Diocese ducks Transforming Mission finance questions - again
This time, it is Chairman of the Truro Diocesan Board of Finance Mike Sturgess who dodges the question presented at the September Diocesan Synod by Peter Holman representing Carnmarth North deanery.
Mike Sturgess's full response is below but questions remain. As yet, Mr Sturgess has not responded fully to key elements: his response is in italics. Key remaining questions re in bold.
1. As recommended in the report, we have been open about how we will use our reserves to fund mission initiatives in deaneries and parishes.
Could you please let us know which diocesan reserves are being used to fund TM initiatives? Where is this indicated in the TDBF 2021 accounts, please?
2. We have established a new board for change and renewal that will oversee the funding of TM churches, the mission funding for the other seven deaneries, and the use of the Lowest Income Community Fund. The new board includes three highly experienced external members whose remit is to provide scrutiny and challenge in respect of all these funding streams.
Who is on this board please and how will the board report on this ‘scrutiny and challenge’? Could you please also explain how the board was selected. What was the appointment process? Was it advertised?
3. Turning to Transforming Mission, which is just one of the three funding streams covered by the new board, there are three parts to the financing of the TM projects – the Church Commissioners’ SDF grant, the diocesan grant and the parish contribution. Reviewing the diocesan end of the financing makes no sense without understanding the parish financing. Considering my own church, Liskeard PCC’s accounts are freely available on the Charity Commission website, and go into some detail on the financial sustainability of the project.
We have downloaded Liskeard PCC’s accounts from the Charity Commissioners’ website – however we cannot see where the financial sustainability of the project is demonstrated. Could you please point us in the right direction and indicate in particular where actual (not projected) income from new worshippers is detailed? It appears that you are anticipating reduced income from new worshippers: could you please provide the numbers of projected and actual worshippers? This is - as you say - crucial to the financial success of the project.
Could you please, too, point us in the direction of the published accounts of the PCCs which oversee the other TM projects? e.g. We have searched for Camborne PCC without success: in fact members of Camborne PCC have told us that they do not have oversight - nor sight - of TM financial documents.
4. The question asks for a comparison of the current position with the specific targets and achievements of the TM projects as set out in their original Sustainability Plans. COVID has changed the environment in which churches now operate, and as you would expect the TM targets and achievements have been reviewed and updated to reflect that changed environment, and the Church Commissioners have accepted those changes. Reporting on the original targets would be meaningless.
A. Reporting on how diocesan reserves and Church Commissioners’ funds have been spent - and will be spent - is not a ‘meaningless’ exercise.
B. Given that you therefore implicitly accept that the projects have failed to meet their original TM targets, could you please put the revised operational plans in the public domain? Diocesan reserves are involved so the people of Cornwall do have the right to know.
Comments