Memorandum submitted by the Archdeacon
of Suffolk
Given that the Church of England carries responsibility
for something in the order of 80% of the built heritage of this
country in the shape of parish churches, we would hope that there
might be a review of the funding of these buildings. Whilst grants
are available from English Heritage and a number of other charities,
a huge amount of fund-raising is done by a relatively small number
of committed people. These people carry a huge legal and financial
responsibility and feel that not only is this not recognised by
other agencies, but that legislation often conspires to make their
lives more difficult.
English Heritage, through Government funding,
provide £10 million nationally and through the Lottery a
further £10 million. This is a totally inadequate figure
when compared to the need for funding of Government through relief
of VAT and other measures has done a great deal to help, there
is still a need for greater financial assistance. Exact figures
are difficult to obtain, but a reasonable estimate is that the
Church of England spends in excess of £100 million per annum
on repairs and maintenance, most of it raised locally rather than
by grant aid.
The Rural White Paper and other reports have
emphasised the need to use our church buildings as a community
resource. Local congregations very often find that when they wish
to do this they are required to use a disproportionate amount
of energy in negotiating with English Heritage and other amenity
societies, all of which lean toward conservation and preservation
rather than adaptation. Parishes often find this process very
difficult because they lack the confidence or expert knowledge
to deal with such bodes. Furthermore, the authority which English
Heritage and other agencies wield is perceived as being out of
all proportion to the financial assistance which they are able
to give.
A further difficulty which the Department of
Culture, Media & Sport could address is the problem of attracting
grants to enable work to be done to church buildings which would
render them usable for wide community use. Many grant-making bodies
simply will not give money to churches in use for worship, however
worthy a wider community use project might be. A huge amount more
could be done to adapt and broaden the use of our buildings if
such grant-making bodies were to be encouraged or permitted to
review and change their grant-making regulations.
The DCMS should recognise that through the Ecclesiastical
Exemption and Faculty Jurisdiction, Diocesan Advisory Committees
for the Care of Churches are able to call upon the wide spectrum
of expertise in every department of conservation. Every expert
who sits on a DAC gives of their experience and time without charge.
This is a resource which would never be available to local authorities.
The fact should be recognised and appreciated.
The Church of England, through the Ecclesiastical
Exemption, cares for all its historic buildings. We believe that
our record is exemplary, almost without exception. There has been
a very close examination of our methods of operating the Ecclesiastical
Exemption and we still feel under pressure and threat. Where is
the comparable enquiry into care given by local authorities in
the field of heritage and conservation? The list of buildings
under threat which are the responsibility of local authorities
is huge, so much so that a whole television series was devoted
to highlighting the situation. It was, to our mind, extraordinary
that no-on took the local authorities to task over these buildings
whereas the same local authorities that are often negligent in
their care of built heritage are given statutory authority to
become involved in issues relating to the care of church buildings.
The DCMS is right to point out that a balance
has to be struck between heritage and development needs in planning
policy. We would remind the DCMS that a balance has to be struck
in the care of listed church buildings between heritage and the
need to use church buildings as centres of worship and mission.
This is highlighted in the Ecclesiastical Exemption and is often
perceived as not being taken seriously by English Heritage and
other amenity societies. There is growing support for the view
that making good use of a building is the best way to guarantee
conservation.
3 January 2006
| 
