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
The Church of England urgently needs a change in culture. Not all abuse is sexual or financial. What may seem minor to an outsider can be devastating to the victim. Are theological students taught who to show love and care for their flock ? I doubt it very much. Not all abuse warrants a formal legal process but in my experience if there is no risk of litigation the Church of England doesn’t care.
I note the Content & it is without comment? ‘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.’ What confidence of Survivors when even bishops who speak out are silenced :+Birkenhead & Newcastle. All that is witnessed is obsfucation and yet more changes of leadership! Clearly, the CofE doesn’t like what it’s being told to do! And yes please the minute we have an explanation as to why Dame Christine has stepped down : we may as… Read more »
Or, that they made it impossible for her to carry out her task with professionalism and integrity.
This is significant news and another blow to survivors’ trust. Dame Christine’s appointment was, as I understand it, for three years to help deliver the new safeguarding structures and charities Synod has approved. She has served for one year of three. It is striking coming just a few months after the INEQE safeguarding audit of 2025 on the Church of England published in late July 2026. https://churchofengland.blob.core.windows.net/annual-report/2025/INEQE-CofE-independent-safeguarding-audits-annual-report-2025.pdf The INEQE Audit said significant progress in safeguarding was being undermined by resistance from ‘senior officers’. The Church Times, quoting the report said: ‘But progress overall is being stalled, not by senior clergy,… Read more »
Someone needs to ask a question in the House of Commons or through the ‘speaker’ to find out the most appropriate channel since the Church of England is established by English Law for a ‘question’ to be asked in the House. Perhaps Judith with others might be able to frame a Question in such a way to ensure 100% transparency why Dame Christine stepped down. The answers need to be given so that victims and survivors,as far as possible, have a high degree of confidence the new emerging Safeguarding Charity will in time prove to have a ‘different culture’ and… Read more »
This is exactly the kind of reason that we could do with a Synod Scrutiny Committee such as would have been created under the Governance Measure. Apparently the Ecclesiastical Committee would like us to get safeguarding sorted, but it has held up a piece of legislation which could have directed efforts towards making that change more effectively. At present there will be limited options for a new Synod to have any meaningful impact.
It must be for consideration whether this resignation (and its as yet unknown underlying causes) amounts to a ‘serious incident’ for Charity Commission reporting purposes. A serious incident for a UK charity involves an adverse event causing or risking significant harm to individuals, financial or asset losses, property damage, or harm to the charity’s reputation and work. I am not a lawyer, but this definition, if correct, points to the threshold being met, and the need for a report. This might be the beginning of the end for the safeguarding reforms, and the scarcely disguised attempt by the Church of… Read more »
In my experience, self-reporting obligations look good on paper but most organisations ignore them. And get away with doing so. Regulators do not proactively enforce the obligation- especially as if it is not reported they don’t know about it anyway.
Your last sentence is the most common problem, in my experience of regulation. Many regulators don’t act against a failure to report until it is coupled with either public scandal or other allegations against the body/person. At that point failure to report is thrown into the mix of the allegations put to them in a kind of ‘kitchen sink’ approach to finding something against them.
Well, they may ignore the responsibilities, but they then will be in breach of s169 Charities Act 2011, assuming they not believe the incident was reportable. If I was a member of the Archbishops’ Council, which mercifully I am not, I would regard it as a resignation issue if no report was made.
You may be right, Anthony. But there is a world of difference between those who resign on principle, and then make a public statement about why they resigned. And those others, perhaps the majority, who walk away in despair but who (for various reasons) keep the details to themselves.
Perhaps the transparency is as important as the resignation. Resigning but keeping the details secret risks changing nothing.
Here we go again. The only thing that surprises me about this is that credible professionals with a reputation in the field are still willing to try with this cowboy outfit. I’m grateful they are, but I know I would find more promising places to use my skills and expertise if I was in their position.
I do sometimes wonder if people without a C of E background who accept posts in the C of E realise what they are letting themselves in for. The mismatch between rhetoric and reality must come as a shock to the system.
I also suspect that it will be difficult to find a replacement. Given that the last post holder left after a year (whatever the reason), any potential candidates will be doing their due diligence with especial care.
Classic turgid press release from CofE.
My cynical reading is that Dame Christine Ryan still wanted independent safeguarding, but CofE Cabal is effectively stalling everything while claiming cosmetic aim of ‘greater’ independence. As a result she has given up, but under terms of employment has not been able to say why.
Of course it could all be rosey in the wood shed, and the sunlit uplands await ……
For all its grandiloquent talk the CofE is clearly not serious about safeguarding. It can’t retain senior staff in the field and repeatedly makes promises it fails to deliver on. The bishops are happy with the fig leaf that they are in charge, but as the INEQE report shows the bishops’ paid enforcers are not willing to allow the changes a plethora of inquiries and reports have called for. My own opinion is that the bishops believe the church’s existential crisis trumps absolutely everything else. Paradoxically its lack of congruence on safeguarding matters only hastens its demise.
IICSA, Atkinson, Munn, Jasvinder, Reeves, Wilkinson, Professor Jay, Makin, INEQE, Charity Commission, now Christine Ryan. How many times does the CofE have to be told what to do to bring true independence ? How many more will be ignored, then resign or get sacked ? It is just unbelievable