A message from Nick Timothy MP:
Thank you for taking part in my survey about the future of local churches.
You can see some of the main results below. 85% disagreed with the Church’s plan to pay £100 in reparations for slavery, and said the money should instead go towards restoring church buildings and supporting parish ministry.
And 80% of those who took part in the survey agreed with me that it is important to restore to pre-Labour levels the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme, upon which many churches rely to maintain and restore their historic buildings, roofs and chancels. This follows a decision by the Government last year to slash its budget from £42 million to £23 million annually, while imposing a £25,000 cap on claims for the first time.
If you would still like to take part, please click here.
Best wishes
Nick Timothy MP
- The question: “Was the Church right to pledge £100 million in reparations for its links to transatlantic slavery?” Nearly 85% said no. Selected comments from participants on this aspect of the topic can be seen below.
Respondents were also able to give further comments on this topic. A selection of these is below.
“We should not be throwing money on historical time events that are no longer acceptable nowadays. Instead our taxpayer money should be used to ensure that our places or worships such as our current churches are kept in good order and repair just look how the European countries are proud of their churches and keep them in excellent order and open them to tourist.”
“I do not agree with slavery but we must move on, also rural workers back in the day were also slaves to land owners and treated very badly.We would change it all if we could but we cannot so we must look forward. The Church I attend has many Commonwealth members,we are not an old Church but we need to expand build on as we have a great attendance. Young and old. Perhaps they should have always been raising funds and encouraging parishioners to help with renovations, some are very talented.”
“As with all of history mistakes have been made. It goes back thousands of years. It was not invented by Britain. The Romans were heavily involved in slavery over 2,000 years ago and that included Europe and Africa. Have Italy, Portugal, Spain, the Viking nations been approached for these reparations. You cannot turn the clock back. Where does it end.”
“This proposal leaves me speechless. Surely the Church cannot be this out of touch?”
“Charity begins at home and church buildings are in greater need of support than historic acts not connected to the present day.”
2. The question: “If you answered no to question number one above, how should the money be spent?” A majority of those who answered this, (57%) said the money should instead be spent on various priorities including supporting parishes, maintaining and restoring church buildings and caring for historic records. Selected comments from participants on this aspect of the topic can be seen below.
Respondents were also able to give further comments on this topic. A selection of these is below.
“I feel money should be supporting parishes along with the maintenance of the buildings.”
“Helping small village communities where the church provides part time and voluntary clergy to run 4 to 6 churches. This is exploitation.”
“The churches are part of our valuable history and lives, no matter where original funds came from! You cannot rewrite history to modern values or to suit modern thoughts!”
“Helping the homeless”
“Parish ministry may be crumbling even more than the buildings. There’s little point repairing the “bottle” if the “wine” has gone off, so to speak! Yes, these buildings are inportant as history and should be maintained. We should consider that the Church is still very property rich and should look after its own assets, to a degree.”
3. This question: “Do you agree with Nick Timothy MP that funding for the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme should be restored to pre-Labour levels and the new cap abolished?“: 80% of those responding agreed with Mr Timothy, including 66% who strongly agreed. Selected comments from participants on this aspect of the topic can be seen below.
Respondents were also able to give further comments on this topic. A selection of these is below.
“Does this Labour Government now consider churches as irrelevent? Does it not value Heritage and the fine work done by the church and the valuable buildings we all cherish. Clearly there is an element of non value of these issues with the influx on non Christian MPs but this must be resisted.“
“I understand the change in policy has caused uncertainty about some projects proceeding and particularly where a project is already underway. This can make planning very difficult for parishes and could delay some essential repairs. I feel there is a need for education as some people are surprised to learn that churches and not the state are responsible for the maintenance of the (many Grade 1) buildings.“
“It is not just a support of the Christian faith it is also a support of our culture where the towers an spires of churches are always present when you make any modest or longer journey and these historic landmarks as chart a history of the Christian nation which we are today. And like good Christians we are welcoming to people of all races and beliefs and cultures who are living in untenable conditions due to war, disaster or persecution. They come here to a Christian nation because we offer that safe haven.“
“I have worked on 3 major appeals to preserve ancient churches, for small local communities raising £50/100,000 (typical average project costs) and every penny is hard-won over 2/3 years. VAT recovery is a significant element to help volunteers put right the neglect of the past for the benefit of our communities future.“
“The church is one of the biggest landowners along with the crown. They have the resources to pay for these churches. The number of church go-ers continues to decline. The church should look at the sustainability of some of these buildings and deconsecrate and sell privately.“
