THE General Synod approved on Friday afternoon the Legal Officers (Annual Fees) Order 2023, which concerns the remuneration of diocesan registrars.
The Fees Advisory Commission has sought in the past few years to redress what its chair, the Archdeacon of Sunderland, the Ven. Robert Cooper (Durham), described as “substantial and longstanding” under-payment of registrars, who, in 2012, were being paid for only 50 per cent of the work that they had done. The new formula agreed in 2014 took into account work carried out, the size of the diocese, the number of open churches, and the number of clergy of incumbent status.
Data from 2022 showed that the retainer still covered only 70 per cent of that work done — an improvement from 66 per cent the previous year.
The 30-per-cent charitable discount had been deemed unjustified in 2019, and had been reduced by the Synod to ten per cent over a five-year period. It now stood at 14 per cent, a reduction that, the Archdeacon acknowledged, was “not moving the dial to the amount required”. The aspiration was for 12 per cent in 2024.
The Commission also emphasised that the burden of any increase would not fall solely on the diocesan boards of finance (DBF). An average of 42 per cent nationally would be payable by the Church Commissioners. The statutory annual fee was of considerable financial advantage to both, he said. The imposition of a fee limited by statute was acceptable only if it was a fair one, below market rates. The Commissioners’ starting point was consistency and fairness.
“It unanimously remains the view that the broad principles underlying the formula are well accepted and provide the most suitable base for the calculation of the annual retainer. It also considers that the factors which justified the phased reduction of the charitable discount agreed in 2019 remains valid,” Archdeacon Cooper said.
He described the average national increase of 4.9 per cent as significantly below the headline rate of inflation. It recognised the financial difficulties across the Church, and the difficulty of the legal work that was required.
“What was true in 2014 is true now. The Church values the providers of its legal services and should recognise [that] they ought to be renumerated fairly and reasonably for the work they do. . .
“Annual retainers are a good way of achieving that end while putting in place a clear limit on fees. Without a retainer, dioceses would probably be required to agree fees for each piece of work at the prevailing hourly rate, and registrars would need to undertake full-time recording. Synod needs to be aware that this could lead to an increase in recorded hours and, therefore, fees.”
He continued: “This is a real possibility which the Church may face in 2024 if General Synod does not approve the fees order.”
The Commission took its duties seriously and recommended the order unanimously. It attempted to balance “firstly, the needs of diocesan registrars, who deserve fair reward for their work; secondly, those of dioceses, which, we realise, are facing tighter budgets, year on year; and, thirdly, the present and future needs of the Church and the need to keep in view the long-term objective of making sure the specialism of ecclesiastical law remains attractive to law firms as part of their succession planning.”
In the short debate, Nigel Bacon (Lincoln) was grateful for the detailed information, but was disappointed that concerns raised during consultation had been “entirely set aside”. While he approved the basis for apportionment, he suggested that a higher weighting should have been placed on the number of open churches than on the number of clergy. He wanted The Synod to see the detailed working at some future point.
Gavin Drake (Southwell & Nottingham) also suggested that concerns had not been fully addressed. Clergy had had only a one-per-cent increase in the current financial year, and they were the backbone of the Church, he said.
“If we can’t reward clergy and talk about clergy stipends and benefits in the same way that we can talk about lawyers — the value of the work they do, their hourly rate — then I think we have got something wrong.”
Canon Joyce Jones (Leeds) pointed out that the C of E had a body of law unlike any other Church. Specialist lawyers were needed: the consequences of acting without advice were costly. Most registrars were working in law firms that did not necessarily share their faith. Whereas, at one time, there might have been some prestige attached to being a registrar, that was much less true now. One consequence was the difficulty of recruiting young lawyers to be the registrars of the future, she said.
The Revd Graham Kirk-Spriggs (Norwich) was not opposed to the motion — “I understand we need to pay the going rate” — but said: “We are talking about fairness. When people say things like ‘only earning £130 an hour’, that makes me think. I didn’t become a clergy person to become a millionaire, but since 2017, when I was ordained, I have received in real terms a pay cut each year. This is something we really need to talk about as a Church. Think about justice and fairness to our clergy.”
The Synod approved the Order by a show of hands. It will now be laid before both Houses of Parliament.
