SEVEN bishops were amongst peers who supported 4 latest amendments to the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill which were passed within the Lords this week in defiance of the federal government majority within the House of Commons.
The Bishop of Bristol, the Rt Revd Vivienne Faull, was the one bishop to talk throughout the debate on Tuesday afternoon. She was in support of an amendment from the Labour peer Lord Coaker, which sought to incorporate that the Bill have “due regard” for international law and three Acts of Parliament: the Children Act 1989, Human Rights Act 1998, and Modern Slavery Act 2015.
“The Modern Slavery Act is a world-beating piece of laws that we disregard at our peril,” Bishop Faull said, “yet it’s being undermined in lots of changes to other laws. In this case, there will likely be not only a negative impact on victim-care but significant law-enforcement issues in not paying due regard to the Act.
“Not identifying victims, or sending them to a different country before their claim has been properly assessed, will set back our efforts to bring the perpetrators of contemporary slavery to justice. Victims are sometimes the one witnesses to this crime, so perpetrators will likely be more prone to escape detection and conviction.”
Bishop Faull has supported previous amendments to guard existing and potential victims of contemporary slavery under the Government’s plans (News, 8 March; 23 February).
A government amendment to the Rwanda Bill — that the Government should report back to Parliament on modern slavery considerations in its implementation of the Bill — was, she told peers on Tuesday, “a concession that I hope will make it easier for Members of each Houses to scrutinise the consequences of this laws on among the most marginalised people in our society; but it surely doesn’t go far enough.
“There have to be a general exemption for people who find themselves suspected or confirmed victims of contemporary slavery. That is the very least we should always do for survivors of a terrible crime.”
In his opening remarks, the Conservative peer Lord Stewart disparaged the amendment, saying that the Government were “satisfied that removals to Rwanda will likely be implemented with due regard to international and domestic law. It is due to this fact not obligatory to set this out within the Bill.”
The motion, as amended, was none the less agreed by 258 votes to 233 in the primary of 4 divisions.
The second amendment, from Lord Hope, concerned how the protection of Rwanda was judged, and inserted that the Secretary of State should acquire an announcement from the independent Monitoring Committee on this. It was carried 266 to 227.
A 3rd amendment from Baroness Chakrabarti sought to interchange a clause within the Bill to be certain that, where evidence suggested that Rwanda was not protected, the Bill didn’t prevent courts considering a review or appeal for a person. Among other changes, the amendment also disapplied a bit of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 which states that a “court or tribunal may not grant an interim treatment that stops or delays” deportation from the UK. It was carried 253 to 236.
A fourth amendment, moved by Lord Browne, concerned the protection of armed forces and government personnel and their families from being deported under the Bill. It was carried 275 to 218.
The Bishops of Bristol, Gloucester, Manchester, Newcastle, and Worcester voted in all 4 divisions, and the Bishops of Oxford and St Edmundsbury & Ipswich joined them for the ultimate vote.
The Bill, as amended, was returned to the Commons.
