Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure (Hansard, 21 April 1983)

§ The Second Church Estates Commissioner (Sir William van Straubenzee)
I beg to move, That the Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure, passed by the General Synod of the Church of England, be presented to Her Majesty for Her Royal Assent in the form in which the said Measure was laid before Parliament. This is the third in a series of miscellaneous provisions measures which are for the convenience of both Church and state in that they bring together detailed but important amendments in one small Measure. It saves asking the House to approve matters separately, as has happened in times gone by.
Consistent with my duty to the House, I can commend this Measure comparatively briefly. I do not wish to give the appearance of treating the House in a cavalier fashion. That is the last thing that I would wish. Clause 12 is intriguing. It emanated from the diocese of Lichfield. It vests a house and adjoining muniment room in the cathedral close in the Lichfield diocesan board of finance. By a private Act of 1796 the property had been vested in the Registrar of the diocese and his successors for ever. This Measure provides for the property to be vested in the Lichfield diocesan board of finance on the vacation of office of the present registrar of the diocese.
Great care was taken to ensure that all interested parties in the diocese agreed to the proposal. Clause 1 amends the New Parishes Measure 1943, which empowers the Church Commissioners to acquire land or buildings for use as a church hall or dual-purpose building. The subsections go into greater detail, which I shall do my best to explain if I am asked to do so.
Clause 2 inserts a new subsection in the 1943 Measure to give a bishop the power to exercise certain powers if the benefice is vacant. I am willing to explain it if that would be of assistance.

§ Mr. Frank Field (Birkenhead)
Can the hon. Gentleman briefly explain what powers are to be exercised by the bishop?

§ Sir William van Straubenzee
Section 14 of the 1943 Measure deals with the power of corporations, and so on, to give or grant land for sites of churches and so on. That is the limited operation to which we are addressing ourselves. As the law stands, if there is a vacancy in the benefice, it is not possible to operate. In several other matters, if there is a vacancy and one proceeds under one of the other Measures, it is possible for the legal machinery to operate. That is not possible in this case at the moment. The hon. Gentleman has asked me why. The answer is probably because of an oversight. That means that when there is a vacancy in a benefice, it is possible for the conveyancing to proceed. It has been borne out by experience that delay and difficulty have been to the detriment of the Church's work and the people in a parish.

§ Mr. Field
Can the hon. Gentleman assure the House that, apart from there not being an incumbent, exactly the same procedures would be gone through, with the bishop operating as if the incumbent were there?

§ Sir William van Straubenzee
It has to be operated carefully. If such a matter arises during a vacancy in a benefice, it can be dealt with—I said it could not, but I 507 must correct myself — but only by a complicated conveyancing procedure. Section 14 of the parent Measure sets out the conveyancing procedures, which are very much encompassed about. Nothing much happens in the Church of England without its being encompassed about.

§ Mr. Field
Perhaps I could put my question rather more crudely. I want an assurance that if there is a vacancy the bishop cannot carve up a piece of land quickly in a way that he could not do if there were an incumbent.

§ Sir William van Straubenzee
I can give that assurance. This is not a sly scheme to give the diocesans a power under which they could act unreasonably.
The Measure to be amended by clause 4 gave the incumbent the power to sell his parsonage, outbuildings and land, but it assumed that they would all be sold together. In modern circumstances, especially at an auction, they are often sold separately. This measure brings the law into line with modern conditions. Clause 5 deals with a section of the Parochial Church Councils (Powers) Measure 1956 and substitutes for the word "incumbent" the word "minister". That has no sinister connotation, and is designed to include a curate in charge. As the House knows, the Church often has to deal with such an occurrence.
Clause 7 amends the Bishops (Retirement) Measure 1951 in that it no longer refers to the diocesan bishop commissioning a suffragan bishop, because that phrase is no longer used.
Clause 8 deals with the discharge of the functions of a diocesan bishop by way of dedication but limits it to a six-month period, and is designed for circumstances in which no other bishop is available to whom to delegate in an emergency. One has in mind a diocesan who contemplates having to undergo medical treatment and there is no other episcopal person available. However, it is a limited function.
Clause 9 provides for the discharge of functions of archdeacon where the office is vacant. Clause 11 is important because it deals with the constitution of the appeal tribunal under the Pastoral Measure 1968 and brings in what I hope the House will consider are some modest improvements. It increases the number of clergy from whom the members of the appeal tribunal are chosen. It increases the number of laymen, but states that at least half of the laymen in a panel should be professionally qualified as lawyers. I hope that the House will consider that a proper safeguard in such serious matters.
I hope that I have steered the middle course between boring the House and properly explaining a measure that may be modest in content but is important. I hope that the House will accept it.