THE Church Commissioners would must allocate an amount reminiscent of one per cent of their endowment annually to Diocesan Stipend Funds, under a recent Measure proposed by the Bishop of Hereford, Dr Richard Jackson, and the Bishop of Bath & Wells, Dr Michael Beasley.
The fund currently stands at £11.1 billion, generating a hypothetical allocation of £111 million.
On Monday, the 2 Bishops sent an email to all diocesan bishops urging them to support their proposal. It is about out in an amendment to the Redistribution of Funds motion, which originated in Hereford diocese and is about to be debated on the General Synod this month (News, 27 January).
The original motion calls on the Church Commissioners and the Archbishops’ Council to “undertake every little thing crucial to effect a redistribution of economic resources on to Diocesan Stipend Funds to reflect the worth of contributions made by Diocesan Boards of Finance to the Church of England Funded Pension Scheme because it was established by the settlement of 1997 (£2.6 billion)”. It was scheduled to be debated in February, but adjourned after time ran out.
In the interim, the Triennium Funding Working Group (TFWG) has published a set of spending plans which include £200 million of “time-limited support” for dioceses over the subsequent nine years (News, 13 June 2025). The aim is to “address short-term financial pressures and fund existing ministry costs whilst waiting for missional interventions to translate into improved financial health”.
Under the TFWG plans, grants agreed by the Strategic Mission and Ministry Investment Board (SMMIB) would remain a major technique of distributing funds to dioceses: the full available over the three years is about to rise by almost nine per cent, to £416.4 million.
Last month, Dr Jackson said that “to place such an infinite quantum of cash through the SMIIB process is a mistake”, and called for funding to be channelled on to diocesan stipend funds, “to make sure we are able to keep clergy numbers up slightly than always cutting and reconfiguring parishes and claiming it’s a clever missional strategy” (News, 13 June).
In York, Dr Jackson will move the unique motion, and Dr Beasley will move a “friendly amendment”. This instructs the Business Committee to “introduce a Measure requiring that the Church Commissioners allocate annually and on to Diocesan Stipend Funds, commencing no later than 1 January 2029, an amount reminiscent of one per cent of the full Church Commissioners endowment as valued at 31 December of the preceding 12 months”.
The allocation can be distributed “in response to a good formula to be determined by the Archbishops’ Council following consultation with the House of Bishops”, and would come with “appropriate financial safeguards to make sure the long-term preservation of the endowment”. It would also “provide legal mechanisms permitting adjustment of distributions in exceptional economic circumstances”.
The Measure would come with “provisions for standardised, annual, financial reporting by dioceses to make sure transparency and accountability in the usage of these funds for parish ministry enabling the expansion of our churches and the lifetime of God’s Kingdom”.
The amendment acknowledges the “precious work” of the TFWG, but additionally recognises that “the catastrophic deterioration of diocesan funds . . . is a serious impediment to all the Church of England’s strategic outcomes, particularly the revitalisation of the parish system.”
In an email to diocesan colleagues, the Bishops write that the aim is “to acquire sustained annual funding from the Church Commissioners’ income with a view to eliminate the present and deteriorating picture of diocesan deficits and to enable reasonable investment in diocesan growth led by the local expertise of dioceses and their parishes. . .
“If carried, it would apply the expertise that matters most, the local understanding of our people, our churches, our clergy, our parishes and our dioceses, to the deployment of funding.”
Ten dioceses have carried Synod motions an identical to the Hereford motion, and an additional two dioceses have raised supportive ones.
