ROCHESTER diocesan synod’s vote of no confidence within the Archbishops’ Council’s oversight of safeguarding is being taken “very seriously” by the Council, its Secretary General, William Nye, has written (News,10 December).
In a letter to the synod’s clergy and lay chairs, dated 20 December, Mr Nye writes: “We are deeply conscious of the terrible hurt and lasting damage to survivors that has been brought on by the actions of John Smyth, and the failings of the Church in its response. The Archbishop’s Council itself commissioned the independent Makin Review to properly examine and learn from these failings. Along with everyone within the Church, we’re shamed by its findings.”
The trustees of the Council, he says, “at all times welcome conversations with all those across the Church” that may help their reflections on safeguarding.
He goes on to suggest, nonetheless, that the diocesan synod “can have been unaware” of how the Archbishops’ Council and National Safeguarding Steering Group, informed by the National Safeguarding Team (NST), were “actively responding to the recommendations of the Makin review”.
He lists the four-stage process for assessing individuals named within the review (News, 5 December), the proposals for independence to be put to the General Synod in February (News, 20 December), and the brand new Clergy Conduct Measure, because of be presented for final approval at the identical meeting (News, 12 July).
A reference to a House of Bishops meeting that “will consider the proposals on tenth December” indicates that the letter was drafted before that.
Mr Nye also lists financial support for the Interim Support Scheme and Safe Spaces, and says that there was “significant progress” on the work to ascertain the Redress Scheme. It is now 4 years for the reason that scheme was proposed (News, 22 July 2022).
The Council is “aware of absolutely the necessity for trauma-informed assessment in all our work on safeguarding”, he writes. “We particularly value advice from senior members of the National Safeguarding Team on this regard and sit up for further scrutiny from the National Safeguarding Panel under its newly appointed Chair, Nazir Afzal. We have asked him to challenge our work and to carry us to task, with the concerns of victims and survivors central to all of the Council does” (News, 24 September).
The letter says: “We would value a conversation with the Diocesan Synod to further understand your concerns and we sit up for hearing the discussions at General Synod on the independent safeguarding recommendations.”
The motion, brought by the Vicar of St Margaret’s, Rainham, the Revd Nathan Ward, called for the Archbishops’ Council “to take the needed reforms to revive trust, safeguard the vulnerable, and uphold the Church’s moral and legal responsibilities”.
Mr Ward said on Monday that he welcomed Mr Nye’s engagement with the problem. He said, nonetheless: “It is vital to make clear that the motion didn’t suggest that the Archbishops’ Council is doing nothing to deal with safeguarding. Rather, it reflected a collective insecurity in oversight and accountability structures, as highlighted within the findings of the Makin Review and other reports.”
He also welcomed the Council’s offer to fulfill with the Diocesan Synod. “Such a conversation is important for ensuring that the urgent need for systemic reform is met with decisive motion. This is a critical moment for the Church of England to show transparency, accountability, and commitment to safeguarding reform. The concerns raised by the Synod aren’t merely about what has been done up to now but about rebuilding trust and ensuring the Church is a safer place for all.”
This article was updated on the afternoon of 23 December to incorporate Mr Ward’s comments.
