PARISH CHURCHES? how do we keep our - Ecclesiological Society

THE BISHOP OF LONDON • BUILDING BRIDGES 7
But facts must be faced. The historic asset base of the
Church of England administered by the Church
Commissioners is restricted to a modest contribution to
the joint church-state Churches Conservation Trust,
which looks after churches no longer needed for regular
worship.
The #nancial revolution through which we are passing,
in which increasing responsibilities are falling to dioceses
and parishes, makes a re-assessment of the asymmetrical
relationship between church attenders and the wider
community with respect to maintaining such a vital part of
the nation’s inheritance of art and culture, urgent.
No one would argue that Christian work, the
propagation of the gospel or the care of the clergy should
fall as a charge on the public purse. Although I was
fascinated to note that the Italian State has just agreed to
pay clergy pensions on the basis of the public service the
clergy give to the wider
community in that country. I
do think, however, that a
re-adjustment of
responsibilities for
maintaining the historic
fabric of such a vital aspect of
English popular culture is
just and reasonable.
Churches have a key part
to play in various aspects of the present Government’s
agenda. There is clearly an educational role and many
places like Southwark Cathedral and Canterbury have
recently completed new educational centres.
There is a role in urban regeneration. St John’s Hoxton
in Hackney, one of Britain’s poorest boroughs, has
received a good deal of publicity as it brings together new
facilities for the community including an employment
project for the disabled and a facility for families under
stress. This has been accommodated in a building
refurbished with English Heritage advice and assistance. A
somewhat genteel Edwardian Apocalypse painting on the
ceiling has been restored. The activity itself together with
superb leadership from priest and lay people alike has
re-vivi#ed the worshipping community, which has been
enabled to re-engage with its neighbours.
Tourism is one of the most signi#cant economic
activities in the country and a huge employer. In a recent
debate in the House of Lords, I was able to say some very
obvious things about the contribution of places like York
Minster to the regional economy. I was puzzled by the
suggestion from other speakers that this was a novel
perspective. There was no denying the goodwill however,
and the minister replying to the debate drew attention to
the meeting between the of#cers of the Cathedrals and
Churches division and representatives of a number of
Government departments, which happened earlier in the
summer.
We are going to need Government understanding and
support and never more so than in the next few months. I
have already referred to the long running VAT campaign.
We are especially grateful to the Chancellor for the
scheme he announced in 2001 which has yielded now
I do not believe that there are any
quick fix, one size fits all global
solutions which have any hope of
being successful
£11 million in repayments of VAT to parishes undertaking
repairs on listed buildings. This was only ever meant to be
an interim measure while the European Commission
reviewed the sixth VAT Directive. The Commission’s
proposals have now been published and the news is not
good. They have rejected pleas for a reduced VAT regime
on repairs and even worse, they have noted that the UK
alone among member states has zero rated alterations to
historic buildings. They argue that it would be logical to
end this exception, making the standard rate the norm.
Churches and other historic buildings under these
proposals would face a 17.5% tax on alteration schemes,
often vital to enhanced community use.
The Government has already said that the interim VAT
scheme will continue until the VAT rate review is
completed. The decision will ultimately be taken by the
Council of Ministers and it is up to us in conjunction with
other allies to demonstrate
what a depth of feeling there
is about this subject
countrywide.
VAT reform is one part of
the general funding picture
and money as we all know
from our experience with
schools and other public
institutions is very tight.
Entering into new arrangements is going to require
imagination and will be very dif#cult. Expectations will
have to be managed. Our cause will be immeasurably
strengthened if we speak with a common voice and if we
are prepared for adventurous solutions.
I do not believe that there are any quick #x, one size #ts
all global solutions which have any hope of being
successful. We need to be clear sighted about the huge task
of changing perceptions. We need to educate ourselves so
that we can present the case sympathetically to potential
allies who are nearly always astonished when the facts are
relayed to them. We need to be prepared for experiments.
I think that the brief we are considering needs to be
developed further in devising fresh vehicles which can
help us in appropriate places to enter into partnerships
with other potential stake holders. It could be that we
need to think seriously about building on the work done
by some of the present church conservation bodies to
create a National Trust for Churches which could enlist
other partners and sponsors and give them real power
with responsibility as an alternative to redundancy. The
Churches Conservation Trust has done hugely important
work since its inception but it is obvious with the freezing
of its Government funding and the dif#culties in #nding
more money from the Church Commissioners sources
that the Trust’s capacity to absorb further churches in any
numbers is severely limited.
It is very encouraging to see how many dioceses are
engaging with this challenge in an imaginative way. The
diocese of Manchester led a few years ago with a project
undertaken in conjunction with English Heritage, looking
at the historic and architectural signi#cance of each church
building within a designated area and assessing them with