THE Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament is taking time to consider whether the new Clergy Conduct Measure (CCM) is “expedient”, after a session on Tuesday in which its members asked questions of one of the lawyers in charge of drafting the Measure.
The CCM received final approval from the General Synod in February (News, 14 February) and is due to replace the Clergy Discipline Measure. Before it is formally put to both Houses of Parliament, the Ecclesiastical Committee — which comprises MPs and peers — has to declare that it is “expedient”.
In Tuesday’s session, questions about the planned privacy of tribunal hearings, and the current absence of the Rules which will accompany the Measure, were put to the Deputy Legal Adviser for the General Synod, Edward Dobson, and a member of the steering committee for the Measure, Canon Kate Wharton, along with the Bishop of Chichester, Dr Martin Warner.
In response to a question from Danny Kruger MP, Mr Dobson acknowledged that the “starting point” was for evidence to be taken in private, on the grounds that this would better protect children and young adults. The question whether the default should be for public hearings had been considered by the Synod, he said (Synod, 12 July 2024).
The wording of the Measure does allow for hearings to be conducted in public, he said, in line with rules that would accompany the Measure, and Mr Dobson suggested that it was “likely” that precedents would develop under which many cases would be held in public.
The rules are being developed separately from the Measure, and several members complained that they did not have sight of the separate Rules document while considering the Measure.
“It’s another example of insufficient information coming to this committee before we are in a strong position to make a decision,” the Earl of Cork and Orrery, who is a hereditary peer, said.
Mr Dobson said that jurisdiction to put the Rules through the Synodical process was based on the Measure having passed. While they wouldn’t be subject to approval by the Committee, there was a procedure for Parliament to debate the Rules if either House wished to do so. Draft Rules could be provided to the Committee to aid them in their consideration of the Measure, he said.
Tom Collins MP highlighted that the position of “lead assessor” was one that held considerable sway over the operation of the Measure. He asked for clarity about the type of person who might occupy the office.
Mr Dobson said that the person would probably be a judge. One of their primary duties would be to decide whether to proceed with a case as a grievance or misconduct complaint, which has a limitation period of one year, or to classify it as “serious misconduct”, which has no limitation period.
In concluding remarks, the chair of the Ecclesiastical Committee, Baroness Butler-Sloss, who is a retired appeal-court judge, said: “I think the Church would gain from more cases heard in public.”
After thanking Dr Warner, Canon Wharton, and Mr Dobson, she said that the Committee would now meet in private to consider whether to deem the draft Measure “expedient”.
The previous day, members of the Committee received a letter from a former Synod member, Gavin Drake, urging them to conclude that the CMM was “not expedient”. Many of the concerns raised by MPs and peers were set out in Mr Drake’s letter.
