Oral Answers to Questions Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateMarsha De Cordova
Main Page: Marsha De Cordova (Labour - Battersea)Department Debates - View all Marsha De Cordova's debates with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport
(2 days, 7 hours ago)
Commons ChamberThe listed places of worship grant scheme provides support to religious communities with listed buildings by refunding the cost of VAT on repairs. The Church Commissioners view this scheme as an effective way to deliver transformational benefits to local communities, enabling restoration, repair and improved access. I welcome the support shown for the scheme by hon. Members across the House.
The listed places of worship grant scheme is essential to renovations and improvements being made by St Michael on Greenhill church in my constituency. Can the Second Church Estates Commissioner give any assurance to me and my constituents across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages that this grant and Government support will be available to support excellent projects such as the creation of a new community hub?
I congratulate my hon. Friend on raising this issue. It is so important to ensure that our local churches are supported and that churches such as St Michael’s in his constituency can deliver the repairs they need so that they can continue to be a benefit to their communities. The National Churches Trust recently found that for every £1 of investment £16 is returned to the local community in the form of events facilities, warm spaces, food banks and so much more. He will not be surprised to learn that I have raised the issue of the listed places of worship scheme with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and I really hope that the Government are listening and will want to continue with this vital and essential scheme.
The construction of St Michael’s church in Linlithgow began in 1424, and it is a significant centre of worship in the newly formed parish of Linlithgow and Avon Valley. As a category A listed site, it has benefited greatly from the listed places of worship grant scheme over the years. Can my hon. Friend advise what engagement the commissioners have had with representatives of Churches in Scotland on the importance and effectiveness of the scheme?
I know that St Michael’s church in Linlithgow in my hon. Friend’s constituency is a beautiful medieval church with strong community links and engagement. Although I am accountable only for the Church of England, I reassure her that the Church is working closely with its partners in Scotland, as they too want clarity on the future of this vital scheme. I would be happy to put her in touch with the head of church buildings for the Church of Scotland if she so wishes.
St Ives church in Leadgate in my constituency is known as the miners’ cathedral. The building is full of heritage, but costly maintenance issues are threatening its very survival. The church has secured grants to fund temporary fixes, but a long-term solution is desperately needed. It tells me that reclaiming tax can make all the difference, so will my hon. Friend reassure me that schemes like that will continue to help churches such as St Ives?
I thank my hon. Friend for her question. I know that St Ives church is a cornerstone of that community, and I congratulate the congregation on the funding they have raised to stabilise some of the church’s structures. Grants from the buildings for mission fund are available from the diocese and may help with some of the future work. However, we all know the importance of the listed places of worship scheme, and I will continue to raise it with the Secretary of State. I hope that the Government are listening and will come forward, as the scheme is due to end in March, and we certainly do not want that to happen.
Over the past two years alone, Newport cathedral has reclaimed over £87,000 under the listed places of worship scheme. When it soon becomes necessary to repair the tower, at an estimated cost of £1.1 million, a further £220,000 in tax will be added to that bill, and if that cannot be reclaimed the project will be delayed even further. The cathedral provides crucial support to schools, charities, refugees and the homeless. Does my hon. Friend recognise the importance of the scheme not only in saving significant heritage treasures, but in preserving those vital services?
I absolutely recognise the importance of the scheme and the difference that the cathedral’s social impact projects are making in her community. I would be very happy to put my hon. Friend in touch with the director of property strategy for the Church in Wales, so that they can discuss this issue and, I hope, lobby together to ensure—to say it once again—that the scheme is renewed.
The withdrawal of the listed places of worship scheme disproportionately affects rural churches. In my constituency of Farnham and Bordon, six listed churches saved nearly £43,000 in the past financial year through the scheme. Directors of St Andrew’s in Farnham and of St Bartholomew’s and St Christopher’s in Haslemere have raised concerns with me this week about the oversubscribed nature of other grant opportunities, such as the National Lottery Heritage Fund, which combines heritage restoration under the same scheme as, for example, coastal protection in the Humber estuary. This dilutes the vital church funds needed for their heritage. Can the hon. Lady inform me how churches can be supported to preserve heritage in my constituency if the VAT relief for repairs is not reinstated?
I thank the hon. Member for the question. As he will have heard throughout this Question Time, we are keen to ensure that the listed places of worship grant scheme continues, because we can see not only the immense benefits it brings to our communities, but how it helps to alleviate some of the challenges of raising funds. It is important that all our heritage buildings, including our churches, are preserved and that adequate funding is available for them. I would be very happy, if the hon. Member wishes, to meet him to discuss this further.
The scheme was designed to address a perverse incentive in the VAT rules that favoured demolition and rebuild at a time when we were unable to change those rules. Post Brexit, we can now do so. Will the Church Commissioners draw that to the attention of those on the Treasury Bench?
Will the hon. Lady therefore support my private Member’s Bill, which is coming up in March and is designed specifically to exclude repairs to listed places of worship from the VAT regime?
I, too, want to refer to the land of Calvin, oatcakes, and sulphur—Scotland. In a village in my constituency where I used to live, there is a lovely old Church of Scotland church that has been bought by a former Member of this place. It is in bad condition and it is upsetting local people. Can best practice be shared north of the border with planning authorities and heritage organisations? I would be most grateful.
I will certainly share the hon. Member’s thoughts, but I am happy to write to him with further details on other spaces where he can get more information on how he can support schemes in his constituency.
The Makin report made clear the devastating abuse suffered by children and young people at the hands of John Smyth. In the meeting I had with representatives from the Archbishops’ Council, I raised the need for the Makin review to be a defining and watershed moment for the Church. The review made 27 recommendations, some of which have already been implemented. I am awaiting a full and thorough update from the Church on the detailed progress being made on each recommendation. That work is in addition to the ongoing efforts to respond to the Wilkinson and Alexis Jay inquiries into child sexual abuse. Following these reports, the Church began developing potential new safeguarding models, which will be decided at the General Synod in February.
I pay tribute to my ecclesiastical co-worker, the Right Reverend Helen-Ann Hartley, Bishop of Newcastle, for her leadership and courage in championing the voices of victims in the wake of the Makin review. Newcastle is proud of her. Are the Church Commissioners aware of her ongoing concerns about the implementation of the review? In particular, what can they do to ensure that dioceses have the resources necessary to implement a high standard of safeguarding and to ensure that the Church is focused on the interests of the victims and the vulnerable, rather than the career interests of leading clergy?
My hon. Friend rightly raises the work that her own bishop has been doing in her constituency on this issue. Following the Makin review, colleagues such as my hon. Friend and many represented here today and from across the House have rightly been raising their concerns about safeguarding in the Church. This week I met representatives from the Archbishops’ Council, including the Bishop of Stepney, Joanne Grenfell, who is the lead bishop for safeguarding in the Church, to raise my concerns. The House can rest assured that I did that robustly.
The Church’s national safeguarding team is now at stage three of its four-stage process to assess and deal with the risk posed by those criticised in the Makin review, which is rightly welcomed. In addition, the Church institutions have developed the two model proposals on safeguarding, which will go to the Synod in February. Those independent safeguarding models will look at a scrutiny body and at safeguarding operations more independent of the Church. I will be at the Synod in February, and I will listen closely to that debate. Make no mistake, the Church has an enormous amount of work to do to create a cultural shift. That is what is required. It needs to rebuild trust and confidence. It is also important that everybody in the House feels as though they get the opportunity to raise their concerns. I thank my hon. Friend and others for ensuring that they have raised this issue here today.
I would very much like to pay tribute to the Bishop of Newcastle as well. What was so tragic was that so few senior voices were being heard in the Anglican Church. The Makin review named the Bishop of Lincoln and the bishop in charge of the Episcopal Church, but so few people have been held to account. Will the hon. Lady please ensure that more people are properly held to account and that some of the people who have been named are cleared out of those top jobs?
The right hon. Member makes a critical point. It is so important for the Church to view this as the chance to turn a corner and make it a watershed moment. We need change, and those responsible must be held to account. I would be happy to discuss this matter further with the right hon. Member if that would be of help, but he should make no mistake that I strongly believe that it is important that the Church is held to account. The Bishop of Stepney—the lead bishop for safeguarding—and the director for safeguarding both welcomed the Makin review when it was first published last year. We must ensure that its recommendations are implemented.
The urgent need for independent scrutiny of the Church’s safeguarding procedures was highlighted both by the Makin report and by the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. What are the current arrangements for independent scrutiny of safeguarding following the dismissal of the Church’s independent safeguarding board? What is the timescale for having a permanent system for independent scrutiny in place to safeguard against such appalling acts of abuse, as highlighted in both those reports?
Independent scrutiny of the Church’s safeguarding work is extremely important. The Church commissioned a series of audits on dioceses and cathedrals by independent safeguarding experts, and several have been completed and published. The independently chaired national safeguarding panel, which includes victims and survivors among its members, currently scrutinises safeguarding, but as I have already pointed out, proposals to strengthen scrutiny in the Church will be voted on at the Synod next month, and the Church will then have to create a plan for implementation once the right model has been approved at that General Synod in February.
The Hyde Park estate has been managed by the Church Commissioners for over 150 years, and they are committed to its long-term stewardship. As responsible landlords, the commissioners are committed to adopting best practice and have continuous investment programmes for the management of buildings on the estate to ensure that they remain fit for purpose both now and in the future.
I have been working for months with residents of the Quadrangle, the Water Gardens and Connaught Village on the scale of their service charges. They have managed to reduce their service charges by 10%. Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating them on their hard work and agree that they should not have had to work that hard? Will she join me in a meeting with the Church Commissioners to improve the transparency and monitoring of service charge levels?
Of course I congratulate the residents on their hard work. I know from my constituency about the challenges around increases in service charges; it is so important that they are transparent to everybody. I would be happy to join my hon. Friend in a meeting with her residents on this issue, and I would recommend including those from the Church Commissioners’ property services team. I hope that will be okay.
The Hyde Park estate is an oasis of peace and tranquillity in the middle of the concrete and buildings and used daily by many. What steps will the Church take to ensure that there are sufficient waste disposal and recycling bins across the Hyde Park estate, for those with two legs, and indeed for those with four legs?
I am sure that those managing and maintaining the estate are looking at all those issues, but I would be happy to write to the hon. Gentleman with further information.
In 2020 the House of Bishops created the archbishops’ anti-racism taskforce, followed by the archbishops’ commission for racial justice, to continue the work of tackling racial injustice in the Church and society. Last February, the General Synod voted unanimously to continue efforts to address racial injustice across the Church.
The Church’s work to recognise the importance of diversity and on proactive anti-racism is very welcome, but what steps is it taking to address its historical links to the slave trade?
The Church’s role in slavery is truly shameful. It is only right that it takes action to recognise its links to the transatlantic enslavement of Africans. No amount of money would ever be enough to repair the horrors of the slave trade, but the Church Commissioners’ project will set aside £100 million over nine years for a programme of impact, investment, research and engagement. It is hoped that this fund will continue to grow over time and will reinvest returns. Investments in grant funding will be directed towards communities that have been impacted by the enslavement of Africans.