The 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…
Safeguarding Audits 2025 Annual Report.
Statement from Jim Gamble QPM, Lead Auditor
This annual report draws together two years of audit evidence, and its message is clear: the Church is on a positive trajectory. Yet once again we publish at a time of significant uncertainty about the future structures of the Church of England. At the time of our 2024 report, the intention was to implement the recommendations of Alexis Jay’s ‘Future of Church Safeguarding’ review. That has since been overtaken by the Safeguarding Structures Programme, whose outcome and direction remain, at the time of writing, unclear. This must be addressed urgently. The Church needs to set out the evidence that underpins its chosen path, and a firm timeline for moving beyond the current ambiguity. Real progress has been made; the last thing the wider Church now needs is drift. Whatever comes next must command the confidence of all stakeholders, and that confidence will be built on evidence, clarity and a meaningful timeline.
I hope the evidence-based findings of this report and its companion documents on choristers and on victims and survivors, highlighting both positive developments and critical obstacles, will inform the Church’s next steps. In my view, the Church must now demonstrate that it is learning: from the evidence of these audits, from its engagement with the Charity Commission, from listening to its frontline safeguarding teams and, above all, from the voices and experiences of victims and survivors.
Jim Gamble QPM
Lead Auditor
INEQE Safeguarding Group