The Church of England’s General Synod will meet next month. The usual pre-synod press release was issued today and is copied below.
Independent safeguarding proposals published ahead of Synod decision
23/01/2025
Detailed proposals for a new structural model of organisations to deliver and scrutinise safeguarding on behalf of the Church of England are published today.
Members of the Church’s General Synod will be asked to choose between two possible models for independent safeguarding at their upcoming meeting in London from February 10 to 14.
In one model safeguarding officers currently working in dioceses, cathedrals and the national Church would transfer to work for a new organisation. In the other diocesan and cathedral officers would remain with their current employers but most national staff would move to a new body. In both cases safeguarding work would be scrutinised by a second external body.
The models, set out in more detail in a paper to members of Synod, were developed in response to reviews conducted for the Church of England by Prof Alexis Jay, chair of the national Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), and the barrister Sarah Wilkinson.
Synod members will also have an opportunity to debate a motion responding to the Makin Report into the abuse by the lawyer John Smyth, which prompted the resignation of the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. And they will be asked to approve new safeguarding codes of practice including guidance on managing allegations.
The Synod papers also include detailed draft proposals for possible new arrangements to enable the wider use of prayers asking for God’s blessing for same-sex couples including in special services.
The proposals, developed by working groups representing the range of views on questions of sexuality and marriage across the Church of England, are published for discussion and feedback.
These proposals also include additional measures of “pastoral reassurance” that seek to affirm and support the diversity of theological views within the church.
Other key items coming to General Synod include a motion, brought by Fr Alex Frost from the Diocese of Blackburn, on encouraging the ministry of people from working class backgrounds in the Church of England.
There will also be debates on racial justice; the role of sport in Christian outreach; the global prayer initiative Thy Kingdom Come; and possible changes to the voting procedures of the Crown Nominations Commission.
Synod will also have an opportunity to look at proposals for simplifying the way money flows around the Church, providing more financial support to dioceses and levelling up clergy stipends.
The Bishop of Stepney, Joanne Grenfell, the Church of England’s Lead Bishop for Safeguarding, said: “There is, quite rightly, considerable interest in our safeguarding work and I will be leading a number of debates and sessions on these vital questions at Synod.
“In the light of the Makin review, it is essential that we recognise together the pain of all victims and survivors living with a legacy of abuse, while highlighting the recommendations and work already under way.
“The proposals on safeguarding independence are the product of a huge amount of work and feedback from across the Church including from victims and survivors and it is right that Synod now makes the decision on which model to pursue.”
Wasn’t there a lot of discussion on this on TA on 17th Dec.?
There is a consensus that Church of England Safeguarding has failed. Safeguarding is carried out by human beings. If exactly the same human beings remain in post why is it supposed that anything will change ? At the very least we need to know who will appoint new safeguarders, what criteria will be used to appoint new safeguarders and what will the personal consequences be for failures in the future ? Who can victims complain to when things go wrong? We need an end to the Church of England bureaucracy marking their own homework and we need independent monitoring of… Read more »
I agree with all of this, but it’s highly likely that TUPE applies (you’d need a specialist lawyer to determine that properly*) and staff have a legal right to retain employment. And, anyway, I don’t think it is right, even we’re that not the case, to make dozens of staff redundant. However, if the staff are retained, then the change of structure is even more important and, in my view, a fully independent safeguarding organisation is essential. *One thing Synod ought to know is whether TUPE applies. If the answer isn’t in the briefing pack, then a delegate ought to… Read more »
If this happens, then one of those affected, if they are affected and if they are a member, can contact the Faith Workers Branch helpline for legal advice.
It sounds a lot like it would to me though. But the devil is often in the detail. Who is the employer now, who would be the employer then?
I hope we can find infallible human beings to do the safeguarding, remove all the fallible human beings who have failed at safeguarding, then everything will be much better.
It’s not about infallibility. It’s about understanding that the church needs to comply with best practice on safeguarding, and learn from its mistakes. By suggesting that getting safeguarding right is not within human grasp ( infallible, which none of us are) you are also suggesting that we might as well not bother. I disagree.
I’m not suggesting that getting safeguarding right is beyond human grasp, I am implying this, I think justifiably. I am not suggesting that we might as well not bother – you are inferring this, incorrectly. Things are going to change, in one way or another, because of the pressure of the moment. I accept that, and do hope things will improve. I was simply (I apologise if over-laconically) asking that we have realistic, and modest, expectations of the dividends of any regime change, where humans are involved. Where are the ‘clean skins’ going to come from? Police, Social services, NHS?… Read more »
Thank you. Inference is always risky. I suppose I am over alert to implied suggestions that doing better is not attainable. The history of safeguarding in the CofE is so loaded with side steps, shrugs, such is life, get real that I may well be unfairly critical of perfectly reasonable observations. Sorting this out doesn’t need the infallible, it needs honest competence. That exists. But those in power try very hard to extinguish it, and we must continue to call them out.
Neither Jasvinder Sanghera nor Steve Reeves would claim to be infallible but they were very effective advocates for victims of clerical.abuse. So effective that they were sacked !