Written evidence submitted by the
Diocese of Liverpool

Summary

The Diocese of Liverpool welcomes this opportunity to submit evidence in response the inquiry into Protecting Built Heritage

This summary is written as the response is over 3,000 words. The Diocese has set out the key challenges it believes are being faced by churches tasked with managing and protecting heritage buildings and assets. Those challenges are often driven by access to suitable funding streams and the reality that many churches survive on voluntary donations of time and money to secure their on-going care. In addition, we set out the wider social and community benefits that churches provide within their communities and the impacts on cuts to funding streams can have on these benefits.

What are the most significant challenges facing owners and operators of built heritage assets, and how are they affecting what those sites can offer?

Our churches are facing a number of challenges when it comes to protecting and enhancing their heritage. There are significant challenges with the availability and applicability of funding, the ability for churches to diversify and create new opportunities within their communities and capacity and capability challenges for those tasked with the day to day management of buildings.

Liverpool Diocese whole-heartedly endorses the Heritage Lottery definition that heritage “shapes us, inspires us, moves us; makes us who we are, brings us together for celebration & commemoration; helps us respect difference, share our stories and discover new ones; heritage is more than buildings, it is a feeling that connects us all”.

Clearly our heritage assets are much more than buildings, they help enhance our sense of identity, build stronger communities, overcoming instances where people live separate lives, connecting us all together.

Whilst this is an inspirational and aspirational definition, it also emphasises the scale and scope of challenge and opportunity in managing heritage assets. This is about buildings maintenance, management and running costs, but it is also about community engagement, partnership development, life-long education, working across public, private and voluntary sectors to strengthen our communities.

It is about developing our heritage assets to contribute to the visitor economy and tourism, in both urban and rural settings, unlocking new creative and performing arts programmes and enriching the curriculum for our schools and colleges, celebrating the silver economy as well as engaging children and young people through visits and safe digital media routes. In practical terms it is about sustaining our many community support programmes that tackle food poverty, financial debt, support people experiencing domestic abuse/violence, plus many other projects that tackle social isolation and contribute towards health and wellbeing.

If the Buildings Management challenge is huge and growing, the wider community, social and economic challenges are almost never-ending.

These challenges apply across the whole of Liverpool Diocese, but perhaps make the most difference in our more deprived neighbourhoods, post-industrial towns and post-war new towns, where faith-based heritage assets are often the only heritage assets around as well as the only community assets left. As the Church of England, we can still claim to have a supportive, positive presence in each neighbourhood – this is an absolutely unique offering, making us truly local, truly embedded within each neighbourhood, reflective of local aspirations and demonstrates our long-term commitment even where other amenities and services have long since disappeared.

The community, economic, social and heritage value of our buildings cannot be overstated – it is immense. In Liverpool Diocese this impact is well demonstrated in places like Wigan, Widnes, St Helens, Ormskirk, Skelmersdale, Warrington, Norris Green, Old Swan, Southport and Speke as well as our world-famous waterfront.

Faith based heritage assets played a huge role in standing up for peace on our streets in the face of rioting that followed the 2024 Southport killings. In this context it was the combination of church communities alongside our friends in mosques, synagogues, mandirs and gurdwara’s standing side by side that helped to demonstrate the unity that many civic leaders called for.

The funding scene for church buildings is tough. It’s acknowledged that competition for funding will always be great, there is only so much funding available, however having individual churches run by volunteers competing for funding against national institutions can seem like a David and Goliath like task. Many potential funders are reluctant to consider religious buildings irrespective of their role and significance within their communities, or even nationally, and those that do fund churches often have specific focus on location, age or architectural features. Put simply, the Grade II listed church in a tough urban area will often fall between the cracks.

People are a church’s greatest asset – whether they be the congregation at services, visitors to midweek community events or those who volunteer. Their diversity and collective passion is often what keeps the doors open and drives initiatives to secure and protect their buildings. However, they are volunteers and their passion, skills, financial and time contributions can naturally only stretch so far and when caring for a heritage building the challenges are often amplified. It is worth considering there are more Grade I listed buildings under the auspices of the Church of England than in the National Trust and English Heritage estates combined and most rely solely on their congregations for funding, maintenance and improvements.

For some congregations the challenge can often be seeing the wood for the trees in terms of allowing the church to fulfil its role as a place of worship and protecting its heritage whilst also making it a sustainable asset to the wider community. It is fair to say this challenge can often be exacerbated where responsibility has fallen on the same shoulders for many years, the view may be they are reluctant to change, but it is more often that they don’t know how to – as a Diocese we have, and will continue to, develop ways to support churches to seek new ways deliver mission, community benefit and heritage management, but increased national support and guidance is much needed.

What interventions are needed to prevent the managed decline of heritage assets on publicly-owned land?

The managed decline of church buildings and long-term trends on Sunday attendance can often be a self-perpetuating cycle fed by many of the challenges already highlighted – lack of funding, reliance on volunteers, lack of options to diversify.

The Diocese has welcomed many of the interventions made already – implementation of smaller funding streams and support officers from the Taylor Review, funding to allow Community Ownership of buildings to be a first option and changes to major funding streams such as the National Lottery Heritage Fund to consider the intricacies of churches.

However, more is required to provide options for intervention before it is too late. Improved funding and guidance on how places of worship can diversify and reclaim their position at the heart of their communities is needed. Access to funding as both places of worship and community is vital.

As a Diocese we have always sought to balance our obligations for our resources against the financial obligations and we have resisted the closure and sale of buildings unless absolutely necessary. When buildings have been closed we have always tried to retain buildings as places of worship or community, but this is often a slower and less financially attractive process with buildings in abeyance and deteriorating at a faster rate. Support in these situations to develop feasibility studies and community engagement for re-purposing would at least allow communities to have a proper choice before options for private development are considered.

Additionally, more ring-fenced support for church heritage in general would be welcomed to avoid the issues with intense competition for heritage funding against national institutions and would recognise the specific needs and challenges. Action in this area now will avoid far greater challenges in the future.

What can the Government do to make it easier for communities or local businesses to take ownership of historic buildings?

The Community Ownership Fund was an invaluable source of funding for securing local facilities and amenities to remain for their communities as it not only addressed the loss of the facility but also the realities of taking on a building that may have been in managed decline for some time. The fact it has been wound up is a major blow.

Provision for funding and support to allow communities to consider other options for buildings that may be lost to the community is crucial – without a clear vision and a sustainable plan for management and operation it’s likely a building may fall back into decline. Likewise, improved support for earlier intervention has the potential to halt decline and provide new opportunities before a building is facing closure or sale.

The development of the Land Restoration Trust (based in Liverpool Diocese) might provide one model to facilitate the transition and recycling of “surplus” church buildings into new community, social, business, or residential uses.  Launched in 2004, The Land Restoration Trust was piloted by English Partnerships, with Groundwork UK invited to form a joint a joint venture company. The concept was to create a new organisation that could take on the ownership and develop a long-term sustainable land management solution.

The Land Restoration Trust approach was initially tested on the National Coalfield Programme sites – sites restored by English Partnerships (HCA) and Regional Development Agencies through the National Coalfield Programme

This type of inter-agency model could unleash a new wave of community economic regeneration across some of England’s most deprived communities, and could do so in a very cost-effective manner. In Liverpool Diocese we could immediately offer a number of sites which fit this category such as Holy Trinity Parr Mount (Grade II listed).

We would be delighted to collaborate in setting up a pilot programme across Liverpool Diocese should there be any interest in testing and shaping this model.

How effective are the current funding and finance models for built heritage?

There is a breadth of potential funding and it is often a lifeline to churches with heritage buildings that need investment especially when combined with schemes like the Listed Places of Worship Grant Scheme (LPWS).

Recent changes to funding such as the National Lottery Heritage Fund to place greater onus on long term sustainability and encouraging professional support costs within bids will make a real change in the long-term, developing bids that will consider life after the funding has been spent.

There remain significant gaps in the funding and financing realm. Funding that acknowledges the challenges faced by churches, and other places of worship, in increasingly secular urban areas with high levels of depravation is crucial – not only is it often these churches filling the gaps left by reduced local authority services, but said communities have often grown around the church making it a key part of the local social history for church goers and non-church goers alike.

Funding that is specifically for development and fundraising services is severely lacking, many opportunities are lost by a lack of money to develop an idea into something that could become a bid or by a lack of capacity or skills to make applications.

Through funding released to the Diocese following the Taylor Review we have found there is a huge demand for lower levels of funding to complete small repairs, maintenance and improvements that don’t require complex application processes. With £180,000 of funding allocated we have been able to support the delivery of over £600,000 of work that will almost certainly preventing minor issues becoming major issues – a stitch in time in action.

What should long-term public funding for the sector look like?

As with work carried out on domestic property, it is important to recognise that public funding allocated to heritage assets is not just money being spent “out the door” and never to be seen again. Rather, it is an investment in the worth and value of the national estate of heritage assets, with every pound spent on maintenance and improvement helping to sustain and enhance the immeasurable value of these assets – financial value, but also community and social value.

The availability of national grant funding programmes alongside local fundraising and crowd-funding would be hugely beneficial. But the notion of investment in long term capital value might also lead to wider acceptance for access to finance via loans, or loan/grant mixes where heritage business models can be confident to cover repayment obligations.

What role does built heritage play in the regeneration of local areas and in contributing to economic growth and community identity?

Built heritage is often the part of a community’s identity that is not seen until it is gone. Churches play a huge role within their wider communities as focal points for many different people, not just the congregation, they are a physical and social landmark. Therefore, our buildings are crucial to addressing wider community, social and economic challenges

It needs to be acknowledged that our built heritage, and engagement with it, can generate considerable, less tangible benefits through volunteering, social engagement and activity that can improve general health and wellbeing. Or, through directly hosting wrap-around services such as breakfast clubs, after school care and food pantries. All of these elements ultimately reduce strain on other public services, allow greater employment freedom and improve community cohesion.

It follows that funding into the built heritage will multiply to wider community benefits that can ease funding strains elsewhere. As such, any cuts and constraints on funding schemes such as the LPWS will have potentially disastrous knock on disbenefits – VAT relief for a listed church is often also VAT relief for a food pantry, community café, youth and children’s work and mental health groups.

Consideration could be given to increased “means testing” for schemes such as the LPWS to target schemes that deliver in poorer areas or have a high community impact. In any event it needs to be acknowledged that a reduction in the current offer would have impacts beyond the church.

How can heritage buildings be supported to increase energy efficiency and contribute to the Government’s net zero targets?

The Church of England has taken a clear stance on net zero and tackling climate change, with our ambitious commitment to achieve this goal by 2030 making us a pioneer and prime candidate for early adoption of new technology and insulation/energy-saving measures. We also still have great civic convening power to encourage others to follow where we lead, but we need the LPWS benefits to seize this opportunity plus more support in grants for installing equipment.

There is a myriad of advice and guidance on how to make heritage buildings more energy efficient and to support net zero targets, but it is often confusing at best and contradictory at worst.

A dedicated framework for considering how heritage buildings can be adapted to become more energy efficient without impacting on their special character is needed. Although a one size fits all approach is not going to work, providing a better understanding of the range of options available will remove the barriers that such work is not possible or too expensive.

Likewise, a more unified approach to planning and approvals for energy efficiency measures on heritage buildings would serve to give more clarity on what is or is not achievable.

Support for running costs is also needed, particularly where churches have made the positive step away from fossil fuel use. Continuing to zero-rate VAT for solar installations and other low carbon heating technology & insulation measures for charities and grants for EV chargers will support development.

Overall, there is a huge opportunity to incentivise the charitable sector as a vehicle to pioneer and champion low carbon energy measures across community heritage assets. Again, we offer enormous capacity for multiplying the traction of any national policy measures at local grassroots level.

What are the financial, regulatory and practical barriers to preserving built heritage?

A lack of funding at a very local and national level will continue to be the main financial barrier for many churches when it comes to maintaining their heritage buildings and assets. The balancing act between day to day running costs and wider maintenance applies to all churches, but the added requirements for heritage churches that are listed can often tip the balance.

Access to people who are willing and able to maintain churches within the wider financial constraints is also an across the board challenge. But, again, when dealing with heritage assets the challenges are increased - there cannot be many Grade I listed public structures relying solely on voluntary day to day finance and maintenance outside of the church.

The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Care of Churches Measure 2018 and The Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 2015 place churches in a different position to many other heritage asset owners in relation regulatory matters. However, the challenges will remain broadly the same in terms of balancing a public building in the modern world against the unique elements of a heritage building.

Outside of the formal regulatory processes, there is a need to recognise the influence of pressure groups on potential changes to churches and other heritage buildings. Whilst it is acknowledged that specific elements and characteristics of buildings are intrinsic to their heritage it also has to be recognised that buildings need to adapt to the modern world and the needs of its people. To preserve our heritage in aspic is not sustainable and could lead to more heritage falling into disuse and disrepair.

What policy changes are needed to make restoring historic buildings easier and less expensive?

The continuation of the LPWS at existing levels is crucial.

Greater acknowledgement of the heritage value of unlisted faith-based assets and their roles within their communities is required. Piloting of new policy interventions to further encourage such assets as grassroots vehicles for regeneration within their communities is needed.

Liverpool stands ready to collaborate with our vision for a Bigger Church to make a Bigger Difference and bring more Justice to our communities. Liverpool Diocese has already developed a “Network of Kindness” with lottery funding via our Church Urban Fund joint venture, Together Liverpool, and this is building capacity for grassroots economic renewal across Christian denominations and partnering with the many other faiths that make up our diverse communities. Together Liverpool is a ready-made charitable vehicle providing overall coverage of the Liverpool Diocese footprint which is truly representative of the whole North West region, primarily covering most of Liverpool City Region but also touching communities in Lancashire, Southport, Cheshire and Greater Manchester.

Following the tragic aftermath of the tragic events in Southport last year, we take some comfort that Liverpool has now been included in the Near Neighbours programme, reflecting and recognising the contribution that faith-based heritage assets and their communities made in standing up for peace and the common good.

Near Neighbours has run for many years elsewhere in England and has made an enormous impact on social cohesion where communities are at risk of being divided by ethnic or religious diversity. The value of government funding for Near Neighbours has been tested and proven by independent evaluation. 

Continuation of such funding is vital and should be expanded to enable greater connections and regain social harmony within our communities. The work of Near Neighbours and Together Liverpool is an example of grassroots community economic renewal and regeneration which can be effectively delivered through an amazing network of faith-based community heritage assets – releasing the potential of churches, mosques, synagogues, mandirs and gurdwaras as community hubs

Additionally, the Faith New Deal pilot fund instigated by the previous Government showed the potential of what could be achieved with a concerted effort to make better use of our heritage assets.

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the Faith in the City Report which was driven by pioneering work in Liverpool exploring the strengths, insights, problems and needs of the Church’s life in Urban Priority Areas. Whilst many of the wider contexts have changed many of the challenges still remain and we continue to explore and champion new ways to bring faith in the city.

What policies would ensure the UK workforce has the right skills to maintain our heritage assets?

The skillset within the UK workforce is already very broad and there has been a real shift in recent years to support the development of heritage skills that is welcome. Widening the development of these skills into voluntary sectors could assist particularly with day to day upkeep and repair tasks. Equally incorporating heritage skills into general construction and maintenance education, apprenticeships and professional development would give more people the necessary understanding and skills as a standard – breaking some perceptions of heritage skills being for a select few organisations. This is particularly pertinent for churches who often rely on small, local tradespeople to undertake works as they are often the only financially viable option.