š Listed Places of Worship Scheme
Westminster Hall
The parliamentary session focused on the future of the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme, which supports the maintenance of historic religious buildings across the UK. MPs from various parties urged the government to extend the scheme beyond its March 2025 expiry, highlighting its importance to local communities and the preservation of national heritage. The Minister announced that the scheme would continue into 2025-26 with a reduced budget of Ā£23 million and a cap of Ā£25,000 per claim, prompting concerns about the adequacy of funding for essential repairs. The debate underscored the schemeās role in supporting not only religious activities but also vital community services provided by these historic sites.
Summary
-
Purpose of the Debate: The debate focused on the future of the Listed Places of Worship Scheme, which helps listed places of worship reclaim VAT on repair works.
-
Scheme Details: The scheme supports around 20,000 listed religious buildings across the UK, including churches, cathedrals, chapels, synagogues, mosques, and temples. It refunds the full amount of VAT spent on repairs and improvements.
-
Funding Concerns: The schemeās current budget is approximately Ā£30 million per year and is set to end on 31 March 2025. The lack of a commitment to extend or replace it beyond this date has caused concern.
-
Economic and Social Importance: Members of Parliament emphasized the significant economic and social value of these buildings, citing their roles in community activities, tourism, and the arts. One study suggested that these places of worship contribute £2.4 billion annually to society.
-
Examples from Constituencies: MPs shared stories from their constituencies, highlighting how specific churches rely on the scheme to fund repairs and continue community services. Projects mentioned included roof repairs, accessibility improvements, and community hub developments.
-
Call for Permanent Support: Many MPs urged for the scheme to be extended beyond 2025, and some advocated for its permanent establishment to ensure long-term support for repair projects that can take years to complete.
-
Ministerās Announcement: The Minister for Creative Industries, Arts and Tourism announced that the scheme would continue into 2025-26 with a reduced budget of Ā£23 million. A cap of Ā£25,000 per year per listed place of worship was introduced.
-
Response to the Announcement: While the extension was welcomed, some MPs expressed concern over the reduced funding and continued to push for a more permanent and adequately funded solution to support these vital community assets.
Divisiveness
The session exhibited minimal to no disagreement among the participants. Throughout the debate, there was a strong consensus on the need to continue and possibly expand the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme. Members from various parties, including Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats, and others, all spoke in favor of the schemeās continuation and highlighted its importance in preserving cultural, spiritual, and community assets. The primary focus was on the challenges faced by churches and other places of worship in maintaining their historic buildings, and the beneficial role the scheme has in mitigating those challenges.
Examples of this unanimity include: - Repeated endorsements from Members across different constituencies and political affiliations stressing the schemeās importance. - The mention of specific cases where the scheme had been beneficial, contributing to the overall argument for its continuation without any voiced opposition. - The Minister, Chris Bryant, acknowledging the collective sentiment by announcing the continuation of the scheme for the fiscal year 2025-26, albeit with a budget reduction. - A call from the Member for Bromsgrove, Bradley Thomas, to consider making the scheme permanent, showing the unity in purpose but no contention on the existing proposal to extend the scheme.
The only point that could be considered slightly contentious was the reduction in the schemeās budget, raised by the Member for Taunton and Wellington, Gideon Amos. However, this was more of an inquiry for clarification rather than a dispute on the schemeās continuation itself. As such, the session cannot be characterized as having disagreement, but rather a focused discussion on the enhancement and necessity of the scheme.