a rule 35 report is brought to the attention of the Home Office.
  • what guidance they follow in assessing whether a place of immigration detention is appropriate.

Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con): The Illegal Migration Bill creates new detention powers which will allow the Home Secretary to detain a person pending a decision as to whether they meet the four conditions and the new duty to remove applies, and thereafter to detain pending their removal.

All Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs) must operate in compliance with the Detention Centre Rules 2001, this includes any additional sites that are opened as IRCs to increase detention capacity.

Continue reading “Bishop of Durham asks about immigration detention under the proposed Illegal Migration Bill”