THE Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament is taking time to think about whether the brand new Clergy Conduct Measure (CCM) is “expedient”, after a session on Tuesday during which its members asked questions of one in every of the lawyers in command of drafting the Measure.
The CCM received final approval from the General Synod in February (News, 14 February) and is because of replace the Clergy Discipline Measure. Before it’s formally put to each Houses of Parliament, the Ecclesiastical Committee — which comprises MPs and peers — has to declare that it’s “expedient”.
In Tuesday’s session, questions on the planned privacy of tribunal hearings, and the present absence of the Rules which can accompany the Measure, were put to the Deputy Legal Adviser for the General Synod, Edward Dobson, and a member of the steering committee for the Measure, Canon Kate Wharton, together with the Bishop of Chichester, Dr Martin Warner.
In response to an issue from Danny Kruger MP, Mr Dobson acknowledged that the “place to begin” was for evidence to be taken in private, on the grounds that this may higher protect children and young adults. The query whether the default ought to be for public hearings had been considered by the Synod, he said (Synod, 12 July 2024).
The wording of the Measure does allow for hearings to be conducted in public, he said, in step with rules that might accompany the Measure, and Mr Dobson suggested that it was “likely” that precedents would develop under which many cases can be held in public.
The rules are being developed individually from the Measure, and several other members complained that they didn’t have sight of the separate Rules document while considering the Measure.
“It’s one other example of insufficient information coming to this committee before we’re in a powerful position to make a call,” the Earl of Cork and Orrery, who’s a hereditary peer, said.
Mr Dobson said that jurisdiction to place the Rules through the Synodical process was based on the Measure having passed. While they wouldn’t be subject to approval by the Committee, there was a procedure for Parliament to debate the Rules if either House wished to accomplish that. Draft Rules could possibly be provided to the Committee to assist them of their consideration of the Measure, he said.
Tom Collins MP highlighted that the position of “lead assessor” was one which held considerable sway over the operation of the Measure. He asked for clarity concerning the style of one that might occupy the office.
Mr Dobson said that the person would probably be a judge. One of their primary duties can be to make your mind up whether to proceed with a case as a grievance or misconduct criticism, which has a limitation period of 1 yr, or to categorise it as “serious misconduct”, which has no limitation period.
In concluding remarks, the chair of the Ecclesiastical Committee, Baroness Butler-Sloss, who’s a retired appeal-court judge, said: “I believe the Church would gain from more cases heard in public.”
After thanking Dr Warner, Canon Wharton, and Mr Dobson, she said that the Committee would now meet in private to think about whether to deem the draft Measure “expedient”.
The previous day, members of the Committee received a letter from a former Synod member, Gavin Drake, urging them to conclude that the CMM was “not expedient”. Many of the concerns raised by MPs and peers were set out in Mr Drake’s letter.
 is “expedient”, after a session on...){kind=link}