HC Deb 09 February 1987 vol 110 cc12-3
23. Mr. Chapman

asked the hon. Member for Wokingham, as representing the Church Commissioners, if the commissioners have yet reached a decision on the recommendation of the report "Faith in the City" that the commissioners should contribute £1 million per annum for 10 years to the General Synod's proposed urban fund; and if he will make a statement.

Sir William van Straubenzee (The Second Church Estates Commissioner, Representing Church Commissioners)

If legislation currently before the General Synod is approved both by the Synod and Parliament, the commissioners will consider sympathetically the recommendation that they should make available at least £1 million a year.

Mr. Chapman

As clergy stipends and pensions depend so much on the returns made by the Church Commissioners on their capital assets, can my hon. Friend assure the House that the commissioners will not sell off part of their assets to raise this £1 million for each of the next 10 years, if Parliament so wills it, but will encourage a special appeal, to which they will invite churchgoers and others to contribute?

Sir William van Straubenzee

The special appeal is not for me, and is a separate matter. On matters pertaining to the Church Commissioners, I can say that this money will not be raised out of capital, and it is seen as part of a general continuing process of evening out disparities between historic resources of different dioceses.

Mr. Frank Field

As the funds of the Church Commissioners are used primarily for salaries and pensions, to what extent will salaries and pensions be reduced to meet this sum? To put that question another way, to what extent must the laity increase their giving to make sure that these cuts do not occur?

Sir William van Straubenzee

The hon. Gentleman is right. Any sums that Parliament authorises the commissioners to make, and it will be only when Parliament so authorises that this happens, must, by definition, leave fewer resources available for stipends and pensions. With a prudent investment policy, it will not be necessary for us to be talking about cuts.

Mr. Stokes

Is my hon. Friend aware that I am somewhat puzzled by his reply? Is not the money of the Church Commissioners primarily, if not wholly, to be used for the purpose of the Church? If the Church is to make enormous contributions to all kinds of other schemes, what will be left for the Church itself?

Sir William van Straubenzee

With great respect to my hon. Friend, I point out that it will be for the urban fund to allocate these moneys, not for the Church Commissioners. They will respond to the request if Parliament so authorises and the General Synod so decides.

Mr. Simon Hughes

May I urge, through the hon. Gentleman, that the Church Commissioners should make that decision and contribution as urgently as possible? Will he also urge them to consider ways in which they might, as a matter of urgency, through the urban fund, support the schooling that is provided by the Church in urban areas? The hon. Gentleman may be able to comment on the fact that at this moment there is a growing, weekly crisis in the staffing of Church schools, caused in part by the lack of buildings and also by the lack of incremental and other opportunities. Could that be considered by the Church Commissioners, too?

Sir William van Straubenzee

The pace at which the Church Commissioners can move is dictated, first, by the corporate decision of the General Synod and, secondly, by Parliament. Only then will they lawfully be able to proceed. I am afraid that I cannot assist the hon. Gentleman by referring to individual projects. That is not the concern of the Church Commissioners, nor should it be. It will be the concern of the urban fund.