The Church of England logoFaithWorshipLife eventsAbout the Church
Information Where to find us
Media Centre Home
Media

Von Hügel Institute: Government ‘moral without a compass’ says report into Church and Welfare

9 June 2008

Issued on behalf of the Von Hügel Institute, St Edmund’s College, Cambridge University

Centre for the Study of Faith in Society

 

Copies of the report are available to order via the Institute's website

 

The government is ‘planning blind and failing parts of civil society’ when it comes to faith communities in general and aspects of charity law and social policy in particular, concludes a report by the Von Hügel Institute, an academic research centre and think tank based at St Edmund’s College, Cambridge University. “The government has good intentions, but is moral without a compass,” the authors say.

The report, Moral, But No Compass – Government, Church, and the Future of Welfare, was commissioned by the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, Bishop for Urban Life and Faith, who officially received the report today on behalf of the Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England. It was researched and written by Francis Davis, co-Director of the Centre for the Study of Faith in Society at the Von Hügel Institute, Elizabeth Paulhus, a researcher at the Institute, and Andrew Bradstock, co-Director of the Centre for the Study of Faith in Society at the Institute.

The Institute’s research involved interviewees from politics, churches, other faiths, the civil service and the voluntary sector. It ‘uncovered huge gaps in government evidence about faith communities in general and the churches in particular,’ according to the report.

“We encountered on the part of Government,” the report says, “a significant lack of understanding of, or interest in, the Church of England’s current or potential contribution in the public sphere. Indeed we were told that Government had consciously decided to focus its evidence gathering almost exclusively on minority religions. We were unsurprised to hear that some of these consequently felt ‘victimised’.”

The researchers also found the Charity Commission’s data and systems of classification to be ‘very weak’, with a conscious focus on minority communities achieved to the relative exclusion of the Christian church and hundreds of other charities. They conclude that the government is fundamentally underestimating the number of Christian charities to the tune of thousands, and consequently their social, economic and civic impact and potential.

“At the least,” the report argues, “this means that the government cannot include this contribution in its deliberations. At most this raises again the view asserted by so many of our respondents, ‘This Government is positively excluding people of faith’.”

Through their own research into the social, economic and civic impact of churches, the authors highlight the important roles of bishops, dioceses and cathedrals. They also note that they found ‘congregations, clergy and volunteers running post offices and cafes, doctors’ surgeries and asylum rights centres, homeless outreach and bereavement counselling, job creation and economic regeneration programmes, eco initiatives and youth clubs, peace networks and third world solidarity groups’.

The report ‘raises issues of considerable importance’, the authors say, and makes recommendations to the Government, the Charity Commission and the Church. Among these, they recommend that the Government ‘introduce new legislation to create a level playing field for faith-based agencies seeking to engage in public service reform, contracting and civic action’. They also argue that faith communities merit more than just a party post under the Prime Minister and call for a Minister for Religion, Social Cohesion and Voluntary Action.

They call for additional funds to develop a serious faith-based evidence strand to the Cabinet Office’s new centre for research/evidence excellence in the third sector and for the Charity Commission to review and amend its classification criteria.

They recommend that the Church establish a new social enterprise/voluntary sector support and coordinating body to develop public advocacy and service provision engagement across the country.

“Bearing all of this in mind,” say the authors, “it is unsurprising that our respondents in the Church and Parliament, from the regions to London, in business and academia, told us that a fresh dialogue was needed. Such a fresh conversation, supported by new research and a new commitment on the part of both the Church and government to mobilise resources, could lead to inventive new work alongside the poorest and neediest in the UK and abroad.”

Welcoming this report, Bishop Stephen Lowe said: “We had little information about our own capacity or indeed level of existing activity. We had only a sketchy idea of political aspirations for our involvement. We needed an informed and reflective assessment of the position for the Church to consider the nature and extent of its future participation…I am delighted with the outcome.”

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, and the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu,  called it  a ‘fascinating and important report’.

“On the one hand it highlights and details some truly remarkable examples of public good delivered by the Church and faith based organisations - sometimes funded by the state, though mostly not - and a general picture of committed social engagement which if grasped imaginatively by the state could, indeed would, yield some extraordinarily positive results,” the Archbishops said. 

“On the other it reveals a depressing level of misunderstanding of the scale and quality of contribution faith-based organisations make to the civil and civic life of our nation - our common good.  This is particularly true in relation to the contribution of the Church of England, and its membership, on which the report focuses.

“In short, this report urges the Church, government and others, notably the Charity Commissioners, to sit up, take note and to better understand each others roles and intentions in order to make the most of one of this nation’s most diverse, creative and enduring assets – the Church..

“We all need to consider very seriously the report’s recommendations and take appropriate action - for the good of the nation.”

Moral, But No Compass – Government, Church, and the Future of Welfare, by Francis Davis, Elizabeth Paulhus and Andrew Bradstock, Centre for the Study of Faith in Society at the Von Hügel Institute, St Edmund’s College, Cambridge University, is published by Matthew James Publishing Ltd, price £9.95p.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

5.1.1 TO NUMBER 10

(i) That the Government fundamentally review its commissioning guidance and policies across every domestic department of state with a mind to developing fresh directions that emphasise decentralisation of contracts, as well as the importance of advocacy, non economic performance measurements and long term ‘covenant’ relationships in commissioning.

(ii) That the Government introduce new legislation to create a level playing field for faith-based agencies seeking to engage in public service reform, contracting and civic action.

(iii) That the Government name a Minister for Religion, Social Cohesion and Voluntary Action (who also would serve as the Prime Minister’s direct faith envoy) to recognise the striking contribution of the faith communities more structurally across every department of state from the MOD to the DWP. While we praise Rt Hon Stephen Timms MP for his work in this area, we argue that faith communities merit more than just a party post under the new Prime Minister. They should have both a Vice Chair and a Minister.

 

5.1.2 TO THE CABINET OFFICE

(i) That once the contract for the new Cabinet Office’s centre of research/evidence excellence in the third sector has been awarded, several departments of state should provide additional funds to develop a serious and extended faithbased evidence strand of research, including a robust look at the wide-ranging civic contribution of the Churches. This should include studies of the role of ‘theology’ and ‘spirituality’ as key motivational languages and theories of engagement and organisation.

(ii) That this strand of research should include identifying social innovations invented and founded by the Churches internationally, which are ripe for policy transfer. The Department for Children, Schools and Families, for example, has recently borrowed its ‘Studio Schools’ model from an approach to truancy pioneered by Church groups in the Bronx (USA).

(iii) That the National School of Government (or a similar body), as part of the renewal of government skills and knowledge in this area, should be funded by several departments to develop a ‘Religion, Governance, Public Policy and Management’ executive programme in close partnership with the Churches. This programme should form part of senior civil service and voluntary sector umbrella network training.

(iv) That the Cabinet Office should increase its interdisciplinary and cross-cutting specialist strengths in the religious voluntary sector and strengthen the relationship with faith communities across every department of state.

 

5.1.3 TO THE CHARITY COMMISSION

(i) That the Charity Commission should review and amend its classification criteria so that Ministers have a meaningful evidence base on Churches and other faith communities from which to plan.

(ii) That the Charity Commission open a sustained period of dialogue with the largest Christian denominations in the UK, especially those in the membership of the Churches Together in Britain and Ireland, and that this should include regional and national as well as congregational voices.

 

5.1.4 TO THE FOREIGN OFFICE AND DFID

(i) That HM Ambassador to the Holy See and the UK Permanent Representative to the European Commission should work with the Anglican Centre in Rome and the Conference of European Churches to facilitate a major international conference on the UK and Commonwealth experience of public service reform, the role of the Anglican Church and other faith communities in that process, and their wider service and advocacy with and for the poor.

(ii) That DFID fund a small group of Christian NGO policy departments to collaborate on a report showcasing best practice in working with Christian NGOs in overseas settings with a mind to replication on the UK home front.

 

5.1.5 TO THE ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY AND YORK

(i) That public service reform and the Church’s role in domestic welfare provision be the subject of a workshop at the forthcoming Lambeth Conference.

(ii) That the Archbishops call a St George’s House consultation (or its equivalent) to follow up on some of our interim findings.

(iii) That the Archbishops commission a feasibility study to establish a new Lambeth- and York-led ‘Anglican Philanthropy’ fund to encourage a fresh wave of donors to back Christian social innovation, advocacy and welfare provision with both funding and the investment of time, skills and knowledge in a strategic and coordinated fashion.

(iv) That the Archbishop of Canterbury, in conversation with Lambeth Partners, should explore the establishment of annual ‘Archbishop’s Awards for Faith-Based Civic Action,’ ideally in partnership with a national umbrella body such as ACEVO and with the media. These awards would celebrate and recognise the role and contribution of faith-based social innovation, service and action across the country. They would affirm not only inter-faith conversation, but also the full realm of faith-based civic contributions.

 

5.1.6 TO THE LORDS SPIRITUAL

(i) That our interim findings form the basis for a debate in the House of Lords to examine the weaknesses we have uncovered in the Government’s approach to the Churches, as well as the wider need for a refreshed set of contracting principles, which are rooted in an attempt to measure more qualitative factors and enable a wider range of sustainable voluntary sector engagement.

 

5.1.7 TO THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS & THE GENERAL SYNOD

(i) That the Church should establish a new social enterprise/voluntary sector support and coordinating body to develop public advocacy and service provision engagement across the country, modelled on existing best practice in its work in education and on international counterparts such as Anglicare in Australia. This body would encourage the support and continued development of the existing Anglican contributions to health and social care, community development, post-compulsory education, criminal justice, asylum and refugee advice and services, welfare-to-work, job creation, the rural economy and the arts and cultural economy. It would also encourage increased utilisation and coordination of activities in the civic hubs of cathedrals and dioceses. It may have some ecumenical potential as well, since some of the Catholic children’s societies are seeking, or are being required, to reinvent themselves outside the governance networks of the Roman Catholic Church.

(ii) That the Church develop a fresh conversation and process of theological enquiry as to the appropriate nature, form and content of Christian principles for contracting. This could include bishops addressing these ‘principles’ while visiting chief executives in their diocesan areas or while engaging in their myriad civic activities. It could also include a sustained campaign alongside smaller voluntary organisations to enhance decentralisation of contracts and increase wider civic engagement.

 

5.1.8 TO THEOLOGICAL COLLEGES / MINISTERIAL TRAINING PROGRAMMES

(i) That coursework introducing the modern structure of the state (including commissioning, the role of the voluntary sector, and the nature and form of public management and its successors) become a mandatory part of ministerial training.

(ii) That pioneering projects at local, diocesan, and Anglican Communion levels are regularly ‘case studied’ in ministerial training as a source of inspiration and creative thinking and as a reminder of the Church’s innovative nature.

(iii) That training in grant and bid writing, as well as performance leadership, be available to Ordinands.