THE culmination of the Synodical process to ascertain a redress scheme for victims and survivors of abuse in a church context was greeted with positivity, and a measure of circumspection, by each bishops and survivors.
A survivor of church-related abuse who was involved in designing the scheme, Phil Johnson, said on Monday that he was “relieved and pleased” that the General Synod had approved it, that afternoon.
“It is the culmination of years of labor and, when it opens, it is going to make an enormous difference within the lives of individuals,” he said. “For the Church, it’s a possibility to rectify among the harm that’s been done to victims and survivors.”
Jenny Read, a survivor of abuse who was in York for the talk, told the Church Times that the passage of the Redress Measure was “a step in the fitting direction”, although she was anxious about how long it might be until the scheme was fully operational.
The scheme has been delayed several times, and still more time shall be required for it to go through Parliament and receive Royal Assent.
The chair of the redress board, the Bishop of Winchester, the Rt Revd Philip Mounstephen, said after the vote that he couldn’t provide “a selected date for the scheme’s opening or the primary awards”, but stressed that the Church would “work cooperatively” with Parliamentarians.
A former deputy lead bishop for safeguarding, the Bishop of Birkenhead, the Rt Revd Julie Conalty, told the Church Times that the addition of her amendment — which suggests that those that received support under the Interim Support Scheme won’t have this deducted from any sum received under the fundamental redress scheme — would help to smooth its passage through Parliament.
Sam Atkins/Church TimesA former deputy lead bishop for safeguarding, the Bishop of Birkenhead, the Rt Revd Julie Conalty, moves her amendment during a debate on the Measure, on Monday
It would otherwise have been a “bad start”, Bishop Conalty said. “I believe quite a few survivors would have been very distressed if we were going to take the interim payments into consideration, and could be chatting with their MPs.”
She was “beyond delighted” that the scheme was off the bottom. “The process isn’t finished, but, when it comes to Synod, we’ve done the work that we would have liked to do.”
Bishop Mounstephen said that “scrutiny” from the Synod had been vital to make sure that the scheme was “robust and credible”. He said: “I welcome the spirit during which today’s debate was held, and our commitment now’s to obviously communicate this consequence to survivors.”
Ms Read said that the potential stress of the applying process remained a worry, as she was sceptical about assurances that it might be straightforward.
“It’s like when the dentist says ‘this isn’t going to harm,’” she said, suggesting that it might be higher for the Church to be “upfront” if, given legalities, the method was going to be complex and potentially intrusive.
The appointment of the law firm Kennedy’s because the independent administrators of the scheme gave Bishop Conalty more confidence that the scheme could be well administered, she said. It was higher for the Church not to do that work itself, she said; without the vital expertise, this may risk retraumatising survivors.
Audio, moderately than written, applications might be made to the scheme, she added, which might make the method more accessible.
Bishop Mounstephen said that he was “confident that the applying process shall be person-centred and trauma-informed” and that it might “treat all applicants with dignity, respect and compassion”.
Ms Read has been awaiting redress for a very long time. She recently reported to the BBC that, as children, she and her two sisters, Wendy and Christina, were sexually abused by their father; a male curate; and a female churchwarden in “sadistic rituals” inside a church within the north-east of England (News, 20 June). The Church conducted a lessons-learnt review into her case, which has not been published for legal reasons. The Archbishop of York has promised to issue a proper apology.
Ms Read said that she had received some support from the Interim scheme, but that one in every of her sisters had given up resulting from the difficulties of accessing this help. Ultimately, though, it was not in regards to the money, she said. “It’s not a matter of getting what I’m owed. The reason why I’m here is that I can’t let people get away with it without saying ‘that is improper.’”
Prospective applicants for the redress scheme can register their interest at www.redresscofe.org from Friday.
