Emma Thompson

Recharging the transport sector

Bishop Steven speaks in the House of Lords

Bishop Steven addressed the House of Lords on 16 October as part of a debate on the Environment and Climate Change Committee report EV strategy: rapid recharge needed.

My Lords I warmly welcome this debate, as a member of the Environment and Climate Change (ECC) Committee which produced the report. I pay tribute to Baroness Parminter for her introduction to the debate and to her very wise, careful, gracious and patient leadership of the Committee over its first three years.

My Lords, my experience of serving on the ECC Committee over three years was that each of the challenges we addressed proved to be both more significant and much more complex that we first appreciated. It was a tremendous learning curve that each issue had multiple questions and problems associated with it, and needed complex solutions.  This was clearly the case with the EV Report before the House today. Some very good work has been done by the previous government, by manufacturers and local authorities but much more needs to be done and urgently to keep this transition on track.

The need to give urgency to this transition is vital. The effects of climate change across the world are accelerating as all of us in this chamber recognise, often affecting those who have least, who are least resilient, and whose emissions in the present and in the past have been the least. Surface transport is the UK’s highest emitting sector with passenger cars responsible for over half the sector’s emissions. The new government surely needs to do all it can to accelerate this transition, alongside the vital transition to renewable energy.

So what does our new government intend to do? The Labour manifesto for the General Election mentions three key steps:

  • accelerating the roll out of charge points;
  • restoring the phase out date of 2030 for new cars with internal combustion engines;
  • and supporting buyers of second-hand electric cars by standardising information – the second-hand car market is key and complex.

These are welcome steps, and I would ask the Minister as others have done to comment on when we will see action on each of these points. However, as I am sure the Minister will recognise, and as the report makes clear, these steps are not enough by themselves.

So may I ask for a response and for action on two further areas.

The first is what will the government do to ensure that the transition to EVs, as part of the transition to net zero, is a fair transition? I commend that word, fair, to the government, if I may – it doesn’t feature in this part of the manifesto. In particular how will the government ensure parity of pricing and taxation for those able to charge their EVs at home and those who need to use a commercial charging service? 40% of the country will not have access to a home charge point. There is at present no viable solution to ensure parity, and I agree that our Committee was not able to offer one. It will require some radical and imaginative thinking. How will the government address this key question of fairness?

Second, how will the government lead and encourage the transition to EVs through better communication and co-ordination across government? The Committee conducted its enquiry through a period when the government was rowing back from previous commitments and sending very mixed messages to the markets, manufacturers and consumers. We are I think still waiting for a sense of how the new government will respond in terms of encouragement, accurate information and co-ordination of policy goals and delivery. What task force or structures will the government put in place to ensure this for the future?

The transition to EVs is a potential revolution in our road transport, our economy and public health over the next decade. How will the government rapidly recharge this sector into the future?

Watch Bishop Steven’s speech below.

/by
Steven Croft

Bishop Steven calls on government to create ‘communities of kindness’

Bishop Steven joined the debate on social care in the House of Lords this week. He called on the Government to ‘reimagine care’, describing it as an urgent need. The full text of his speech was as follows:

My Lords I welcome this debate. I particularly appreciated Baroness Tyler’s appeal for a reframing of a broader conversation and like others across this House, I want to pay tribute to the many unpaid carers and those who work in social care, investing their lives in the wellbeing of others. As has been said, we acknowledge together in this debate that our social care system is in urgent need of reform, that this is a key moment.

So I share the hope that the government will take the first steps in that reform in the very, very near future. Social care impacts all of us in terms of our responsibilities and our needs. Social care brings the most vulnerable in our society from the margins to the centre of our attention and our love. My Lords last year the Archbishops’ Commission on Reimagining Care published its excellent report with the title, Care and Support Reimagined.

The Commission was chaired by Dr Anna Dixon MBE and the Rt Revd James Newcome, then Lord Bishop of Carlisle. The report commends the development of a National Care Covenant. The biblical notion of covenant is based not around commercial contract but around a wider societal promise and mutual expectation and is focussed on relationships, mutuality and partnership. It demands a shared vision across society and common values and I would particularly draw the attention of the House to the seven values and principles from the Commission’s work which I believe offer an excellent underpinning for the government’s work.

Social care should be universal; social care should be fair; social care should be characterised by loving kindness which as we all know is transformative; social care should foster trust; social care should be inclusive; social care should promote mutuality; social care is an expression of empathy, focussed on what each individual wants or needs, rather than paternalistic and presumptive.

A number of Lords have and will highlight the need for workforce planning. Clearly that is needed as part of a holistic, integrated, systemic approach. We are entering a period in wider society when new technologies are likely to lead to a rapid decline in the number of roles in many industries: in warehousing and call centres as many roles are automated.

The renewal of social care gives us the opportunity to think about rethinking and expanding the workforce in an area of our lives which needs to remain distinctly personal and deeply humane. In social care we must think not only how to be efficient but how to create communities of kindness.

As the motion before us implies there is an urgent need to offer a matrix of support for voluntary carers not least the funding of respite to enable rest and Sabbath in their demanding roles. My Lords so much that is good is offered by home carers and volunteers and partnerships with faith communities and by local authorities and by businesses. The government now has a significant opportunity to Reimagine Care and Support and the need to begin this task is very, very urgent.

/by
Steven Croft

House of Lords debate on Gaza and conflict in the Middle East

Bishop Steven told the House about an interfaith peace vigil which was held in Oxford recently, bringing together diverse communities from across the city in a call for peace, remembrance and unity.

Here is the text of his speech:

My Lords, I want to thank the Minister for her very, very compassionate and clear speech, statement and the tone in which it is delivered. If I may, other noble Lords who have spoken will speak about these terrible, terrible events and the effect they are having on our own communities. I was privileged to take part on Sunday evening, the anniversary of the last day of relative peace, in a large community and interfaith vigil in Oxford and for Oxford and Oxfordshire.

Despite terrible weather, well over 200 people came together, drawn from the Muslim, the Jewish, the Christian communities, other faiths and those of no faith. We listened to our local council leaders, our civic leaders from the county, the vice chancellors of our two universities, and other representatives of the community.

It was an enormous encouragement and comfort to see the way in which different sections of the community were able to come together and to make a stand for peace, in remembrance, in lament, for all that has been lost and in a common commitment to community cohesion.

My Lords as other noble Lords have said already, this is a particular conflict which places almost unique strains on our own communities in the United Kingdom. Could I ask the Minister to say what the Government is doing and plans to do in the future to encourage this deeper and greater community cohesion as these stresses no doubt continue in the year which is to come?

/by
Steven Croft

The impact of technology on human flourishing

My Lords it’s a privilege to contribute to this debate. I congratulate the new ministers and express appreciation to Baroness Barron and to Baroness Jolly for her valedictory speech. There is much to commend in the gracious speech.

A few weeks ago Pope Francis addressed the leaders of the G7 on the risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence. Francis spoke of the way in which artificial intelligence arises from God given human potential. He spoke of the excitement at the possibilities these powerful tools will bring. He spoke of the risks of greater inequalities; of impersonation; and  of the need for deep and humane wisdom and ethics and the right political leadership. Pope Francis demonstrated a deep humanity not only in his words but in the way he embraced each leader in the room and lightened for a moment the heavy burdens each carries.

My encouragement to the government is to hold together these very significant developments in  technology with deep insights into our humanity on the other: what it means to live well; to build flourishing societies; to enable the wellbeing of all. We must equip our young people be masters of technology not slaves to algorithms; able to put the science to good use but not allow its creations to distort our humanity. The deep ethical questions raised by the sciences will run across every part of the government’s legislative programme but I will focus on three themes if I may.

The first is the intersection of work and technology. An increasing number of people now work for and with algorithms. The quantity and quality of work is changing. Work is fundamental to human flourishing. The new skills and employment  bill must have regard to the question of satisfying and rewarding work not only in respect of income but also agency, autonomy and creativity in daily work and the ability to create safe and humane workplaces for the flourishing of all.

The second is the opportunity and risks of data: the need to ensure that every citizen derives maximum benefit from the secure use of data and every citizen is protected from exploitation by individuals or corporations whether in health or education and skills.  I would ask the minister what will be the government’s approach to risk in terms of the deployment of untried technologies which have the capacity to do harm? Will security extend to security of data? This seems a vital question given global events today.

The third is to urge that the well being of children and the vulnerable remains at the heart of the government’s approach to technology. Any society will be judged by its care for the young. We have seen two decades of unregulated exploitation of children for commercial gain by social media companies. I welcome very much the resolve of the Secretary of State to further strengthen and enhance the Online Safety Act. We do not yet fully understand what makes for a good digital childhood. Many childrens lives are ruined through overexposure to technology. I urge the government to be bold when it comes to the protection of children online.

Every development in science and technology reveals a little more clearly the wonder of what it is to be human and asks us to mine the deep treasures of wisdom in faith and our common humanity. Will the government dare to hold in tension both knowledge and wisdom for the sake of the flourishing all.

 

/by
Steven Croft

Debate on support for persecuted Christians around the world

Bishop Steven speaks during the House of Lords debate on support for persecuted Christians around the world.

My Lords, may I too add my congratulations and appreciation to Baroness Foster for securing this important debate and for her comprehensive and moving survey and speech. It is also a pleasure to follow the noble Lord Lord Carey and pay tribute to his considerable expertise in this area. I’m grateful to my colleague the Bishop of Winchester, formerly the Bishop of Truro, for a briefing in advance of this debate which I know he will follow closely.

As Baroness Foster set out so eloquently, the beginning of Holy Week is a fitting time to remember the persecution of Christians across the world and the costs of faith. This persecution been evident since the very  beginning of the Church. Even so it is sobering to reflect that according to Open Doors 365 million Christians face some sort of persecution worldwide, about one in seven of the global Christian population. I also note with other noble Lords the disproportionate consequences for women and girls.

We pay tribute today to the courage and perseverance for persecuted Christians faith and in turn appreciate the freedom of belief which is a feature of our own democracy. As the historian Tom Holland has argued recently in his powerful book Dominion, many of the core values of our society can be traced directly to our Christian heritage.

However this debate has a broader significance because freedom of religion or belief [FoRB] violations against anyone can be an important indicator of the state of human rights in any context globally. As the former UN Special Rapporteur on FoRB Heiner Bielefeldt says:

“Freedom of religion or belief has rightly been termed a “gateway” to other freedoms, including freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”

An approach that guarantees (FoRB) for all, as advocated by the Truro Review, is the best way of addressing Christian persecution for two important reasons. First, singling out Christians inevitably ‘others’ them, increasing their vulnerability. It is also antithetical to the Christian faith itself to favour Christians over other faiths: Christianity puts no limit to its definition of who our neighbour is. So, it is wrong to argue for special treatment of persecuted Christians theologically. But secondly, it is also impossible to support persecuted Christians effectively without supporting the freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) of all persons. That is because freedom of religion and belief is intertwined with other human rights and a matter of legally-binding international human rights obligations.

My Lords we need to note in this debate that we have seen a regrettable increase in islamophobia and antisemitism in the United Kingdom since the terrible October 7th attacks and the devastating conflict in Gaza. The work of faith leaders building bridges and strong relationships and understanding locally has been a vital part of the local response to event in Israel and Gaza in my own city and county and across the country. Religious freedom and tolerance needs to be nurtured and guarded nationally and locally.

The library briefing provides some estimates on the numbers of Christians persecuted globally. Estimating persecution is problematic and contentious for obvious reasons. A comment former UN Special Rapporteur on FoRB Asma Jahangir makes in relation to all FoRB statistics is very helpful here: “When I am asked which community is persecuted most, I always reply ‘human beings’”. Our responsibility is always to stand up for the world’s most vulnerable people wherever they may be found. Freedom of religion and belief is a foundation of human rights.

The Truro Review argued that FoRB should be front and centre in Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) policy. However, religious literacy in policy and diplomacy remains a significant challenge even though only religiously literate responses will be effective in addressing some of the world’s most serious instances of persecution in countries like Nigeria, India, Iran, Russia and China. What steps are the FCDO taking to build religious literacy across its work?

Fiona Bruce is sponsoring a private member’s bill in the other place the ‘International Freedom of Religion or Belief Bill 2023–24’ – which would establish an ‘office of the special envoy’ and require the prime minister to appoint someone to the role by law.

I very much hope this House will play its part by supporting the Private Member’s Bill to establish the Special Envoy post in law when my colleague the Bishop of Winchester brings it to the House in due course.

Finally, can I invite both the Minister and the opposition leads to tell this house what future strategies they intend to have in place to continue or enhance the role of the Special Envoy for FoRB and support for persecuted Christians globally?

 

/by
Steven Croft

EV strategy stuck in the slow lane

The Lord Bishop of Oxford is part of a committee which has called on the Government to recharge its EV strategy, in a report on the UK’s transition to electric vehicles.

“The evidence we received shows the Government must do more to get people to adopt EVs. If it fails to heed our recommendations the UK won’t reap the significant benefits of better air quality and will lag in the slow lane for tackling climate change.”
Baroness Parminter, Chair of the inquiry

A House of Lords committee report, published this month, has warned that the Government needs to put its foot on the accelerator if the UK is to transition to Electric Vehicles (EVs) in time to meet net zero targets.

In its report; EV strategy: rapid recharge needed, the Environment and Climate Change Committee has warned that a combination of higher purchase costs, insufficient charging infrastructure and mixed messaging risks people not adopting EV cars.

Whilst welcoming the ZEV mandate on manufacturers, recent investment in the UK car manufacturing industry and initial support for local authorities, including the Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (LEVI) fund, the report calls on the Government to act much faster. This includes tackling the disparity in upfront costs between EVs and petrol and diesel cars and looking at targeted grants to incentivise the purchase of new electric cars.

After taking evidence from a wide range of witnesses and hearing from young people from across the UK, through its unique Youth Engagement Programme, the committee also calls on the Government to:

instil confidence in consumers by:

  • exploring options to incentivise second hand electric car sales, including developing a ‘battery health standard’;
  • reforming road tax to give a clear steer on future motoring costs;
  • equalising VAT for charging by reducing the 20% VAT rate applied to public charging, to 5% in line with domestic electricity;
  • communicating a positive vision of the EV transition to consumers, and promoting comprehensive, clear, and accurate information.

accelerate the rollout of the UK’s charging infrastructure by:

  • extending Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (LEVI) funding for another three years;
  • consulting on offering a ‘right to charge’ for tenants and leaseholders in multi-occupancy buildings;
  • reviewing planning regulation to ensure that the rollout of EV infrastructure is not unduly delayed by out-dated regulation;
  • consulting on mandating workplaces with designated car parking spaces to install EV chargepoints.

support industry by:

  • further enhancing UK manufacturing and battery innovation;
  • accelerating investment in UK vehicle and battery recycling facilities.

Baroness Parminter, Chair of the inquiry said: “Surface transport is the UK’s highest emitting sector for CO2, with passenger cars responsible for over half those emissions. The evidence we received shows the Government must do more – and quickly – to get people to adopt EVs. If it fails to heed our recommendations the UK won’t reap the significant benefits of better air quality and will lag in the slow lane for tackling climate change.”

/by
Steven Croft

Existential risk in this and future decades

Following the State Opening of Parliament on Tuesday 7 November, the House of Lords is debating the content of the King’s Speech over five days. The King’s Speech is written by the government. It sets out the government’s legislative agenda for the new parliamentary session. On Monday 13 November the Bishop of Oxford

It is a privilege as ever to take part in the debate on this most gracious speech. I thank the Minister for his clear introduction and also pay tribute to Lord Gascoigne and the Bishop of Norwich for their gracious and eloquent maiden speeches. It is particularly good to welcome the Lord Bishop of Norwich to this House with, as he has demonstrated, his considerable expertise on the environment and climate change.

My Lords I warmly welcome the Prime Minister’s ambition to build a better future for our children and grandchildren and deliver the change the country needs. But it seems to me, as to many, that so great are the challenges we face, that this and any government will need deeper humility combined with greater practical wisdom to lead the nation forward. I focus my remarks on my own two areas of focus in this House: the climate and artificial intelligence – both areas of existential risk in this and future decades.

On climate: I welcome the government’s restated determination to lead action on tackling climate change and diversity loss. As a member of your Lordships Select Committee on the Environment and Climate Change I do recognise the complexity of a fair transition for the whole of our economy to net zero. But I do not yet see this determination translated into effective leadership of granular policy, whether that is in the transition to electric vehicles or decarbonising home heating or encouraging behaviour change.

The tone of the speech is that the world is more or less succeeding in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The opposite is of course the case. The years when we can avert future disasters are slipping away as Lord Stern has argued. I would say with respect to the noble Lord Lilley that much of the world is currently experiencing catastrophic effects of climate change as is well documented by the United Nations and others. We need greater leadership and co-ordination across every government department and an increased sense of urgency in this legislative programme.

And in particular I want to highlight the risks and dangers of politicising the climate change agenda which has been a feature of recent government announcements. Reaching net zero fairly demands the patient building of cross party and cross societal consensus which have been damaged by the recent changes on electric vehicle targets and by the decision to license yet more future oil and gas fields which are unlikely to come into production in time to support the essential and urgent transition we need.

Turning to Artificial Intelligence. I do want to congratulation the Prime Minister and the government on the recent AI Summit and all that has emerged from the discussions there. The Summit served to raise profile of the questions raised by AI and the ways in which the benefits of new technology can be realised and the mitigation of its potential harms. I welcome the promise of new legal frameworks for self driving vehicles, new competition rules for digital markets and the encouragement of innovation in machine learning.

However I do want to encourage the government to invest more deeply in dialogue with civil society about the impact of these new technologies. The recent summit claimed to involve civil society, but I have seen no evidence of this key third voice in the room. The government has entered into a rich dialogue between government and tech companies, which is welcome, but this dialogue must be informed by trade unions, academia, community groups and faith communities to build trust and confidence moving forward about the kind of society we are building.

So may I ask the minister in her response to indicate the ways in which the government will strengthen this third arm of the conversation in the coming months and years.

/by
Steven Croft

Online harms and disinformation

Young girl resting face on her hand and looking at a mobile phone which is lighting up her face.

The Bishop of Oxford, raises concern about online harms, powers, and disinformation in the second reading of the Online Harms Bill in the House of Lords.

Read more
/by
Steven Croft

Supporting behaviour change

The Lord Bishop of Oxford to ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to support behaviour change as part of the pathway to net zero emissions. Read his full speech given in the House of Lords on 20 November 2022.

My Lords

I appreciated the time given to this debate. We face many challenging issues but none is more serious than climate change and the environmental crisis. The context of our debate is the real prospect of global heating of more than 1.5 degrees by the middle of the century with escalating extreme weather events in the UK and across the world; rising sea levels; devastating fires and floods; significant loss of life and damage to infrastructure; wars over scarce resources; shifting patterns of harvest; increasing zoonotic diseases and a massive displacement of peoples as large parts of the earth become uninhabitable.

At the same time, the green economy offers genuine prospects for economic growth and diversity and the opportunity for global leadership. It is a privilege to be a member of your Lordships Select Committee on the Environment and Climate Change under the able leadership of Baroness Parminter. Last week we published our first major report: In our hands: behaviour change for climate and environmental goals which I commend to the House. My questions to the government are largely based on the report’s findings.

To avert disaster in our lifetimes we need to reach net zero by 2050 or before. That means radical action in this decade and the next. The Committee agreed with the Committee for Climate Change that behaviour change is a key element in that journey: both the adoption of new technology and changing habits and practices around diet, transport, heating and consumption. Each of these behaviour changes has co-benefits. All of them have potential economic benefits. They are essential stepping stones on the path to net zero.

This government has given imaginative and committed leadership in the area of climate and the environment including at COP 26 through the COP President and in the recent Environment Bill. The government has acknowledged the need for behaviour change across the board: we all must play our part. It is good to see government commitments to behavour change summarised in the library briefing for this debate. To give just one example, the noble Lord the minister said in your Lordships house in September 2021:

“The government wanted to make it easier and more affordable for people to shift towards a more sustainable lifestyle while at the same time maintain freedom of choice and fairness’.

The Committee takes a similar view. We know that the public is looking for stronger leadership from the government in this area. 85% of the public are concerned or very concerned about climate change – double the number from 2016.

But the Committee found a very significant gap between what the government wants to do and the leadership which is being offered. There is a very significant gap in understanding the challenge from department to department. There is too little joined up thinking and policy. There are quick wins which are not being adopted. There are massive areas for development and leadership – particularly domestic heating which is the subject of our next enquiry. The leadership and committee structures are opaque. There is a lack of expertise and knowledge across government. There has been no real attempt at public information and engagement campaigns. The leadership debate over the summer has raised real questions around the new governments commitment to net zero which are being worked through even this week in the other place.

The report offers a set of recommendations to government in this area of leadership. Other speakers will no have other questions to the minister. Could I ask for reassurance that the government will take these concerns seriously and will put real energy and creativity around the process of supporting behaviour change into the future and as a matter of great urgency.

/by
Steven Croft

AI in the UK: No room for complacency

The Bishop of Oxford spoke in the debate on the Scrutiny Committee Report in the House of Lords on 25 Mary 2022.

Read more
/by