Two press releases today:
Archbishops’ Council appoints Felicity Mitchell to lead next phase of Church safeguarding reforms
Rollout of safeguarding complaints process underway full text of this is copied below the fold
From the first release:
15 CommentsThe Archbishops’ Council has appointed Felicity Mitchell as Interim Non-Executive Chair of the Safeguarding Structures Programme Board with immediate effect.
Felicity is a qualified barrister who has worked for many years in the ombuds sector. She has served on the Programme Board since September 2025, having joined the Programme in July 2025. She has played a central role in supporting the vision for safeguarding reform, and more recently the design of a new independent safeguarding authority. In addition, she has advised the programme on a new unified safeguarding complaints process featuring local resolution and access to an independent safeguarding complaints body…
…Felicity follows Dame Christine Ryan, whose strategic vision presented to General Synod in February 2026 formed the basis of the development work over the past 12 months. Drawing on proposals developed independently by the Safeguarding Structures Programme Board, the Archbishops’ Council has approved the national rollout of a new complaints process and a detailed operating design for new safeguarding structures, including plans for an independent safeguarding authority to oversee Church safeguarding.
This autumn stakeholders will have opportunities to consider aspects of the detailed operating design, engage with the programme team, and meet the new Interim Chair.
Implementation of new safeguarding arrangements will happen in phases and will prioritise stability over speed to protect frontline capacity. The practical changes will be evaluated in real-world conditions and are likely to inform further refinements to the design over time. This iterative process will help to ensure that future legislation to make the arrangements mandatory is built on proven, robust practice…
More about Felicity Mitchell
Felicity qualified as a barrister and is currently an independent consultant working mainly in the ombudsman sector. From 2018 to 2023, she was Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education at the OIA, the ombuds scheme for higher education students in England and Wales. As Independent Adjudicator, Felicity led the OIA’s case-handling and outreach functions, including the development of the Good Practice Framework. She worked at the OIA for 19 years in various case-handling roles.
Felicity joined the Church of England Safeguarding Structures Programme in July 2025, joining the Programme Board in October 2025. She has co-chaired the Programme’s Policy and Assurance Advisory Group.
Felicity sits on the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales’ Advisory Panel, a non-statutory forum whose main role is to support the Ombudsman in providing leadership and good governance. She is the Independent Reviewer of Service Complaints for the Housing Ombudsman. She is an external member of the Academic Board of the University of Law.
Felicity is an active member of her local parish church, a trustee of a charity supporting women to become entrepreneurs in Uganda, and she volunteers for a local debt counselling charity.
Church of England press release 06/10/2026
Dame Christine Ryan is to step down from her role as independent Executive Chair of the Safeguarding Structures Programme Board.
A spokesperson for the Archbishops’ Council said:
“We thank Dame Christine Ryan for her contribution to advancing our commitment to independent Church safeguarding. Under her direction as Executive Chair of the Safeguarding Structures Programme Board, we have established a clear vision and much of the detailed design for a new safeguarding structure built on greater independence, accountability, and consistency. This blueprint, subject to final approval, details how the organisation intends to operate in the future.
“The Church of England remains committed to delivering greater independence in safeguarding. The Programme Board was set up to deliver this work, creating a trusted and sustainable safeguarding system that has the confidence of victims and survivors as well as the public and regulators.
“The Programme Board will now continue this important work at pace. It remains on target to meet the key programme milestones for 2026, including launching a standardised complaints process by the end of the year. The transition to the new arrangements will take place in a careful, measured way to ensure there is no impact on day-to-day safeguarding delivery as we continue to strengthen Church safeguarding.”
Church Times news report: Dame Christine Ryan to step down from Safeguarding Structures Programme Board
16 CommentsWe reported in April that the Bishop of Salisbury had stepped back from ministry. The Church of England has now issued the following press release.
Clergy Discipline complaints against Bishop of Salisbury
07/09/2026
An investigation into allegations of financial misconduct by the Bishop of Salisbury Stephen Lake has concluded. A disciplinary complaint under the Clergy Discipline Measure has now been brought against him.
Subsequent to these allegations, concerns relating to Bishop Stephen’s conduct were raised with the National Safeguarding Team. These have been taken very seriously and responded to according to House of Bishops Code of Practice. A second and separate disciplinary complaint under the Clergy Discipline Measure has been brought against Bishop Stephen in relation to these concerns.
Bishop Stephen remains stepped back from ministry.
If this statement causes distress, support is available through the independent Safe Spaces helpline on 0300 303 1056 or visit safespacesenglandandwales.org.uk.
Alternatively, you may wish to contact the diocesan safeguarding team in your area or the National Safeguarding Team at safeguarding@churchofengland.org.
Other support services are also available.
37 CommentsThe Church Times reports: Campaigners call for removal of senior church officers ‘resisting’ safeguarding reforms
THE senior church officers who, according to an INEQE review, are resisting safeguarding reforms, must be “removed from influence”, a group of campaigners have told the Archbishops.
The letter, sent on Sunday and signed by 20 people — including both complainants and respondents in safeguarding cases — calls for an “independent urgent review” of safeguarding in the Church…
The letter described in this article can be read in full here.
45 CommentsThe Ineqe Safeguarding Group has released its Second Annual Report covering the Independent Safeguarding Audits of the Church of England.
There is a covering statement from the Lead Auditor, Jim Gamble. This is copied in full below the fold.
The Church Times has published this news article: Church of England safeguarding progress being resisted at high level, says INEQE
The full report can be downloaded from here. Two paragraphs from the Foreword:
…In last year’s annual report, we expressed concern that some areas were delaying the adoption of recommendations, choosing instead to wait for the outcome of the Future of Church Safeguarding Report. We warned then that risk does not pause, meaning safeguarding cannot wait. A year later, only the excuse has changed: auditors now hear that some are waiting for the outcome of the Safeguarding Structures Programme. I wonder what we will hear next year, but our core message remains the same: ignoring evidence-based recommendations invites risk. While it makes sense to wait for decisions on wider structural issues beyond parish and diocesan operational delivery, stalling on the reconfiguration of frontline teams makes no sense. Furthermore, the audit identified no evidence that would justify delaying operationally independent Directors of Safeguarding covering dioceses and cathedrals.
Crucially, the primary inhibitors of progress do not stem from senior clergy, most of whom demonstrate a genuine desire for change. Instead, they are structural and, in certain cases, institutional. They arise from
a small group of influential senior officers at the diocesan level and certain individuals within the national Church. This resistance manifests in unhelpful and frustrating ways, such as a readiness to hide behind exceptionalism, canon law, tradition, and procedural defensiveness. It is evident in the pushback against recommendations designed to secure the operational independence of safeguarding (including the Director of Safeguarding role), in challenges to the scope of the audits, and in unresolved conflicts of interest, specifically, where those advising the Church as an institution are simultaneously expected to provide ‘safeguarding-first’ advice. Though those responsible are few in number, their impact is disproportionately significant, and this must be addressed…
Updated 7 July and 8 July
Eighty-two members of the General Synod have written to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York asking why a fringe event and exhibition space at the July 2026 Synod have been approved. The letter asks the Archbishops to exercise their discretionary powers as Presidents to uphold the Church’s safeguarding guidance and the ethos of the Church of England.
The announcement of the fringe event can be seen here.
The text of the letter is published at Unadulterated Love: Letter to Archbishops objecting to Synod event in support of “Conversion Therapy” and is copied in full below the fold.
Robert Thompson has written a further reflection on this issue, which is published at ViaMedia.News: The Body We Are Becoming: Ecclesiology, Safeguarding and the Common Life of General Synod
Update 7 July
The Telegraph reports:
A Church of England spokesman said: “A General Synod member has applied to host a Synod fringe meeting and related public display on ‘sexual identity transformation’ at the forthcoming General Synod meeting at the University of York. The organiser has made clear both will challenge the principles of a ban on conversion practices.
“Following careful consideration, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York have informed the Synod member that their fringe meeting, as a private discussion for Synod members and invited guests, may go ahead as planned, but has declined permission for the associated stand and public display.
“In 2017, the General Synod voted, by a large majority, in favour of a ban on conversion practices. A publicly visible display would act as a public statement contrary to that stated position and is not appropriate in the circumstances.”
Update 8 July
In the archbishops’ letter to those who wrote to them about this, they also say:
“The University of York have made certain requests in relation to the meeting. If the meeting is to take place, the organiser will need to meet these requests which concern the name of the event, the display of signage and a disclaimer.”
The Church of England yesterday published its final report on the recommendations of the Makin Review and the work of the Task and Finish Group. In addition to the report there was a press release, which is copied below.
Final report published on response to Makin recommendations
23/06/2026
The Church of England has today published its final report on the recommendations of the Makin Review and the work of the Task and Finish Group, including updates on actions in response to the independent review into the abuse carried out by John Smyth. (more…)
53 Comments5 May press release: Independent audit report of the National Safeguarding Team
The first independent audit of the Church of England’s National Safeguarding Team (NST) has been published today.
The audit was carried out by the INEQE Safeguarding Group and commissioned by the Archbishops’ Council, following a recommendation from the National Director of Safeguarding. It assesses the work of the NST against the National Safeguarding Standards.
The report highlights areas of good practice as well as identifying 66 recommendations for further improvement. Some of these relate to the wider Church’s safeguarding structures, while others are specific to the NST….
You can read the full report here. It’s 142 pages long, and most of the 66 detailed recommendations relate specifically to the way the NST is currently organised (although that structure is not explained) and to the way it carries out its work.
There is a report in the Church Times: NST audit makes recommendations to expand Church’s national safeguarding capacity
…The audit has been conducted in parallel with work to establish, with the General Synod‘s backing, a new independent safeguarding authority into which the NST’s functions will be subsumed (News, 24 April). This evolution is one that INEQE “fully supports”, the audit says.
“The primary function of this new governance body must be to hold those operationally responsible for the delivery of safeguarding to account.”
Against this backdrop, a number of the audit’s recommendations are designed to deliver “immediate improvements as an interim measure under current structures”. These include a restructure to establish a secretariat, including a compliance unit; a “specialist safeguarding legal advisor to navigate the Church’s complex safeguarding landscape”; and an expanded data analysis, research, and evaluation unit (DARE). “Victim and survivor participation and engagement” would become a “dedicated service area”.
No costing or calculations on staffing are included…
See earlier TA article about the plans for the new independent safeguarding authority.
4 CommentsThe Church Times reports: Safeguarding body consults on new national organisation. Curiously, there is not (yet?) any Church of England official press release. Digging down into the Safeguarding section of the CofE website, I eventually found this page:
New Safeguarding Authority Design Consultation which in turn leads to these pages
As the first page explains:
In a joint message for the consultation, the Independent Executive Chair, Dame Christine Ryan, and the Deputy Lead Bishop for Safeguarding, Bishop Joanne Grenfell, write:
“Following General Synod’s overwhelming support for our strategic plans to rebuild trust and deliver professional, independent safeguarding across the Church, the work to translate that vision into a detailed, structured programme of change is well underway.
“At the heart of these reforms is the creation of a new national safeguarding organisation that will operate independently of Church hierarchy, governed by a majority-independent Board. This consultation seeks your views on the detailed design of this organisation, referred to in the consultation as the “Authority”.
“Whether you are a survivor, a parish volunteer, a safeguarding professional, a Church officer, or a member of the wider public, your perspective will help us refine these proposals. Your feedback and viewpoints are essential and will help ensure the proposals are robust, sustainable, and fit for purpose.”
And there is further information after that, and continuing on the second page.
I encourage all TA readers to study these proposals.
14 CommentsThis letter was sent to all General Synod members on 13 March:
National Church Governance – update for General Synod Members – 13 March 2026. The full text is copied below the fold.
There is a news story about this in the Church Times today, 20 March:
Plans to reform Church of England structures ‘not expedient’ says Ecclesiastical Committee
There are numerous links to related documents here.
17 CommentsAnthony Pierce was Bishop of Swansea & Brecon between 1999 and 2008. He was jailed for four years in March last year after admitting separate sexual offences against a boy aged under 16, committed between 1985 and 1990, when he was a parish priest in the West Cross area of Swansea. The Church in Wales has published the findings of a detailed review into the way in which he was appointed to senior church roles in the 1990s despite senior clergy knowing of sexual abuse allegations against him.
There is a press release.
The full text of the review is here.
There was also a Disciplinary Tribunal: its Decision is available here.
There has been some coverage of this in the media:
BBC: Child sex abuse allegations covered up by Church in Wales for decades, report reveals
Church Times: Review confirms first episcopal deposition in Church in Wales
26 CommentsDavid Holdsworth, the Chief Executive of the Charity Commission, has written a letter to the editor of the Church Times, responding to Andrew Brown’s column of 30 January Viewpoint with Andrew Brown: When everything is ‘safeguarding’ no one is safe.
…Andrew Brown appears to doubt (Viewpoint, 30 January) that some bishops consider that their diocesan boards of finance are ultimately responsible for ensuring the proper handling of safeguarding concerns of which diocesan officers or trustees are made aware.
That misunderstanding is precisely the concern that the Charity Commission raised in its recent regulatory decisions regarding the dioceses of Chelmsford and Liverpool, where trustees were seemingly not aware of their duties and were not appraised to any extent about allegations made against an influential member of the clergy with a leadership role in their region.
Whether an investigation is labelled by the Church as conduct or safeguarding is rather beside the point: diocesan trustees — just like PCC members — have a duty to take reasonable steps to keep safe from harm all who come into contact with their charity…
The full text of his letter is here.
There is also a related letter (scroll down) from Gavin Drake.
19 CommentsThe latest proposal for reforming Church of England safeguarding structures is contained in this document
which is due to be considered on Wednesday 11 February at 2.00 pm. Its Executive Summary reads:
In February 2025 the General Synod voted decisively for greater independence in the Church of England’s management of safeguarding. This report sets out the work that has been done since then to turn this decision into reality and, in particular, to deliver change at pace. It includes the following.
- A vision for a new charity, provisionally named as the Independent Safeguarding Authority. This charity will be an operationally independent organisation, led by a majority-independent non-executive Board. Executive functions of the charity will be led by a Chief Safeguarding Officer, whose operational safeguarding responsibilities will be a protected function of the charity and not subject to Board discussion or determination.
- A plan for a new, standardised complaints handling process comprising:
- A standard mandatory process for each Diocesan Board of Finance and other relevant Church bodies to follow; and
- A national external ombudsman-style body to provide resolution of complaints after processes within Church bodies have been exhausted.
The General Synod is asked to welcome this update, endorse the direction of travel set out in it and look forward to considering detailed proposals in futures Groups of Sessions.
Gavin Drake has written a comprehensive briefing paper (linked below) and a shorter blog which we linked to earlier today in our previous Opinion article. I found his analysis very helpful, and recommend its reading in full.
Blog: Delay and control: the problems with the Archbishops’ Council’s safeguarding plans
Briefing: The Church of England and independent safeguarding: why GS 2429 falls short
This briefing examines the Archbishops’ Council’s latest proposals for independent safeguarding, set out in GS 2429, and assesses them against the commitments, expectations, and regulatory requirements that have accumulated since the collapse of the Independent Safeguarding Board and the commissioning of the Jay and Wilkinson reviews.
Its focus is narrower and more fundamental. It is not an assessment of the diligence, competence, or good faith of safeguarding professionals. Instead, it asks whether the governance and accountability model now proposed is capable of delivering genuinely independent safeguarding in practice, or whether it preserves institutional control behind the language of reform. In that sense, GS 2429 is not merely a technical plan but a test of whether the Church is prepared to accept external constraint and independent authority as the price of restoring trust.
GS 2429 must be understood not as an isolated policy document but as part of a long chain of commitments and failures. IICSA, the creation and collapse of the ISB, Parliamentary scrutiny, the commissioning of Professor Alexis Jay, and the Charity Commission’s intervention have progressively narrowed the scope for delay. The question is no longer whether the Church intends to improve safeguarding, but whether it will do so in a way that transfers power and accountability away from the structures that have repeatedly failed victims and survivors…
Gavin refers repeatedly to the original report by Alexis Jay which recommended a system of total independence. This report is still available on the Church of England website but its annex of legal advice is not. For those interested here is a copy.
Updated Saturday 7 February
The Church Times recently reported: President of Tribunals finds no case to answer for Archbishop of York in David Tudor case.
The full decision by Sir Stephen Males is here. (Also his supplementary decision on publication.)
In response the Archbishop of York issued this statement.
This is not the only outstanding process relating to the David Tudor case. As Gavin Drake explains:
The Church of England is currently engaged in two distinct processes arising from the David Tudor case. One is a disciplinary complaint brought under the Clergy Discipline Measure against the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, which was halted at a preliminary stage by the President of Tribunals under section 17 of the Measure. The other is a national, independent Safeguarding Practice Review, still ongoing, examining the Church’s handling of the case over many years and intended to identify learning to improve safeguarding practice and outcomes for victims and survivors.
The Safeguarding Practice Review (SPR) was commissioned by the National Safeguarding Team and the dioceses of Chelmsford and Southwark to examine the Church’s handling of the David Tudor case over many years. Its terms of reference make clear that Stephen Cottrell’s actions will be part of the review. The review began work in March 2025 and was originally expected to conclude within six months. A final call for evidence was issued in September 2025, after that initial timetable had already elapsed, and in November the Church announced a further delay, citing new police information.
The review is now expected to report in early 2026. Its stated purpose is not to re-litigate disciplinary findings, but to identify learning, assess safeguarding practice and decision-making, and improve outcomes for victims and survivors. At the time the Archbishop issued his statement, this review was ongoing and unfinished.
Gavin has further commentary on this.
He also has criticism of the president’s decision and of the archbishop’s statement over here and also here.
Update
Ian Paul has also written about this: Do we have safeguarding leadership in the Church of England? This article, like Gavin’s, is also worth reading in full.
19 CommentsUpdated Monday
St Albans diocese recently (19 January) announced a grant of £2.3 million from the Strategic Mission and Ministry Investment Board (SMMIB): £2.3m awarded to equip leaders and revitalise churches in our diocese and there are links from that page to further details about this.
The Church Times reported this on 22 January: St Albans diocese plans to put faith and funding in Soul Survivor.
This report, and in particular the headline, provoked negative reactions from many people who were shocked that apparently Soul Survivor was to benefit in some way as part of this. The diocese then issued on 23 January a “clarification”, sent by email to all diocesan clergy and readers, the full text of which is copied here below the fold. (At the time of writing it has not appeared on the diocesan website.)
Updates
Religion Media Centre has a report (scroll down) : Soul Survivor named ‘engine of mission’ despite safeguarding scandal, which includes a link to the diocesan proposal for funding: DS-25-11v.2 – SMMIB Funding Application
Media coverage:
Telegraph Church at centre of abuse scandal ‘rewarded’ with new role and Church of England to overhaul internships after Soul Survivor abuse scandal
Watford Observer C of E to tighten rules after Soul Survivor Watford scandal
Premier Christian News Church of England to revise mission rules to avoid another Soul Survivor
22 CommentsCharity Commission press release
Regulator issues Official Warnings to two Church of England Dioceses
The Charity Commission has taken regulatory action against and over failures to handle safeguarding allegations in line with the Commission’s guidance and trustee duties.
The Commission’s definition of safeguarding includes taking reasonable steps to protect from harm all those who come into contact with a charity.
The charities, which have purposes to assist and promote the work of the Church of England in the Dioceses of Liverpool and Chelmsford respectively, have both been issued with Official Warnings and advice on how to improve their practice for the future…
The full text of the press release continues below the fold.
Each diocese has issued a statement in response:
Last week Chanel 4 broadcast a two-part documentary See No Evil about serial abuser John Smyth. It can be viewed online here, and there is this introduction: Serial abuser John Smyth’s wife speaks for first time in Channel 4 documentary. It has attracted much press interest.
Madeleine Davies Church Times ‘I am so ashamed’ says John Smyth’s widow in Channel 4 documentary
Jayne Manfredi Church Times TV review: See No Evil
Tim Wyatt Premier Christianity See No Evil: This Channel 4 documentary paints John Smyth’s family as his first victims
Barbara Ellen The Observer See No Evil – a too painful story of child abuse and the Church
Tola Mbakwe Premier Christian News ‘I never confused my dad with God’: John Smyth’s daughter speaks about faith and survival ahead of new doc
Fiona Lamdin and Bea Swallow BBC News ‘My dad abused 130 boys – learning the truth was horrifying’
The Church of England issued this press release Statement on Smyth documentary.
On a related matter there is this report in the Church Times.
63 CommentsMadeleine Davies Church Times Bishop ‘correct’ not to act against vicar concerning handling of Smyth reports, tribunal rules
Updated 12 December
This matter was first reported by Donna Birrell on Premier Christian News: Exclusive: Abuse survivor and former staff member say Church treatment pushed them to the brink. Her report is worth reading in full but here’s an excerpt.
The case of Survivor N
Survivor N’s case began more than a decade ago when he first reported accusations of abuse against a priest in the Diocese of London.
Premier has seen evidence that when he filed a complaint against the accused priest, Rt Rev Sarah Mullally as Bishop of London, contravened the Clergy Discipline Measure code of practice by sending a confidential email about the allegations directly to the priest concerned, outside of the CDM process. She also wrote to him that the claims were “unsubstantiated”.
Survivor N says he was then subjected to what he describes as a “systematic campaign of harassment and retribution as a CDM complainant”.
He later filed a formal complaint against Bishop Mullally for her handling of the case. In March 2020, in a letter seen by Premier, the then Bishop at Lambeth acknowledged receipt of the complaint. But 16 months later, when his lawyers requested an update, the same Bishop at Lambeth stated that the complaint had only just been received by Lambeth Palace.
A senior psychiatrist told Premier that during those 16 months, Survivor N’s mental health deteriorated sharply.
To this day, despite repeated requests from his solicitors, Survivor N says he has not received a formal response.
Today, the Church of England has issued two statements:
Lambeth Palace statement:
The provincial registrar for Canterbury has written to an individual – known as ‘N’ – to clarify and outline next steps in relation to a complaint the individual initially submitted in 2020 against the Bishop of London under the Clergy Discipline Measure.
Due to administrative errors and an incorrect assumption about the individual’s wishes, the complaint was not taken forward or appropriately followed up. The Bishop of London was unaware of the matter, as the process never reached the stage at which she would have been informed of the complaint or its contents.
The provincial registrar has apologised to those involved and urgent arrangements are now being made for the complaint to be considered according to the relevant statutory process.
The Bishop of London, Dame Sarah Mullally, said:
“N has been let down by the processes of the Church of England. While his abuse allegations against a member of clergy were fully dealt with by the Diocese of London, it is clear that a different complaint he subsequently made against me personally in 2020 was not properly dealt with.
“I am seeking assurance that processes have been strengthened to ensure any complaint that comes into Lambeth Palace is responded to in a timely and satisfactory manner.
“The Church’s processes have to change, both for complainants, and for the clergy who are the subject of complaints. Today, I am one of those clergy. As Archbishop of Canterbury, I will do everything in my power to bring about much needed and overdue reform. We must have trust in our systems, or else we cannot expect others to put their trust in us.”
Update 12 December
Donna Birrell has a further report: Church forced to revisit Mullally case as survivor raises concerns over contradicting evidence in its response which again I recommend reading in full. Another excerpt:
68 CommentsLambeth Palace told Premier that the reason N’s complaint hadn’t been followed up was because additional documents hadn’t been provided after July 2021 and the provincial registrar had believed N had decided not to proceed with the matter.
However, Premier has seen evidence that two bundles of documents dated 22nd August 2021 were sent to Lambeth Palace as well as to the ‘Designated Officer at the Church of England Legal Office’. A copy of the bundle was also sent to the President of Tribunals on the same date. They were all marked as having been delivered.
Lambeth Palace has told Premier that this hard copy documentation had previously been received from N in electronic form the previous month. However N disputes this and said several bundles were sent in August 2021 including several witness statements which had not previously been sent via email. Lambeth Palace told Premier that the Office of the President of Tribunals has no record of receiving anything from the complainant in August or September 2021.
The first time N learned that the CDM against Sarah Mullally hadn’t progressed and was no longer outstanding, was when he was told by Premier Christian News earlier this month.
The Charity Commission has issued this press release:
Church of England charity must rapidly accelerate safeguarding reforms
The Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England must rapidly accelerate the delivery of safeguarding improvements and close gaps in its approach to handling complaints, the charity regulator has warned.
The Charity Commission has set an expectation that the Archbishops’ Council should implement independent safeguarding structures as endorsed by the Church’s General Synod in February 2025 within 18 months from now – a year sooner than current plans indicate – and in the meantime, put robust interim measures in place to keep people safe.
The expectation is part of a Regulatory Action Plan issued to the Archbishops’ Council, a registered charity whose objects are to co-ordinate, promote, aid and further the work and mission of the Church of England. It follows the Commission engaging with the charity over whether its trustees are taking sufficient steps to address the safeguarding concerns and implement recommended changes raised in a number of safeguarding reviews…
….In summary, the Commission has found that:
- there is insufficient urgency and pace in implementing responses to past safeguarding reviews, and the current approach to doing so is fragmented and overly complex. For example, the Council’s current timescale of 2028 to pass the necessary legislation to implement independent safeguarding is too slow, representing a four year gap since the publication of the Jay Review
- currently the Church does not treat allegations of abuse from an adult not assessed to be “vulnerable” as a safeguarding allegation. The Commission’s guidance is clear that trustees must take reasonable steps to protect from harm all people who come into contact with their charity
To which the Church of England has responded:
Archbishops’ Council response to Charity Commission case review
24 CommentsThe Church of England has issued a press release (copied below) to mark the first anniversary of the publication of the Makin Review.
Progress update following publication of Makin Review
04/11/2025
Statement from lead safeguarding bishops Joanne Grenfell and Robert Springett, who chaired the Makin Task and Finish Group
“This week, we mark the first anniversary of the publication of the Makin Review and acknowledge again the deep harm caused by the abuse committed by John Smyth and the failures in the Church’s response.
“We are profoundly sorry for the ways in which the Church failed to protect children and vulnerable adults and for the lasting impact of those failures. Over the past year, we have continued to listen to survivors, offer them support and respond to the recommendations and observations in the independent learning lessons review. These came immediately to the National Safeguarding Steering Group and have continued to be scrutinised and acted on over the year, with implementation now well underway. Survivors are a key part of this work.
“Our commitment is clear: to create a Church that is safe for all, where safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility, and where survivors’ voices inform our decisions. We know this process will require humility, accountability, and sustained action.
“We want to thank all, particularly those with lived experience, who continue to hold us to account and shape the improvements that are needed. We are committed to transparency, continued progress, and lasting change.”
The National Safeguarding Steering Group has published a paper that will be presented to General Synod in February, setting out progress on the Makin Review recommendations and next steps.
The paper details final approval of the majority of the recommendations from the Makin Review. Of the recommendations, 24 are accepted fully and three in part. The Steering Group will continue to scrutinise the implementation of all the recommendations to support rapid and continuous improvement of safeguarding practice across the whole Church.
This paper updates the work that has gone on during the past year to implement recommendations from the Makin Review.
A new Code of Practice is in place which places anyone working or volunteering in a church under a legal duty to report any safeguarding concern they are made aware of. The Code specifies the process and timescales for reporting. Failure to comply with the Code can result in disciplinary action.
The National Safeguarding Team has sought to bring disciplinary proceedings against 11 members of the clergy who were criticised in the review, eight of which are currently in progress. The Anglican Church of Southern Africa has undertaken and published its own report into the abuse that took place there.
The development of an independent scrutiny body is underway, which will provide external oversight of safeguarding practices within the Church and hold Church bodies to account with powers to require compliance. Alongside this, the strategic and operational independence of the National Safeguarding Team is being reviewed.
A programme of independent safeguarding audits of cathedrals and dioceses is already underway. So far 15 cathedrals and dioceses have been audited and had their reports published, with clear recommendations for action. The Church now has a set of National Safeguarding Standards which provide a framework that aids the consolidation, analysis and implementation of both the Makin recommendations and those from other reviews, including the Future of Church Safeguarding and from the independent audit programme.
Finding support
If you or anyone you are in contact with is affected by the publication of this report and would like to talk to someone independently, please call the Safe Spaces helpline on 0300 303 1056 or visit safespacesenglandandwales.org.uk.
Alternatively, you may wish to contact the diocesan safeguarding team in your area or the National Safeguarding Team at safeguarding@churchofengland.org.
There are also other support services available.
35 Comments