Evangelical anti-abortion push influencing UK position, say activists

Advocates of sexual health and abortion rights are worried the United Kingdom government is being infiltrated by Christian fundamentalists, in a pattern of behavior similar to what eventually enabled Roe v. Wade — the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision granting a constitutional right to abortion — to be overturned in the United States.

Nongovernmental organizations in the U.K. have been alarmed by a government decision to drop language protecting sexual and reproductive health and rights — or SRHR — from the concluding statement of a July conference on the freedom of religion or belief, organized by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office and Fiona Bruce, an evangelical member of the U.K. Parliament who serves as the prime minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief.

Concerns about the U.K.’s faltering position on SRHR are accompanied by worries about the behavior of some U.K. government envoys, whom critics say are essentially unaccountable in the country’s febrile political atmosphere. Major political decisions are on hold as the governing Conservative party chooses a new prime minister, who will not begin the job until early September.

“There is a real worry for many of us that there is an infiltration going on and a lack of accountability, that we need to watch very closely, because that’s how we ended up in the situation we’re in in the U.S. right now,” said Robin Gorna, a women’s rights activist who was the lead of the SheDecides initiative’s support unit. 

For years, evangelical Christian groups in the U.S. have been a driving force in the conservative political push to ban abortions. They scored a major victory when abortion rights were gutted following a ruling by the conservative-leaning Supreme Court in June, sparking outcry domestically and fear for the impact on SRHR worldwide because of the U.S. far-reaching influence.

“Following the Supreme Court decision, the anti-[abortion] rights groups are emboldened, running around capitals, saying, ‘Look what we’ve achieved in the U.S., we can achieve the same here,’” said Dr. Alvaro Bermejo, director-general of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. A “strong reaction” to defend SRHR was required from the governments who had championed it for many years, he added.

“Instead, what we see is a weak response or in many cases, like this one, playing into their hands and into their politics, demonstrating the gains we have made on sexual and reproductive rights are very fragile,” continued Bermejo. “This is a moment to stand up and to be clear, and the U.K. government is not doing that.”

The change in language of the 2022 International Ministerial Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief took place without the knowledge of signatories, angering long-time allies like Sweden and Denmark, according to The Guardian. The move surprised many as the U.K. has long been considered a global leader on SRHR, providing policy and funding support internationally.

“The changes made to the statement set a dangerous precedent for global commitments to be rolled back,” said Bekky Ashmore, SRHR policy and advocacy adviser at Plan International UK, adding that the NGO was “monitoring developments” on the issue.

“If the U.K. stops advocating for SRHR and bodily autonomy in the international sphere, I think that’s a very alarming time,” said Gorna. “The U.K., the northern Europeans have always been relied on to be firm friends of gender equality and women’s rights in very complicated international negotiations and there have been wonderful civil servants through the years who have made that happen. We should be very alarmed that this seems to be changing.”

“This move is further eroding the trust of international partners, following last year’s aid budget cut which disproportionately impacted sexual and reproductive health,” said Ashmore. “The government’s promises to ‘boldly defend and progress SRHR for all’ are ringing increasingly hollow. With the recent rollback of US abortion rights, it is vital for the UK government to set a different tone and live up to its commitments.”

The U.K. government’s reversal was justified by Tariq Ahmad, member of the House of Lords, who, answering a parliamentary question, said it was done to “make the final statement more inclusive of all perspectives and views, to allow for a constructive exchange of views on all issues.” But pro-choice and human rights groups were unconvinced, particularly because the amended statement saw the number of signatory countries drop from 22 countries to just eight.

“That very much is a product of a combination of some of the U.S. tactics and people here within the ministry wanting to play that game, because otherwise it would be impossible,” said Bermejo.

The conference itself also alarmed SRHR advocates. Bermejo, whose organization monitored the event, described it as a mix of people “genuinely concerned” about freedom of religion and others who used it as “a cover” to promote an “anti-rights agenda.”

Bruce, who helped organize the conference, is a council member of the Evangelical Alliance and has said her priority in Parliament is “defending and fighting for the sanctity of human life.” She is suspected by several sources of being behind the amended statement, though no link has been proven. Her appointment to the role had already caused concern within the U.K.’s SRHR community. Bruce did not respond to a Devex request for comment.

“It was really worrying, she was was well known as a campaigner [against abortion] … It was a shock she was appointed,” said an SRHR expert who asked to remain anonymous. Bruce, who also co-chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Pro-Life Group, is “unashamedly aligned with the Christian right in the U.K.,” according to Gorna.  

Bruce “seems to be accountable to no one” in her role as special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, said Bermejo. “I think the government and Parliament need to question her role as interlocutor for these U.S.-based anti-rights groups,” he added, but acknowledged he had no evidence to prove this suspicion. 

One of the freedom of religion or belief conference attendees who caused particular alarm was Sam Brownback, appointed by former President Donald Trump as ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom between 2018 and 2021. As a Republican senator and governor of Kansas, Brownback had a track record of restricting abortion and LGBTQ rights. He was given an award by the U.K. and Dutch governments at the conference, The Guardian reported. Hardline U.S. Christians have also become involved in controversial U.K. medical cases where families have fought doctors to keep their children on life support.

There is no evidence that any changes to the U.K.’s SRHR policy or aid funding have taken place since the conference, but Gorna said she was flagging the issue as “something to watch,” noting that it takes months for government funding decisions to be made and changes would not be expected “overnight.” The U.K.’s development program is currently in another period of rupture as nonessential spending has been paused while the government awaits a new prime minister and fears mount over the amount, potentially billions, that will be diverted from international programs to support refugees in the U.K.

“My much bigger concern is this is a pattern of behavior which is constitutionally problematic, in that if people are being given power as envoys, they should not be changing long-standing government policy without some kind of accountability,” Gorna said. “As a special envoy, Bruce or any of them don’t have any obligation to answer questions in the House of Commons, and these are the fundamental accountability mechanisms of government.”

“There is an accountability question about these people [envoys] generally,” said Tim Durrant, an associate director at the Institute for Government. “They hardly answer questions in their respective Houses. Sometimes they appear in front of select committees but it is rare. We’ve previously said there should be a letter of remit [outlining] the length of their term and whether it’s paid. This information matters and isn’t normally made available.”

Meanwhile, it's become more difficult for SRHR practitioners around the world to work safely, according to Bermejo.

“We’re seeing more death threats against front-line workers in many countries as a result of this [fundamentalist activism]. Our clinics [are] waking up in the morning to find their walls graffitied with threats of violence, more and more picketing in front of clinics so it’s more and more difficult for women to access. We continue to see that growing, and of course it does affect our programming,” he said.

An FCDO spokesperson said: “The UK is committed to defending universal access to comprehensive Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights and will continue working with other countries to protect gender equality in international agreements. In our capacity as Chair of the event, we amended the statement we made at the [freedom of religion or belief] Conference to focus on the core issues.”