Written evidence submitted by the Association
of English Cathedrals (AEC) (arts 186)
1. This submission is made by the Association
of English Cathedrals (AEC) which represents the 42 Anglican cathedrals
in England and two Royal Peculiars (Westminster Abbey and St George's
Chapel, Windsor). The cathedrals range from those of international
importance (such as St Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey)
and those in World Heritage Sites (Canterbury and Durham Cathedrals)
to less well known cathedrals such as Blackburn, Bradford and
Sheffield. The primary purpose of a cathedral is to be a place
of Christian worship but it is also often the most historic and
architecturally important building in its environment and of significance
to the heritage and culture of the area it serves.
SUMMARY
— Cathedrals are independent ecclesiastical
corporations responsible for financing their activities from a
variety of funding sources; grants from central Government provide
a small proportion of total income, but are important.
— Of the two dedicated grant programmes,
one, the Cathedrals Grant Scheme run by English Heritage, has
already been withdrawn. The other, the Listed Places of Worship
Grant Scheme, is due to end on 31 March 2011 unless extended by
the Government.
— Cathedrals have also received some Heritage
Lottery Fund support, but only for projects involving new build
and/ or interpretation and access.
— Spending cuts will result in delays in
undertaking repair projects while additional fundraising takes
place; this has consequences for skilled craftsmen and others
involved in heritage conservation, and could result in the loss
of craft skills for a generation or more.
— Fundraising will become more difficult
as other heritage and arts organisations, possibly more directly
affected by spending cuts, compete with cathedrals for such monies
as are available. Grant making trusts are already suffering from
reduced investment returns due to the current economic situation.
2. Each cathedral is responsible for its
own finances. Cathedrals are ecclesiastical corporations and are
independent from the central institutions of the Church of England
and from dioceses. Cathedrals raise the funds necessary for them
to fulfil their role as places of worship and pilgrimage (involving
maintaining their buildings, supporting those in liturgical roles,
clergy, musicians and lay staff, and enabling the cathedral complex
to be open to all every day of the year) from a variety of sources.
These include congregational giving, legacies, income from visitors,
sums generated by trading activities, income from investments
and property (for those cathedrals with such assets), monies donated
in response to appeals and fundraising activity, and grants from
the Church Commissioners. The Church Commissioners pay the stipends
of three clergy at each cathedral and pay grants for employment
costs of lay staff to cathedrals depending on need—those
cathedrals with the lowest income from other sources receive most.
3. Central Government funding for cathedrals
has taken two forms, both supporting fabric repair work. The first
was English Heritage's Cathedrals Grant Scheme which was introduced
in 1991 and ended in 2009. This Scheme provided grants towards
the cost of fabric repairs which had to be matched funded. The
second is the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme (LPWGS) which
gives cathedrals an amount equivalent to the irrecoverable VAT
paid on repairs to buildings, bells, clocks, pews and organs and
related professional fees. The Scheme was introduced in 2001,
initially reimbursing VAT payments in excess of 5% on building
repairs but being extended in 2004 to reimburse all VAT on building
repairs and again in 2006 to include reimbursement of amounts
paid in VAT on repairs to bells, pews, clocks and organs and,
more significantly, to VAT amounts paid on related professional
fees. The Scheme is due to end in March 2011. There is a campaign
to persuade the Government to extend the Scheme to future years.
4. Some cathedrals have also been successful
in obtaining funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF). This
is not strictly central Government funding. It is important to
note that cathedrals are specifically excluded from applying to
the joint English Heritage/HLF Repair Grants for Places of Worship
Scheme, and can only apply for HLF funding for projects involving
new buildings and/ or interpretation and access. The restriction
was introduced at a time when English Heritage was running a dedicated
grant scheme for cathedrals but has not been reviewed following
the scheme's abolition. We would welcome a review of the Repair
Grants for Places of Worship criteria so that cathedrals are able
to apply for funding under the scheme. HLF grants are competitive,
and awards depend on the number and regional distribution of other
projects applying as well as the project's "appeal".
It has been suggested by Government ministers, among others, that
the current Government's intention to ensure more lottery funding
is made available to HLF will compensate for the withdrawal of
the LPWGS. This assertion displays a lack of understanding of
the two grant programmes. Whilst we welcome more money going to
HLF, the two streams are entirely separate and different in their
aims. Increasing the money available to HLF does not mean that
more funds will flow to cathedrals since HLF grants are awarded
on a competitive basis to all areas of heritage whereas the reimbursement
of VAT under the Scheme is automatic. LPWGS grants are available
as of right, are relatively easy to apply for and follow the actual
repair work undertaken.
5. Between 1991-2009, English Heritage made
grant payments under the Cathedrals Scheme of £52 million.
Spending was concentrated in the earlier years, with only £1
million a year being dispersed between 2006-09. We estimate that
the LPWGS has paid grants to cathedrals of approximately £1
million each year since 2006, but smaller sums before then due
to the reduced scope. In 2004, a survey into the economic and
social impact of cathedrals showed that cathedrals were responsible
for direct visitor related spend of £91 million and a total
spend of £150 million, providing significant economic outcomes
for their surrounding areas.
6. The loss of central Government funding
through the English Heritage Cathedrals Grant Scheme has already
been experienced by cathedrals. Although cathedrals can apply
for English Heritage grants under its general grant programme,
the programme is open to applications from all listed buildings
in England and grants are awarded only to buildings in the most
urgent need of support; most cathedrals are not falling down.
Major repair programmes are being delayed to allow time for fundraising,
in what is a difficult economic climate. This has implications
for the skilled craftsmen who work on the buildings and all involved
in heritage conservation.
7. If the Listed Places of Worship Grant
Scheme is not renewed, or renewed with a reduced level of payment,
either in the percentage of VAT reimbursed or in scope of activities
attracting reimbursement, cathedrals anticipate further delays
in repair programmes while additional funds are raised to pay
the VAT bills.
8. Cathedrals do not receive any Government
funding to assist with their role as tourist attractions. Whereas
the DCMS awards grants to museums to enable free access for the
public, no such grants are available to cathedrals. In York in
2005-6, the National Railway Museum received a grant of £5.66
million, equivalent to approximately £6.50 per visitor. York
Minster, which received 895,000 visits in 2006, received no assistance
and instead charged £5.50 for an adult visitor (£9.00
for a "see everything" ticket), a charge necessitated
by the cost of keeping the building open, safe and secure, and
in good repair. (Please note that entry to York Minster is free
at certain times on weekdays and on Sundays).
9. In January 2010, the House of Commons
Committee of Public Accounts, in its report on Promoting Participation
with the Historic Environment stated "English cathedrals
represent some of our most important architectural heritage yet
many of them charge the public for entry. These buildings are
expensive to look after and the Department and English Heritage
should work together to find ways to fund their conservation so
that they can be less reliant on charging for entry, which could
deter people from visiting". This recommendation was welcomed
by cathedrals, but, in the current economic situation, we are
aware that there will be no new funding for the foreseeable future.
10. Most cathedrals do not receive any financial
assistance from local Government. Some local authorities pay or
contribute to the costs of maintaining the environs of cathedrals,
for example paying for lighting the churchyard at night, or maintaining
the grass in open areas. Cathedrals and their local authorities
work closely on tourism development and other local issues for
the benefit of both cities and cathedrals, but this co-operation
does not involve money.
11. Given the current low levels of financial
assistance from central and local Government received by cathedrals,
cathedrals are better placed than many heritage organisations
which depend on grant funding to weather the proposed spending
cuts. Our concern is that fundraising, on which cathedrals depend
to fund major repair programmes, new buildings and new art commissions,
will become even more difficult as more arts and heritage organisations
compete for funds from a relatively small number of grant-making
trusts and high net worth individuals. Current market conditions
have reduced investment returns and the amounts available for
distribution. Delays in carrying out repair programmes will result
in a general deterioration in the condition of the fabric of England's
cathedrals, eventually to the level established by an English
Heritage survey in 1990 which triggered the Cathedrals Grant Scheme
and which resulted in a number of major repair programmes being
started. It is better to undertake work in a timely way, to minimise
costs and disruption and enable skilled craftsmen to be best deployed.
Spending cuts will result in increasing hardship for those involved
in heritage conservation and to a loss of craft skills from which
it could take more than a generation to recover.
September 2010
|
