THE use of Church House, Westminster, for a Reform UK press conference, was condemned by Church of England clergy last week.
Canon Dr Keith Brindle, who works at Dorothy House Hospice Care and co-ordinates Christians Against the Far Right, described the event as “a cynical attempt currently underway to decorate nationalism within the robes of the Church”.
He said: “By opening its doors to an agenda of hostility, Church House has provided a veneer of spiritual legitimacy to Reform’s anti-migrant and anti-Muslim politics, and their cynical scapegoating.
“As followers of Jesus, we must refuse to let the architecture of our faith be used to endorse the dehumanisation of our neighbours. The Church should be a sanctuary for the displaced, not a platform for his or her expulsion.”
The conference centre was utilized by Reform UK on 17 February for a press conference, at which the party’s “shadow cabinet” was announced (News, 18 February).
The Revd William Hogg, a retired priest in Scotland, wrote to the Church Times to say that he had been “shocked” (Letters, 27 February). “I believed that there was an understanding, or unwritten rule, that church buildings shouldn’t be used for party-political purposes, except, perhaps, at election time, for cross-party hustings to which all candidates are invited and given an equal likelihood to talk, and the general public are encouraged to ask questions. . .
“Reform UK has often denied accusations of racism and even disciplined members for overtly racist remarks, but its positions on immigration and welfare issues are, to say the least, highly controversial. It seems to me extremely unsuitable for any Church to provide a platform to such a one-sided event.”
Gill Davis, a deanery synod member within the diocese of Hereford, wrote to Church House last week, referring to the venue’s ethical lettings policy, which “says that a letting won’t be accepted if the hirer promotes views that are anathema to the teachings of the Church of England.
“I feel that the policies of Reform UK are contrary to the essential Christian commandment of ‘Love thy neighbour’. Their policies include leaving the European Court of Human Rights, repealing the Human Rights Act, to be certain that illegal immigrants could be deported and can be ineligible for asylum.”
Church House, Westminster, is a wholly-owned trading subsidiary of the Corporation of Church House, a charity founded in 1888 to own and maintain a constructing for the usage of the National Church Institutions (NCIs). Since 2018, it has been permitted to make grants for the advantages of the NCIs, totalling £8.62 million so far.
Its ethical lettings policy states that the Corporation will “seek to protect against reputational risk to the Church of England or the Corporation”, and “reserves the appropriate to refuse any bookings which can be contrary to the witness and mission of the Church of England”.
On Monday, the chief executive of the Corporation, Stephanie Maurel, said that the conference centre was “an independent business entity and shouldn’t be a part of the Church of England”. It “operates on a business basis, accepting bookings from organisations that meet our ethical lettings policy, subject to availability”, and “hosts a wide selection of clients and events annually, including organisations from across the political spectrum, charities, firms, and the general public sector”.
A review of the lettings policy was conducted by Dr Oliver O’Donovan, Emeritus Professor of Christian Ethics and Practical Theology, on the University of Edinburgh, in 2019 within the wake of criticism of the hiring out of Church House conference centre for the annual Land Warfare Conference, (News, 2 August 2019). The review was not made public, but a passage appended to the policy states: “The Church is free to make use of prudence in avoiding unnecessary occasions for criticism and confusion of its witness.”
In addition to hosting the General Synod, Church House is a preferred conference venue that has been used for a few years by political parties. In 2024, the Labour Party held its first full meeting after the General Election at Church House.
In January, the Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, delivered a speech on the venue, which included a reminder of the party’s plans to depart the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and repeal the Climate Change Act.
Before its February meeting, Reform UK had set out plans to scrap Indefinite Leave to Remain and rescind existing awards. Migrants — including those already within the UK — would must apply for a latest visa every five years, it said. The party has also proposed to bar anyone apart from British residents from accessing welfare.
Like the Conservatives, Reform UK has pledged to have the UK leave the ECHR and repeal the Human Rights Act, with plans to “withdraw from or disapply every international treaty that forestalls this country from having the ability to secure its borders”, and establish a five-year emergency programme “to discover, detain, and deport illegal migrants within the UK”.
While Reform UK has set out the hardest plans so far, each the Conservative and Labour parties have promised radical reforms to the immigration and asylum architecture. The Conservative Party has announced plans to ascertain a “Removals Force” based on the United States’ Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The Institute for Government has suggested that these plans would “prohibit those that enter the UK through irregular migration from ever claiming asylum and restrict refugee status to only those threatened by a foreign government”.
In November, the Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, set out “probably the most sweeping asylum reforms in modern times” (News, 19 November 2025), stating that the UK had develop into “the destination of selection in Europe, clearly visible to each people smuggler and would-be illegal migrant the world over” and had been “unwilling to point out the mandatory toughness or resolve to say our right to return those with no right to be here”.
Among the policies she announced was that refugee status would develop into temporary — “lasting only until a refugee can safely return home” — and that the automated right to family reunion would come to an end. Ms Mahmood has also set out stricter conditions for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), including “being in work; making national insurance contributions; not taking a penny in advantages; learning English to a high standard; having no criminal record; and, finally, that you might have truly given back to your community, similar to by volunteering your time to an area cause”.
Bishops have criticised the Government’s plans. The Bishop of Chelmsford, Dr Guli Francis-Deqhani, suggested that they “appear to scapegoat refugees for the commonly poor state of public funds and public services”. The Lords Spiritual have supported a lot of amendments to the Government’s Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.
Last week, the Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, repeated his earlier criticism of the bishops. He said: “I feel they’ve got a quite twisted view of what their flock on this country actually want them to do, and we’re completely open to real refugees.
“They will need to have their heads within the sand, these bishops, if they can not see that aggressive young males chucking their iPhones and passports into the English Channel on the 12-mile line so we are able to’t discover who they’re — in the event that they don’t understand that that may be a threat to our country, then, frankly, they’re not doing a superb job.”
A Reform UK spokesperson told the BBC that complaints concerning the venue were “little greater than an inexpensive political stunt by a gaggle that is totally out of touch with the British public. Poll after poll shows immigration is a top issue for voters. Attempting to shut down debate on a subject near voters’ hearts is each unChristian and authoritarian.”
The latest tracker from YouGov found that immigration topped the list of the “most significant issues facing the country”, with 48 per cent of respondents choosing it. For the past 12 months, Reform UK has led in voting intention polls.
