Synod will examine the way forward on safeguarding

FOUR models for the future of safeguarding the Church of England will be presented to the General Synod when it meets next month, but members will not yet have the chance to vote on the way forward.

Instead, it was revealed yesterday, members will be asked to vote on further analysis of the proposals, in time for next February’s group of sessions.

In February this year, Synod members voted in favor of a consultation (News, March 1) after a report by Professor Alexis Jay recommended the creation of two new independent bodies: one to provide services backup and the other to examine this work (News, February 23).

Along with Update Document GS 2364, the results of a survey seeking responses to Professor Jay’s report were released Thursday afternoon.

THE Church times reported late last month that the findings indicated strong opposition among senior clergy and church protection staff to a model in which day-to-day protection would be carried out by an independent body (News, May 31) . However, there was widespread support for the creation of a body to provide independent oversight of safeguarding work.

Models reflecting these options are presented in GS 2364, and a motion will be debated on July 8 calling for their “detailed analysis.”

A “core” model outlined in the document would not involve any major structural reorganization, but would continue to work to implement the recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) – a process chaired by Professor Jay .

Models two and three propose variations of an independent review of safeguarding work, with model three incorporating a new external body which would take responsibility for safeguarding records reaching a certain threshold.

The final model “closely follows the recommendations presented by Professor Jay,” the document states, and would create two new bodies.

The motion to be submitted to the Synod is as follows:

May this Synod thank the Response Group for its work, welcome the progress update presented in GS 2364, and note that comments identified concerns regarding:

1. Professor Jay’s recommendations on spiritual abuse and the definition of protection; And
2. The role of bishops in decision-making on safeguarding cases

request a detailed analysis of the options set out in the document to be undertaken for the February General Synod.