FEW parishes will find a way to pay the so-called “mansion tax”, and dioceses won’t find a way to soak up the fee, the Bishop of Manchester, Dr David Walker, warned on Thursday, during a House of Lords debate on the Autumn Budget.
The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, announced in her Budget speech last week the introduction of the High Value Council Tax Surcharge — dubbed the “mansion tax” (News, 28 November). It implies that properties in England which can be valued at greater than £2 million pays an annual surcharge of a minimum of £2500 from 2028, along with existing council tax (News, 28 November).
During Thursday’s debate, Dr Walker said that, in London and the South-East, “location aspects mean that, even in a comparatively poor parish, the vicarage could have a capital value over the £2 million threshold.”
Dr Walker spoke a couple of Nineteenth-century Act of Parliament, which “determined that vicars should live of their benefices”, in order that they were easily accessible to parishioners and never “merely one other middle-class commuter”.
“The modern vicarage is never as large and splendid as a few of former times; nonetheless, it needs not only to accommodate the priest and their household but to host meetings, provide a gathering place for parishioners, and supply study and office space,” he said.
He continued: “If we’re to keep up the essential principle of clergy living where they serve, including those from other denominations, I urge the minister to satisfy with church representatives in order that we will discuss how the present tax exemptions applying to the residences of ministers of faith can perhaps be prolonged.”
Dr Walker also spoke in regards to the Listed Places of Worship Grant (LPWG) Scheme. Before the Budget, the Archbishop of York urged Ms Reeves to make scheme “everlasting” and to “lift the cap on claims”, but she didn’t mention it in her Budget speech (News, 28 November).
Dr Walker said that works to repair and improve places of worship was “not low-cost” and that “much-needed renovation and improvement work” was currently being stalled by the dearth of a secure, long-term future for the listed places of worship repair scheme.
“Will the Minister commit to reviewing the longer term of this vital scheme, in order that it will possibly be prolonged in time, and commit to withdrawing the harmful limit of £25,000 a yr, which was introduced only recently and makes many larger refurbishments unaffordable?”
In a maiden speech, the Bishop of Portsmouth, the Rt Revd Jonathan Frost, the lead bishop on education, spoke in regards to the difficulties that schools were having in supporting children with special educational needs (SEND) and “the postcode lottery of SEND provision”.
He continued: “I note the intention to bring the fee of SEND provision into the central government spending envelope from 2028-29. This shall be a relief to councils holding significant deficits, but I’m deeply concerned that no indication has been given so far of how the estimated additional cost involved shall be covered —in accordance with OBR, £6 billion by 2028-29 — without causing a big fall in mainstream funding for schools. I note, too, that from 2028, the Government won’t expect local authorities to fund future special educational needs costs from their general funds once the statutory override ends at the top of 2027-28. . .
“I might welcome some assurance from the minister that accrued profit deficits in local authority spending on SEND won’t be paid off or reconciled through the use of the mainstream schools budget.”
Bishop Frost also commended the Government for removing the two-child profit cap, which he described as “a number one driver of kid poverty for nearly a decade, crushing aspiration, hope and opportunity”. He said: “I hope and pray that that is the start of a renewed commitment to investment in a generation of young people.”
Dr Walker also offered the Government his “deepest thanks” for ending the two-child cap. “I never felt it right or simply to push a toddler into poverty simply for having too many sisters or brothers; it makes even less sense after we badly need a birth rate that may provide Britain with tomorrow’s workforce without having to depend on migration to fill the labour market gaps.”
The Labour peer Lord Rook also addressed the needs of the subsequent generation. “A rustic that disinvests in its future residents cannot expect the subsequent generation to speculate of their nation,” he said. “While these Budget measures are welcome, we will all do more and higher, and we must, since it takes a society to lift a generation.”
The Conservative peer Lord True, in contrast, said that the Government was “failing” in its claim to be an establishment for growth. “We respect the Government’s desire to secure growth: the difficulty is that their policies are designed to stunt it. . . This Government are mercilessly battering businesses, particularly small businesses, with the massive sticks of taxation and regulation, and it cannot succeed.”
Responding for the Government, the Treasury minister Lord Livermore, didn’t address the points raised by Dr Walker about vicarages and the LPWG Scheme. Lord Livermore did, nonetheless, reply to Bishop Frost’s concerns about SEND funding.
“The OBR has based its estimate on unreformed pressures,” he said. “It has not accounted for planned reforms to deliver a sustainable SEND system that works higher for youngsters and families. The detail of this shall be set out in our reform plan early in the brand new yr.
“The OBR has only used mainstream schools as an indicative example, whereas the Government have confirmed that residual SEND pressures shall be absorbed inside the overall Government DEL budget from 2028-29 onwards. The Government won’t make final decisions until reform plans are confirmed and Budgets from 2028-29 onwards remain subject to the spending review in 2027.”
