---

Baroness Wilcox: My Lords, I have the honour to be a member of the Ecclesiastical Committee of both Houses and therefore saw the measure as it came through. As with anything in the Church of England, there is always a worry about taking the voluntary giving of one person—no matter how long ago—and wanting it to go to one particular place. The Church of England always finds it a bit difficult when we say that we will stick it all in a bucket and give it to the poorest.

One or two people found it very difficult as it came through the committee, but, as we have heard tonight from the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool, the measure would not disadvantage any incumbent presently receiving statutory payments under the 1976 measure. It would also remove the need for some time-consuming and expensive administration.
 
22 Mar 2005 : Column 215
 

At present the payments made to incumbents under the 1976 measure are made as a result of historic endowments of particular benefices, and the vestigial link—as we have heard—between the endowments and the benefices concerned will now be broken. The proposed measure will allow the Church to allocate its financial resources where there is the greatest need. Therefore from these Benches we are happy to say that we find the measure expedient.

Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool for presenting the measure. May I say that I am happy with the other two measures that he is about to present and I have nothing further to say on them. I will confine my remarks to this measure.

The Church of England in organising its own affairs has already voted in its own decision-making bodies by 255 to 22, which seems a hefty majority on any basis. Who are we to question what seems to be internal business for the Church of England? This is a legalised Robin Hood measure, and I well understand that the Church of England wishes to do that.

I have only one point to put to the right reverend Prelate. I am sure that the Church of England is right in trying to target the money that it has on where it is needed, but I am also certain that there will be people working with and for the Church of England who are looking for legacies, gift aid and large donations attached to gift aid and so forth. I am aware that the mind of the donor is not always based on sending a big cheque to London. In my part of the world, many people would think that that is not the right thing to do.

Therefore, as a candid friend and not a member of the Church of England, it occurs to me that the Church ought at least to have an eye to the fact that it may be able to get some resources, provided that there is the opportunity for large donations and legacies to be used where the donor wishes. I well understand that, in many cases, the Church will be intimating that donations made for national or international purposes are appreciated and appropriate. However, there will be people who want to give in a local way. It would be useful to know how that will be achieved. Having said that, I am happy to support the measure.

The Lord Bishop of Liverpool: My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their support. I understand the anxiety of the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, and I can assure her that I too scrutinise these things to make sure that we are respecting history and the wishes of donors in the past. I give her my assurance that no beneficiary will be disadvantaged by this measure.

I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Shutt, for his comments. I assure him in the spirit of Robin Hood that any moneys given to parishes will not be affected by this measure. Money given locally will be respected and used locally. I therefore urge noble Lords to support the measure.

On Question, Motion agreed to.
 
22 Mar 2005 : Column 216
 

Care of Cathedrals (Amendment) Measure

9.36 p.m.

The Lord Bishop of Liverpool rose to move, That this House do direct that, in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919, the Care of Cathedrals (Amendment) Measure be presented to Her Majesty for the Royal Assent.

The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, it gives me great pleasure to bring this House a measure to contribute to the care of our cathedrals, which must surely be some of the most splendid jewels in the crown of our country's built heritage. Although the measure is complex, and parts of it are highly technical, your Lordships will see that the Ecclesiastical Committee was satisfied that it was expedient. The committee was able to set out its conclusions in a very brief report.

I am glad to say that I can explain the general object of the measure, and how it seeks to achieve it, quite briefly and without getting involved in the legal complexities. Noble Lords will find the details fully set out in the material from the legislative committee of the General Synod, which is reproduced in the Ecclesiastical Committee report.

Many of your Lordships will know that for centuries parish churches and their treasures have been safeguarded by the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts. Because of concerns that that jurisdiction did not extend to cathedrals, the Care of Cathedrals Measure 1990 set up a comparable system. Under it, a cathedral must obtain consent for significant works to the cathedral itself, for some other works that would affect its setting or the cathedral precinct, and before important articles belonging to the cathedral are disposed of or acquired. Major proposals go to a national body, the Cathedrals Fabric Commission for England, for approval. Other proposals are dealt with by the fabric advisory committee for the individual cathedral. The measure also deals with such matters as the cathedral inventory and the responsibilities of the cathedral architect.

A review commissioned in 1997 by what is now the Department for Culture, Media and Sport found that, in general, the system was working effectively. However, the Church had already agreed to carry out its own review of the new controls once they had been in force for a few years. It carried out very wide-ranging consultations, which included the cathedrals, those who hold office in them, Church bodies, professional organisations and heritage bodies, such as English Heritage and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. The review group also invited, and received, submissions from the general public. The review group agreed that the system was working well, but it came up with a number of detailed recommendations for minor changes in the legislation. Again, it consulted widely on its proposals before bringing them to the Synod.

Just to give your Lordships a flavour of the kind of changes that the review group proposed, and which were then embodied in the measure, I shall mention three examples. One of them extends the controls over
 
22 Mar 2005 : Column 217
 
cathedral treasures, which already applied to disposals, to any significant work on them that could affect their essential character. Another consists of changes to the detailed procedure for notices when the cathedral applies for approval under the measure.

A third example relates to the definition of the "precinct" of the cathedral. This is a key concept under the 1990 measure because it is important that the whole complex of the land and buildings of which the cathedral forms part should be looked on as a whole. Here the measure expends the 1990 provisions on how the boundaries of the precinct are to be fixed and allows for them to be changed if, say, the cathedral acquires additional land.

Your Lordships will see from this that the changes go only to the detail of the 1990 measure and not the principles and objectives which underlie it. The Synod accepted that almost all were completely non-controversial and it passed the measure with not a single contrary vote. In that sense, the measure is a modest one. Nevertheless, it will make a genuine contribution towards helping the arrangements for the care of our cathedrals to work even better. I commend the measure to the House. I beg to move.

Moved, That this House do direct that, in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919, the Care of Cathedrals (Amendment) Measure be presented to Her Majesty for the Royal Assent.—(The Lord Bishop of Liverpool.)

Baroness Wilcox: My Lords, on these Benches we are grateful to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool for his clear summary of what is indeed a modest measure. I must declare that I am on the council of St Paul's Cathedral and, therefore, have my own experience of the contents of this measure and the desire for them. Therefore, I shall not take up the time of the House any longer other than to say that it is the opinion of these Benches that this measure is expedient.

Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, as I indicated, on behalf of these Benches, I am happy to support the measure.

The Lord Bishop of Liverpool: My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their support. I thank in particular the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, because her support comes from her wide-ranging experience. I urge the House to approve the Motion.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

---