Nationality and Borders Bill 2022 – Page 2 – The Church of England in Parliament

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in debate

On 14th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its third reading. The Bishop of Durham spoke briefly in the debate, expressing support for amendments whilst raising concerns about the reception and timing of the bill:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I support all the amendments because they all seem to make complete sense in terms of tidying up, including those in the Government’s name. I too was disturbed by the announcement about the devolved legislatures—it expresses the deep unease about the Bill out in the country as a whole. I ask the Minister to take away from this House a real concern that this is not the right time to press ahead and that Ukraine has raised questions about the Bill and whether some kind of pause ought to be considered.

Hansard

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Chelmsford speaks on amendments relating to visa penalties

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the 3rd day of its report stage. The Bishop of Chelmsford spoke in the debate, raising concerns regarding amendments tabled by Baroness Williams of Trafford which would “allow visa penalties to be extended to countries that present a risk to international peace and security, or whose actions lead or are likely to lead to armed conflict or a breach of humanitarian law.”

The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, for his comments and I will add a few further thoughts.

I appreciate that the intent of these proposed new clauses is to bring additional sanction pressure on Russia, and perhaps also other states which threaten peace and security. However, I ask whether there are any concerns that, in practice, this provision may make it more difficult for a critic of, for example, the Putin regime, to reach the UK in safety. Such a person—perhaps one of those involved in the courageous protests against the current war—might seek to reunite with family in the UK for their own safety. They would require a valid visa, not least since the Bill makes it so much harder for those arriving without a visa to apply for refugee status. Is the Minister at all concerned that additional costs and barriers to obtaining a visa may invertedly hurt people seeking to escape authoritarian regimes, and who would be eligible for a visa to come here, more than it would actually hurt the regime itself?

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of St Albans speaks in support of amendments on modern slavery

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debted the Nationality and Borders Bill in the 3rd day of the report stage. The Bishop of St Albans spoke in support of several amendments on modern slavery:

My Lords, I will speak to Amendments 67 and 68 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Alton. I spoke to these amendments in Committee because I was concerned that Clause 59 was effectively raising the reasonable grounds threshold for identifying a victim of modern slavery. With respect to the Government, I confess that I remain unconvinced by their desire to alter reasonable grounds thresholds, and was not adequately assuaged in my fears that this could erect an unnecessary barrier to victims accessing the national referral mechanism.

The noble Lord, Lord Alton, made the argument in Committee that reasonable grounds decisions on the standard of “suspect but cannot prove” would allow the Modern Slavery Act to be more in line with ECAT. I am not a legal expert so this may well be the case. However, I made the point that since we currently use “maybe” as it exists within the Modern Slavery Act, as opposed to “is” or “are” as proposed by the Government —indeed, rather than “has been” as appears in ECAT—in supposedly bringing ourselves in line with ECAT we would effectively raise the threshold for access to the NRM.

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Bristol speaks in support of amendments on modern slavery and protection of overseas domestic workers

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its report stage. The Bishop of Worcester spoke in support of amendments to the bill that would remove certain clauses relating to victims of modern slavery, and moved an amendment intended to protect overseas domestic workers:

The Lord Bishop of Bristol: My Lords, I support the amendments in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, to remove Clauses 57, 58 and 62 from the Bill, to which I have added my name. I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, on her appointment and give thanks for all the work she does, even when we do not always entirely agree across these Benches.

As we have heard, Clauses 57 and 58 would make it appreciably more difficult for people to be recognised as victims of modern slavery and receive support. In Committee, the Minister responded to my concerns about these clauses by saying that, far from deterring victims, this will

“encourage genuine victims to come forward”.—[Official Report, 10/2/22; col. 1843.]

Votes: Nationality and Borders Bill

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Nationality and Borders Bill in its third day of the Report stage. Votes were held on several amendments, in which Bishops took part.

Nationality and Borders Bill 2022: Bishop of Durham speaks in support of amendments

On 8th March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its 3rd day of reports. The Bishop of Durham tabled amendments to the bill and spoke in support of other amendments:

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I support Amendment 64A, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, to which I have added my name.

I declare my interests in relation to both RAMP and Reset as set out in the register. I am very grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Neuberger and Lady Lister, and the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, for outlining all the arguments for why this amendment is the right route to take. On Amendment 64, I hear the words about safeguarding but it is a dangerous route to take.

The needs of children have been starkly left unaddressed in so many areas of the Bill. The policies proposed to determine the age of the child are particularly concerning. The child and their best interests, rather than deterrence, must be the starting point in designing these policies. I support the amendment because it is imperative that such assessments are up to standard and based on scientific evidence. We should be seeing help for local authorities to improve their practice through multiagency working so that social workers conduct these assessments and that they are better supported with appropriate funding and training. Making the process stricter will lead to more children being treated as adults. This is extremely concerning given that they will then be placed alone in adult accommodation, with no support or safeguarding.

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham speaks in favour of greater protection for children and vulnerable groups

On 2nd March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the second day of the report stage. The Bishop of Durham spoke on several amendments to the bill, including:

Amendment 35, which would prevent offshoring of asylum seekers
Amendments 40-45, moved by the Bishop of Durham on behalf of the Bishop of Gloucester, which relate to the standard of proof applied to vulnerable people seeking asylum
Amendments 48 & 49, which would promote more safe routes for asylum seekers and targets for resettlement

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, in rising to support Amendment 35 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Kirkhope, to which I have added my name, I declare my interests in relation to both RAMP and Reset and set out in the register. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, for the way she introduced this amendment, and I fully support all her points.

I set out my reasons for supporting this amendment in Committee. However, a significant concern for me now is that the Minister was not able to give assurance that children in families would be excluded from offshoring, nor that families would not be split up in the process. This is deeply concerning. I appreciate that the policy document of 25 February sets out that exemptions will depend on the country where people are being offshored and tat publicising exemptions will fuel the movement of the most vulnerable not subject to offshoring.

However, I would set out that, for children, onward movement to any country after an often traumatic journey to the UK, in addition to the trauma in their country of origin, is simply never in their best interests. All the concerns I set out in my Committee speech regarding the monitoring of the practice of offshoring processing centres are especially true for children.

Votes: Nationality and Borders Bill 2022

On 2nd March 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in its second day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part.

Votes: Nationality and Borders Bill

On 28th February 2022, the House of Lords debated the Nationality and Borders Bill in the first day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:

Nationality and Borders Bill: Bishop of Durham supports amendments proposed to ensure well-being and fair treatment of refugees and asylum seekers

During a debate on amendments to the Nationality and Borders Bill on 28th February 2023, the Bishop of Durham spoke in favour of several amendments:

by Baroness Hollins that sought to ensure the fair treatment of asylum seekers awaiting decisions on their cases by establishing a code of practice for professionals involved in the care of those seeking asylum, and introduce the need for a review of those services
by Baroness Stroud that would support the right to work for asylum seekers awaiting decisions for longer and six months
by Lord Coaker that would reduce the waiting time for asylum decisions

The Lord Bishop of Durham: My Lords, I fully support the amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, and my noble and right reverend friend behind me here supports it as well. I will speak to the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, and the two amendments from the noble Baroness, Lady Hollins, which I fully support.

We may have 125,000 asylum seekers but let me focus on two. This is why I support both amendments. One is an asylum seeker who lives in my area who heard from the Home Office within the first three weeks of arrival then heard nothing for 12 months, in spite of inquiry after inquiry. That is why we need a code of practice. That is why we need better ways of working. It beggars belief what that says to him about how he is seen in our society and by our society. That is, of course, told time and again.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: