VAT and listed places of worship
From the Revd Tony Redman
Madam, — I was not surprised at the report (News, 28 November) on the hopes dashed for the retention of the Listed Places of Worship Scheme. As the mover of the General Synod motion in 1998 which led to the Government’s invention of the scheme, you might be surprised at my agreeing with the Chancellor that the time has now come to end it.
It was her predecessor, Gordon Brown, who saw the benefit to the common good of reducing VAT for heritage-building repairs, but, as we were then part of the European Union, he could do nothing then to bring in a new zero rate.
But times have changed. Since Brexit, we do now have the ability to bring in a new zero rate. Establishing this instead of retaining the old scheme would have significant benefits for everybody.
First of all, it would save the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport not to have to administer and pay for a separate scheme, which it largely outsources to contractors. This in itself would go towards offsetting the loss of revenue to the Treasury.
It would also, in effect, give a tax credit to anyone raising funds to retain the church heritage buildings, which, as the recent National Churches Trust-sponsored survey has so eloquently shown, are regarded as a national benefit by many people who would never darken the doors of a church service.
It would provide a boost for traditional building skills, which are getting increasingly scarce, and help to generate apprenticeships among the younger generation. This could stave off the cost of undertaking major repairs, which, one day, possibly, might become a central-government responsibility by default. It would significantly relieve the cash-flow crisis endured by many small and struggling church communities, for which raising funds to pay the VAT burden is often off-putting.
It would also relieve the fiscal burden placed on local voluntary communities who are increasingly picking up social work in the wider community laid down by cash-strapped local authorities. As statutory undertakings, by the way, they do not, in effect, pay VAT on fabric repairs to their building assets.
So, pushing for zero rating is not asking for a favour: it is simply asking for a level playing field and a tiny financial benefit for all faith communities that are struggling to maintain ancient assets. This would create a significant positive benefit for those, mostly ageing, PCCs that are responsible as trustees of our listed heritage buildings.
The Chancellor could, at a stroke, generate a much needed feel-good factor in every community across the country, at a cost that, as we were told confidentially 27 years ago, the Treasury would hardly notice.
Is it time to engage with the new generation of politicians to demonstrate the significant value that faith buildings contribute as part of the built heritage, the social benefits to the nation of their retention, and the proportionately tiny cost to the Government in helping to keep them going?
TONY REDMAN
Member of the Norwich Diocesan Advisory Committee, and Trustee of the Suffolk Historic Churches Trust
Great Livermere, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk
Perils and opportunities of Christian nationalism
From Symon Hill
Madam, — It is a relief to see Christian leaders warning of the dangers of Christian nationalism in the UK (News, 28 November). At the same time, I cannot help thinking that Churches as a whole are offering far too feeble a response.
While the British far Right has always claimed the mantle of Christianity, there has been a significant shift in recent months. Tommy Robinson and his allies have made their belief in “Christian Britain” a bigger focus, linking such rhetoric to attacks on Muslims and ignoring the reality that a significant percentage of migrants are Christians. While anti-migrant rallies have involved prayers led by clergy from tiny right-wing denominations, it is becoming clear that among the marchers are churchgoers from more mainstream Churches.
It is not enough for clergy to talk of “listening” to anti-migrant protesters. When far-Right leaders exploit concerns around housing and NHS funding, Churches can point out that there is enough for all if it is fairly distributed. Jesus calls us to love our enemies, not to be neutral in the face of injustice. When people are screaming racist abuse outside accommodation for refugees, let us not be afraid to take sides.
In a year in which the far Right has gained ground, now is not the time for dithering. We need to counter their preaching of hatred with a bold gospel-rooted vision that proclaims love for all and solidarity with the poor — born in Britain or outside it.
SYMON HILL
Aston University
Birmingham
From Dr Christopher Shell
Madam, — The recent rise of Christian nationalism, together with the claimed conversion of Tommy Robinson, are indeed, to echo the Bishop of Ramsbury, Dr Andrew Rumsey, an “only too happy” corrective to fashionable homeland denigration. The opportunity should be seized, since this is a sizeable demographic that produces huge crowds.
Recent Anglican reactions have, alas, echoed the Giantess’s revulsion at Puddleglum (“The horrid thing! It’s alive!” — C. S. Lewis, The Silver Chair) and recall the PCC whose church was being done up and who proverbially devoted an entire meeting to discussing how to get rid of the “outsiders” who had joined them in their temporary location.
We should lovingly catch the wave (as the Anglicans partially failed to do with the Windrush generation and the Jesus People) and provide solid evangelism and teaching. Who knows whether “they” might not also have much to teach “us”?
CHRISTOPHER SHELL
Sunbury, Surrey
Parliamentary scrutiny of Governance Measure
From Mr Jonathan Baird
Madam, — Madeleine Davies is to be congratulated on her balanced reporting of the Ecclesiastical Committee’s concerns about the National Church Governance Measure (News, 21 November).
The longer online version (17 November) of her story says that the sums allocated under [Clause 1 of] the Miscellaneous Provisions Measure 2018 were “£38 million in 2023, compared with £33.5 million under the 1998 Measure”.
In fact, £119.4 million was allocated in 2023 under Clause 1 of the Miscellaneous Provisions Measure 2018. This was more than three and a half times as much money as the aforementioned £33.5 million, which was distributed under the 1998 Measure.
Furthermore, the piece cites my letter of 7 March, which contained the following questions: “First, was the Ecclesiastical Committee apprised fully and accurately in 2018 of the intended use, to which Clause 1 of the Miscellaneous Provisions Measure 2018 would be put?
“Second, given that Clause 1 came into force only on 1 March 2019, on what lawful basis were Strategic Development Funding grants totalling £ 118.3 million made available between June 2014 and December 2018?”
Neither question has been answered. And yet the answers should be of acute and immediate interest to the Ecclesiastical Committee.
JONATHAN BAIRD
General Synod representative for Salisbury diocese
Conock, Wiltshire
The Church Times’s figures came from an answer from the First Church Estates Commissioner to a General Synod question in February. He said that £81.4 million was “partially covered by the 1998 Measure and entirely covered by the 2018 Measure” and that these were “not mutually exclusive”. Editor
Neurodivergent experience at Westcott House
Madam, — We are writing as a group representing neurodivergent students at Westcott House, Cambridge, in response to the recent article about neurodiversity and ordination training, which, we feel, painted Westcott House in an unfairly negative light (Vocations, 14 November).
We were disappointed that no current neurodivergent Westcott House students were asked about their experiences, nor were staff contacted to comment. Westcott House has changed significantly over the past few years, and we are pleased to say that support for neurodivergent students at Westcott House, in our experience, has been excellent.
Westcott has a culture of recognising that everyone learns in different ways, and tutors are committed to helping all students to thrive. One ordinand commented that a tutor spotted from their application form that they might have undiagnosed dyslexia, and the tutor proactively encouraged them to have an assessment. Since being diagnosed with dyslexia, this ordinand has been given practical support with their studies, and they feel that Westcott House academic staff have been consistently helpful.
Another ordinand remarked that Westcott was a very supportive environment, as staff worked with students to find learning solutions. This ordinand said they had never been made to feel like a problem for raising when there was a barrier to their learning, and they had appreciated how Westcott tutors had spoken with them about practical ways of managing neurodiversity, health, and well-being into their curacy.
For anyone looking for a place to train for ordination, we feel that Westcott House is a caring community, where there is commitment to continuing to improve support for neurodivergent students.
NAME SUPPLIED
On behalf of three representatives of neurodivergent ordinands
Westcott House, Cambridge
Islamic craftsmen and Romanesque architecture
From Diana Darke
Madam, — Please allow me to point out that your recent review of Islamesque (Books, 21 November) misleads your readers on two counts.
First, it highlights the use of Arabic numerals in the roof timbers of King’s College Chapel by an Englishman, but omits to mention that these have been dated to 1508-15, by which time Arabic numerals were, in any event, starting to replace the Roman numerals previously used by English craftsmen.
The Arabic numerals that I discuss extensively in the book, found in the roof timbers of Salisbury Cathedral (and in several other high-prestige buildings such as the sculpture of the Wells Cathedral west front), date from the 1220s, nearly 300 years earlier, when no British craftsmen used or understood Arabic numerals, as evidenced by their inability to put the Wells West Front Resurrection Tier sculptures in the correct numerical sequence after the foreign craftsmen had left.
Second, the review says that I claim Arab craftsmen were responsible for the “round arches and solid walls” of Romanesque, which I categorically do not. Those are unquestionably Byzantine. What I do attribute to Arab craftsmen are the new pointed arches, ribbed vaulting, and decorative repertoire that start to appear on church buildings from 1100 onwards. This is the period when the declining rulers of Muslim Spain and Muslim Sicily lost their elite craftsmen to the rising wealth and power of Latin Christendom and the Normans. The timing, the politics, and the geography all coincide, as comprehensively explained and, as the review concedes, “beautifully illustrated” in the book.
DIANA DARKE
London SW15
MPs reflect on ‘bogus self-employment’
From the Revd Andrew McLuskey
Madam, — In relation to the current debate in Parliament about the new Employment Rights Bill, a number of MPs are quite rightly emphasising that ending bogus self-employment should be a priority. This has particular relevance to the status of clergy.
When it suits them, church authorities are happy to say that ministers are self- employed and so cannot expect to enjoy the rights accorded to normal paid workers. The reality is that in all major respects (e.g. pay) the clergy are effectively employees. It is high time, as the courts themselves have recommended, that, whatever the legal niceties of the situation, church “bosses” treated ministers as employees.
ANDREW McLUSKEY
Ashford, Middlesex
The Editor reserves the right to edit letters.
