St Edmundsbury and Ipswich – Page 2 – The Church of England in Parliament

Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asks about environmental land management and sustainable farming initiatives

The Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asked a question on ongoing assessment of environmental land management and sustainable farming schemes during a discussion on food security on 26th March 2024:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, I indicate my interests as listed in the register and pay tribute to farmers. As the Minister has said, the priorities are food production and environmental quality, including rebuilding biodiversity, restoring clean air and water and prioritising the rebuilding of healthy soils. What ongoing assessment is being made of the current ELMS and SFI programmes to meet these aims?

Victims and Prisoners Bill: Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich expresses concern over human rights protections

During a debate on the Victims and Prisoners Bill on 12th March 2024, the Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, on behalf of the Bishop of Manchester, spoke in support of removing clauses 49-52 from the bill on the basis that they would potentially weaken human rights protections in the UK through disapplication of certain rights to prisoners:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, my right reverend friend the Bishop of Manchester regrets that he cannot be here today to speak to the amendments to which he has put his name.

The basis of our opposition to Clauses 49 to 51, to echo points made by the noble Lord, Lord German, and the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, is that human rights need to be applied universally, even when disapplication might seem expedient. We know that, when people are marginalised, it is then that human rights protections are most necessary and, as such, the disapplication of rights to prisoners, who rely on independent courts and the justice system to guarantee basic minimum standards of fairness and respect, is particularly egregious. The Law Society has warned that these clauses

“significantly weaken the system of human rights protections in the UK”.

My right reverend friend and I add our voices to these concerns.

Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich speaks on use of armed force and ethics of conflict

The Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich gave a speech in response to a motion to take note of the UK’s position on foreign affairs, on the topic of how and why armed force is used, and the difficulties of the ethics of war:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, I add my gratitude and appreciation to the noble Lords, Lord Cameron and Lord Ahmad, not just for what they do but for the way in which they do it.

I want to focus on how we continue to apply moral principles surrounding war in this ever-changing landscape. These are dangerous and uncertain times, as we have heard countless times this afternoon, for which we must prepare—and good preparation is itself deterrence. I add my name to the appeal made by the noble Baroness, Lady Goldie, that we see a significant increase in defence funding.

Votes: Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill

On 4th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration Bill) in the first day of the report stage. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration Bill): Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich supports amendments on modern slavery, right of return, and overall safety

On 4th March 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich spoke in the debate, supporting amendments on assessing Rwanda’s safety, establishing right of return for asylum seekers after relocation, and protection for victims of modern slavery:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich: My Lords, I shall speak in favour of Amendments 1, 3 and 5 tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti, to which I have added my name. I do not believe that we can enshrine in law a statement of fact without seeing and understanding the evidence that shows such a statement to be true, in particular when such a statement of fact is so contentious and for which the evidence may change. Ignoring for a second the strange absurdity of such declarations, we must also consider the real impact that this could have on the potentially vulnerable people whom the Government intend to send to Rwanda. As my most reverend friend the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is in his place, said at Second Reading,

Animal Welfare (Livestock Exports) Bill: Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich welcomes legislation

On 21st February 2024, yhe Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich gave a speech during the second reading of the Animal Welfare (Livestock Exports) Bill, expressing his support for the bill and stressing the importance of maintaining animal welfare standards in the UK:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, I draw attention to my entry in the register of interests. It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, and I welcome the Government’s commitment to improving the standards of animal welfare in the UK. I add my thanks to the Minister, as he begins his new role, and to those who have campaigned for so long, particularly the noble Baroness, Lady Fookes, whose birthday it is today.

I have spoken to farmers and farm vets in Suffolk, and they are clear that the exporting of animals for slaughter is not an acceptable practice, and I fully support the Bill. They raised with me a couple of related points, both of which have been made already, but I will briefly refer to them. First, we must ensure that holding British farmers to high welfare standards does not result in the undercutting of our farmers by cheaply produced imported meat that does not meet the same standards required of UK farmers. I hope the Government are able to provide farmers with the assurances they need on this matter.

Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asks about funding for coastal erosion and flood defences

The Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asked a question on the disparity in funding between managing flood risks and coastal erosion on during a discussion on the adequacy of Environment Agency expenditure on flood defences on 20th February 2024:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, I thought my question was going to be off the point. One of the issues raised frequently with me by those managing the coastline in Suffolk is the disparity between flooding risks, for which the Environment Agency takes responsibility, and coastal erosion, which is managed by local authorities. What assessment have the Government made of the disparity of funding for these two vital activities?

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill: Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich supports amendment challenging disapplication of the human rights act

On 14th February 2024, the House of Lords debated the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in committee. The Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich spoke in support of amendment 36 to the bill, on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The amendment would leave out clause 3 of the bill, in order to “limit the Bill’s disapplication of the Human Rights Act to immunising the Secretary of State from challenge of his decision to lay positive UNHCR advice.” The Bishop also pointed out the risks associated with disapplying the universal principle of human rights to asylum seekers:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord from Suffolk. The most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury regrets that he cannot be in his place to speak to Amendment 36, tabled in the name of the noble Baroness who has just briefly left, and to which he has added his name. I will speak briefly and again repeat the moral point.

The amendment leaves out Clause 3, where the Bill disapplies large chunks of the Human Rights Act and replaces it instead with one very limited disapplication of the Act to allow the Secretary of State to lay positive UNHCR advice before Parliament. This seems a necessary corrective to the wider issues in the Bill and supports the other amendments tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti, to Clause 1 of the Bill, to give the UNHCR a role in providing positive advice on the safety of Rwanda before any asylum seekers can be sent there.

Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asks about county council funding

The Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich asked a question on 14th February 2024 concerning the issue of funding for county councils, drawing on an example from Suffolk County Council and stressing the need for advance communication of finances to allow for forward planning:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich: My Lords, may I return to the issue of reforming the model? I have recently been caught up in discussions with Suffolk County Council about funding cuts it was making to its arts programmes. That drew me into detailed discussions about what its priorities were and the challenges it was facing. It said that two things would make a huge difference. The first was knowing further in advance what it might receive; it was looking for a three-year projection. The second was for the groundwork for the reform to which the Minister has been referring to be done now, rather than in the future.

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum & Immigration) Bill: Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich questions constitutional basis and moral implications of bill

The Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich spoke in the debate on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum & Immigration) Bill on 29th January 2024, arguing that the bill represented a loss of moral compass for the UK, and that the approach to the legislation by the government was constitutionally inappropriate:

The Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich: My Lords, as the 41st speaker, I will inevitably repeat or underline others’ points, but I will briefly make a couple of observations. I am struck that some noble Lords supporting the Bill nevertheless do so with a hint of equivocation, saying that it is not perfect or the final destination. In addition, I have not heard evidence that the proposal will work. The Minister commented in opening that progress had been made and the numbers of those coming across in boats had decreased. Why do we not put more effort into the courses that have enabled that reduction?

I do not think there is a single noble Lord who is not determined that the dangerous boat crossings of those seeking asylum in this country be stopped. Our valuing of and care for human life and the plight of those fleeing danger place a moral duty on us to work out a way to stop these perilous crossings and find a just and safe way for people to find refuge. We know from the Government’s figures that the great majority of those who have sought asylum in this country through this life-endangering method have had their applications upheld. We are not talking about people risking their lives without legitimate cause. We need to find, as a number of noble Lords have said, safe ways to achieve this goal with our European neighbours. This is a good moral purpose to which I believe we would all assent.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: