MINUTES OF THE NORWICH DIOCESAN BOARD OF FINANCE LTD ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING AND NORWICH DIOCESAN SYNOD Tuesday 8th June 2021 at 6:30pm, held via Zoom

Present: All Members of Diocesan Synod were in attendance, excepting those who had submitted Apologies for absence were noted, as detailed below. Minute Secretary: Mrs Alison Steward

Welcome +GN welcomed all to the Summer Diocesan Synod meeting and Annual General Meeting of the Norwich Diocesan Board of Finance and sought permission for the meeting to be recorded, to aid with Minute-taking. Permission was granted.

Apologies for absence: Revd Canon Chris Copsey, Revd Rob Baker, Susan Martin, Revd Canon Howard Stoker, Revd Miriam Fife, Revd Matthew Jackson, Constance Tyce, Revd Canon Catherine Dobson, Harry Verney, Revd Peter Leech, Revd Alaric Lewis, Fr. Glen Brooks, Revd Mark McCaghrey.

Opening prayers were led by The Venerable Karen Hutchinson, .

NORWICH DIOCESAN BOARD OF FINANCE LTD – ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 1) Introduction of the DBF Chair and Chair’s Comments +GN advised that it was his pleasure to introduce and warmly welcome Mark Jeffries, as the new DBF Chair in this, his first meeting, within the role. +GN thanked him for the considerable time he had committed so far. The Chair was invited to provide his opening comments. The Chair advised that he had joined the Diocese at an interesting time; a time of great enthusiasm and excitement for the new Diocesan Vision and of contemplation and reflection upon the completion of several Reviews (the Governance Review, Peer Review, the ongoing TriO Review). The Chair outlined that his initial impression was that of the pressures on finance for the Diocese and outlined that the Interim Diocesan Secretary and Diocesan Director of Finance had already discussed their initial early thoughts on next year’s budget with him. The Chair confirmed that the implementation of the Central Services Review was underway and thanked the Interim Diocesan Secretary and Diocesan Director of Finance for taking the lead on these very difficult and sensitive discussions; the handling of which was particularly important in order to ensure that a motivated team remained in place to fully support the Vision. The Chair commented that, within his statement for the Annual Report, he had commented on the need to instigate a greater understanding of stewardship and he is hopeful that the TriO Review would go some way toward achieving that. The Chair also commented on the possibility of increasing the remit of the work of the Norwich Diocesan Churches Trust, as part of the strategy for dealing with excess church buildings. Following discussion with Board members of Spire Support Services, the Chair commented that he looked forward to working on some good opportunities to grow trading income and, hence, the profit that is covenanted up to the Diocese from that company. Page 1 of 12

The Chair also wished to review the opportunities for the spread of the Diocesan investment assets. As referenced within the papers issued ahead of the meeting, there is an aim to increase the Parish Share collection rates back to a pre-pandemic level of 90% by 2023. There is a risk that this may not be achievable, and we must therefore explore the opportunities for securing higher return from the investment assets we have. The Chair felt that this is something the Diocese should be doing anyway, irrespective of the pressures brought about by the pandemic, as it does make good sense in the context of ensuring that the Diocese has the resources needed in delivering the new Vision. The Chair advised that he is looking forward to working within the new Governance structure as the Diocese looks to restore a well-balanced financial position. The Chair also greatly looks forward to working with Lindsey Rix who is going to be Chairing the Asset Management Committee, following confirmation of her appointment by the Nominations Committee. Lindsey is the outgoing CEO of Aviva UK Savings and Investments and is shortly to take up the role of UK CEO of Canada Life. The Chair commented that he looks forward to reporting to future Synods on what he hopes will be a well-balanced financial position. The Chair invited questions from Synod members. None were received.

2) Minutes of the 2020 Annual General Meeting held on 10th October 2020 The Chair referenced the Minutes of the meeting held on 10th October 2020 and asked if there were any amendments required. None were received. The Minutes were therefore adopted/approved.

Matters Arising The Chair enquired if there were any Matters Arising not sufficiently covered by the Agenda (the appointment of Auditors to be covered under item 4). None were received.

3) Receive and adopt the Report and Accounts for the year ended 31st December 2020 Moving to the Report and Accounts for the year ended 31st December 2020, the Chair handed over to Susan Bunting, Diocesan Director of Finance.

The Director of Finance gave a detailed presentation, copies of which are available via the Diocesan website. The following items were particularly noteworthy: AUDIT: • There were no management letter points; • There were no recommendations for improvement in financial procedures.

TRUSTEES REPORT: • Pages 9 and 10 make mention of the new Committees already established (Audit Risk and Assurance, Nominations and Remuneration). Later in the year there will be an increased number of Committees as we move through the new Governance structure but those listed were those in place at the time of the signing of the accounts. The Audit Risk and Assurance Committee also had a thorough review of its accounts before they went to the DBF Executive, the DBF Trustees and to Bishops Council. • Page 12 – Highlights the Achievements of 2020. • Page 15 – Highlights the plans for the future. The Chair thanked the Director of Finance and invited questions. None were received. The Chair therefore proposed that the Report and Accounts for the year ended 31st December 2020 be received and adopted. Synod provided their unanimous agreement to this.

Page 2 of 12

4) To consider the re-appointment of Messrs Lovewell Blake as Auditors at a fee to be arranged Within the Minutes of last years’ Synod Revd Heather Wilcox had raised a point as to how long Lovewell Blake had been in post as the Diocesan auditors. The Director of Finance confirmed that there had not been a tender process for some time and it was agreed that this should be given attention over the coming twelve-month period. For obvious reasons, that has not come to fruition. The Chair suggested that we go out to tender over the course of the coming year and, in the meantime, sought Synod members approval in appointing Lovewell Blake again as the auditors for this year. All Synod members were in favour. +GN thanked all for their input in the NDBF A.G.M and handed over to the Chair of the House of Laity. NORWICH DIOCESAN SYNOD Mrs Kandi Kammoun, Chair of the House of Laity, thanked the DBF Chair and the Diocesan Director of Finance and formally opened the meeting of Diocesan Synod.

1) Minutes of the Diocesan Synod meeting held on 20th March 2021 The Chair referenced the Minutes of the meeting held on 20th March 2021 and asked if any amendments were required. Jennifer Vere (Redenhall) : wished to highlight that Item 5 of Page 7 of the Minutes had provided a figure of 140 church schools. There are, in fact, 110 church schools and Jennifer asked that this be amended. This was duly noted by the Minute Secretary. The Chair asked the members if, aside from this change, the Minutes could be regarded as a true and accurate record of the meeting. All agreed that it could.

2) Matters Arising None received.

3) The 2020 Annual Reports of the Boards and Committees The Chair asked that the following Reports be received and invited questions on each. (i) Diocesan Synod – No questions received (ii) Bishop’s Council – No questions received (iii) Diocesan Mission and Pastoral Committee – No questions received (iv) Diocesan Advisory Committee for the Care of Churches (DAC) – No questions received (v) Diocesan Board of Education

Question received from Mervyn Wilcox (Bishop’s Appointee, Diocesan Synod): Mr Wilcox had understood that the work of the Children, Youth & Families Team came under the remit of the Board of Education but noted that this has not been mentioned within the report.

Response from Paul Dunning (Director of Education): Mr Dunning explained that the line management for the CYF team had since moved away from the Board of Education and they therefore had no involvement within the time period captured by the report. (vi) Diocesan Children, Youth & Families Team

Question received from Revd Dr Patrick Richmond (Chair, House of Clergy): The Chair of the House of Clergy noted that Page 14 of the report referenced the fact that the Children, Youth & Families Team has now moved to report to The Venerable , , as part of the Mission Forum. Revd Richmond asked what is a Forum (in this particular context), how does it relate to the team or Committee, who has made a decision on such things and will a report from the Mission Forum follow? Page 3 of 12

Response from Mervyn Wilcox (Bishop’s Appointee, Diocesan Synod): Mr Wilcox outlined a brief history of the CYF team, advising that Bishop Graham James initiated it back in 2002, when it then sat under the remit of the . At this point it was known as a Forum, noting that Norfolk County Council still had a Youth Department in full operation at that time. Since then, it has evolved and moved forward and currently sits with the Archdeacon of Lynn/will sit with the incoming .

Response from the Archdeacon of Lynn: Archdeacon Ian explained that, within his role as Interim Director of the Church Planting & Revitalisation Project, he had undertaken to keep a “weather eye” on Mission within the Diocese. The Mission Forum was established by the Archdeacon as a holding operation, in order to ensure that the various strands of Mission within the Diocese and those involved with them were brought together from time to time and known to each other. The Forum is, predominantly, a networking/informal set up and the Archdeacon envisages that, in time, the Bishop of Lynn will become fully involved, as will the Director of Mission, once appointed. The Archdeacon advised that anybody wishing to become involved in this Forum should make contact with him in the first instance, and an invitation to the next meeting will be issued.

Response from Revd Dr Patrick Richmond (Chair, House of Clergy): Revd Richmond commented that the Archdeacon’s explanation was most helpful and that he was very interested in attending the Forum.

(vii) Social, Community & Environmental Concerns – No questions received

The Chair moved that the reports listed be received and approved. Approval was received.

4) The Diocesan Board of Finance : 2020 Annual Report and Accounts The Chair moved that the 2020 Report and Accounts be received. Approval received.

5) Financial context and outline budget 2022 : Interim Diocesan Secretary & Director of Finance Rosemary Pearce : Interim Diocesan Secretary Rosemary Pearce outlined that this year the Diocese has moved to a new timetable for the budget and it is intended that this be signed off in the Autumn for the next year. Regarding the broader Diocesan context, the majority of expenditure within the budget relates to the provision of ministry. The clergy deployment review has, so far, led to a reduction of the equivalent of more than nine full time clergy posts, as a result of retirements and the reforming of Benefices, in line with Share contributions. It is anticipated that there will be an over-all reduction of approximately 10% of clergy posts within the next 5 – 10 years. Clergy stipends, pensions, housing, and training still form the bulk of Diocesan expenditure. It is unknown at present as to whether there will be an increase in stipend in 2022. Norwich Diocese mirrors the increase in the national stipends benchmark and that has yet to be disclosed. There is hope that clergy pension contributions may be reduced, although this is not likely until 2023. The pension scheme has performed extremely well. Indications have been received from the Pensions Board that they are looking at how they might reduce the figure.

The maintenance and repair of the 254 vicarages, which was put on hold due to lack of income, has begun again (albeit cautiously). There is a recognition for the need in 2022 to undertake more of this necessary/essential work, as funding permits. Page 4 of 12

An allocation of £695,000 has been made to the budget provisionally for this and this will include quinquennial works, ingoing works, repairs and boiler maintenance. In addition, there will be over £600,000 allocated in relation to Council Tax, Water Rates, and Insurance. The Diocese will continue to invest in future ministry through the discernment process for Ordinations. There are 7 people going into Ordination Training in the Autumn and the Diocese are funding 36 curates who are currently completing training in parishes. This is vital in the support of the church for the future. The Diocesan Board of Education have had a challenging year, supporting head teachers in leading their schools throughout the pandemic. They have been working with the two Diocesan multi-academy trusts and the sixty-nine schools not yet within that. As part of the Central Services Review, their base budget, like those of most Diocesan departments is to be reduced; in their case by £45,000 over three years as they identify new income streams. This will remain ongoing.

The Safeguarding Department is one of the few areas where it is necessary to increase the Diocesan staffing annual budget in order to meet national requirements. In addition to the two Safeguarding Case Workers, it has been necessary to recruit a Trainer to provide Safeguarding training to the clergy and lay people in the parishes.

Much of the mission related work is part funded by the National Church, including work with children and young people, particularly in areas of deprivation and church planting and revitalisation. There are currently nine people, working in different teams, who make up this programme. The new Strategic Programme Manager, Julie Smith, is helping to develop and move forward the Diocesan Vision and priorities. Julie is part funded too, by the national Strategic Development Fund money which is targeted to supplement diocesan resources for mission and innovative work. It is now a national trend that money from the centre is focused specifically on these type of areas. There is a need for the Diocese to take on more financial responsibility for the core funding as the national church funding in those areas is reducing by over £300,000 a year. Whilst the Diocese has been successful is attracting some money for mission, the core work of the Diocese is becoming more and more the responsibility of the Diocese itself. This has proven a challenge, as has the reduction in investment income received and, in the second year of the pandemic, investment returns fell by £82,000 against the anticipated income. This is one of the reasons why the new Asset Management Committee, Chaired by Lindsey Rix, is going to be so important. A closer look will be given at how the value of Diocesan investments can be enhanced across the investment portfolio and through opportunities provided by glebe and property developments. It is recognised that this is going to be playing an increasingly important part in the financing of the Diocese moving forward.

The last two years have been extremely difficult with the fall off in Parish Share payments and the Diocese are in the process of making significant cost savings across the departmental budget and will be reporting to Synod further in due course. It was noted that some of the parishes have worked extremely hard to meet their Share responsibility but there will be a need to increase the percentage of Share paid to cover the basic cost of ministry, clergy stipends, housing, and the training of the next generation of clergy. It is completely understood that this is in addition to the funds needed by the parishes to look after their church buildings and to develop ministry and mission. Therefore, the Diocese are going to put in additional resources to increase planned giving, develop legacy programmes, increase funding from the community and look at online giving in greater depth. It is recognised that the partnership of the parishes and the Diocese working together is essential in order to provide vibrant Mission and Ministry. The Diocese continue to be fully committed to that. The Interim Diocesan Secretary asked that thanks be

Page 5 of 12 passed back to the parishes for all they have done, with a request that the plans outlined for the future and the financial needs can be communicated to them.

Susan Bunting : Diocesan Director of Finance The Diocesan Director of Finance thanked the Interim Diocesan Secretary for her support and very comprehensive report.

The Director of Finance outlined that all in attendance would have received the outline budget paper with a copy of the Agenda. Particularly noteworthy points were as follows:

• It should be noted that this is an outline budget to inform Synod of the current thinking and assumptions currently agreed by the DBF Executive Committee and Bishop’s Council. • The 2022 budget will be brought back to Synod for approval in November 2021, when a lot more work has gone into it, following the implementation of the Central Services Review. • Income assumptions are shown in detail; in particular, an 85% collection rate for Parish Share is budgeted for 2022. 2019 was 89%, 2020 fell to 77% and it is hoped that at least 80% can be achieved this year and then 85% in 2022. It is hoped that 2023 will see pre- pandemic levels of 89% and that the Diocese will achieve a balanced budget. Expenditure shows a total budgeted decrease of over £703,000. The Director of Finance indicated that she had not shown the detailed lines for this, where savings have been identified, as the Central Services Review is currently being worked through and assumptions cannot be made until those individuals affected are consulted. • Parochial Ministry Costs include stipends, NI, pensions, housing costs, vacancy removal and resettlement grants. • Ministry support and other ministries include core services, ordinand training costs, education, youth and families, safeguarding, counselling, chaplaincies, Archdeacons etc. • The National church responsibilities is the Diocesan contribution requested by Archbishops’ Council toward the National Secretariat, which includes support to the Cathedral and church buildings, mission, and public affairs, share service departments and the grants budget at Archbishops’ Council, including the CHARM scheme for retired clergy (our requested contribution to them). • Support and admin include our legal fees, Chancellor, Registrar, Finance and Admin, computer support, office running costs, our statutory audit, Glebe management, asset management and specific pension costs. • Concentrated effort needs to be given toward increases in giving. If income can be brought back to pre-pandemic levels, along with the planned cost savings, it is hoped that a balanced budget in 2023 will be achieved. The Director of Finance did not anticipate that the budget brought back in November 2021 relating to 2022 would change significantly from the anticipated bottom line figure of a £298,000 deficit. Upon the conclusion of her report to Synod, the Director of Finance invited questions from Synod members and the Chair requested anybody wishing to do so to raise their hand.

Question received from Revd Andrew Whitehead (Ingworth & Sparham): Revd Whitehead voiced that he had found the reports really informative and thanked both the Director of Finance and Interim Diocesan Secretary. He commented that he hadn’t heard a great deal relating to cost associated with reducing the Diocese’ carbon footprint, particularly as Synod

Page 6 of 12 were so committed to do so. Revd Whitehead wondered if any costs could be factored into the budget this year.

Response from the Director of Finance: The Director of Finance confirmed that funds were currently being looked at (but not available at the current time) in order to address these costs. Closer scrutiny will be needed of the asset base in order to fund these changes.

Question received from Revd Canon Adrian Ling (Lynn): Revd Ling referenced an email received last year which had illustrated that some parishes had paid a zero amount of Parish Share and this had included one of the major/prominent churches within the Diocese. Why is this the case and how can it be allowed to happen?

Response received from Stuart Jones, Diocesan Registrar: Mr Jones provided assurance that active steps were being taken to address this with the parish concerned. An Episcopal visitation is underway and one of the areas to be addressed is the lack of Parish Share payments last year or this. Firm pressure will be applied to the parish, not just on financial matters, but on a range of Governance issues.

Question received from Revd David Smith (St Benet at Waxham & Tunstead): Revd Smith felt that in setting a collection rate of 85%, there was a danger of achieving a self- fulfilling prophecy in that if 88.8% balances the budget, then that is the figure which needs to be taken seriously and people need to step up to meet that requirement.

Response from the Director of Finance: The Director of Finance agreed but advised that there is a fine balance between what the Diocese needs and how the Diocese might help to achieve this, in real terms whilst recovering from a pandemic.

Revd Michael Asquith (Lothingland): Revd Asquith extended his thanks to the Diocesan Director of Finance and her team for all the hard work that had gone into the preparation of the accounts, budget, and the presentations for this year. Revd Asquith wished to simply comment on the fact that his area of the Diocese already struggle in finding good quality candidates for ministry and he felt that the Diocese should be aware that a number of other neighbouring Dioceses are paying clergy 2.5 to 3% more than Norwich Diocese, this year. Revd Asquith’s concern is that if Norwich Diocese fall behind in this way, it will stop attracting good, mission focused candidates from making applications.

Question received from David Griffiths (Thetford & Rockland): Mr Griffiths suggested that there was scope for a Strategy Group to take stock of the last eighteen months, with a view to alternative strategies/ways of working being adopted by the . Mr Griffiths pointed out that many large organisations in the retail, medical, education sectors had had to do so, as a result of the pandemic. Why not the Church?

Response from Rosemary Pearce, Interim Diocesan Secretary: Mrs Pearce advised that Diocesan House staff had had to adapt to a different way of working brought about by the pandemic and that some of the changes implemented would be retained moving forward. The pandemic had forced the Diocese to look at the benefits and challenges of working in a different way; such as holding meetings via Zoom, rather than travelling to and from

Page 7 of 12

venues (thereby saving time, travel costs etc). It was anticipated that a ‘mix and match’ approach would remain in place for the future.

Response from The Venerable , : Archdeacon Steven pointed out that the Mission Strategy is about to become fully engaged as well as the ongoing conversations surrounding the Deployment Review. Additionally, there had been regular communications distributed by the Archdeacons, which had encouraged people to think about what they wanted to keep doing, what they felt they could stop doing and implementing the appropriate changes, moving forward. The ongoing reviews were all designed to assess what we had learned from the difficult time brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Response from David Griffiths (Thetford & Rockland): Mr Griffiths commented by saying that he felt that ministry where clergy are located and the costs associated with housing, bills etc needed to be looked at more closely; feeling that now was the time for different ways of organising ministry to be addressed and ideas formulated.

Question from Revd Helen Rengert/Revd Keith Rengert (Ingworth & Sparham): Revd Helen Rengert advised that within their own Benefice (Reepham & Wensum Valley) clergy are working hard on developing new strategies, developing very active lay ministry and via the clergy development review. Lay people are key to the ministry teams and should be encouraged in every possible way.

Response from Mrs Kandi Kammoun (Chair, House of Laity): Mrs Kammoun referenced the fact that Julie Smith is now in post as Strategic Programme Manager for the Diocese and that she imagined that this topic would be something which Julie will take into account.

BREAK (A comfort break of 15 minutes took place)

6) From Lament to Action : Synod listens – presentations and responses +GN warmly welcomed Revd Sonia Barron from the Diocese of Lincoln and Co-Chair to the National Church of England’s Anti-Racism Taskforce, to the meeting. Revd Barron thanked Synod for inviting her to join the meeting and for the priority given to the Lament to Action report; a copy of which was available to view via the link provided at the foot of the meeting Agenda. Revd Barron advised that some comments received on the report had indicated that it had not, perhaps, been radical enough but all had been courteous and constructive in their feedback on the topic of institutional racism. Some particularly noteworthy points highlighted by Revd Barron’s presentation were as follows: • To say that the Church of England is institutionally racist is, in itself, racist but some aspects of the Church fail. Why? • The Church of England is an established church with a Mission to demonstrate the love of Jesus to all, whatever their background. • All God’s people must participate in God’s work and are called to join in the great Commission. • In reality, members of Synod and Communications within the Church of England come from very similar backgrounds, culture, outlook and, upon retirement, they are replaced by similar people. There is no serious intent in this but this can self-perpetuate itself. • The Church of England’s strength is built upon its diverse churchmanship, from Anglo- Catholic to Charismatic Evangelical. Page 8 of 12

• A great many of the Windrush generation have become UK Anglicans and have found a spiritual home in the Church of England ; and so, the urgent question must be asked, why is it that ALL of God’s people cannot fully participate? This needs to be understood and addressed. • Statistics reflect very clearly that changes need to be made when recruiting personnel. Of the figures obtained, 1 out of 42 Bishops are from a UKME background. Amongst Diocesan Secretaries/Chairs UK wide; there is not one from a UKME background, which is both inappropriate and unjust. • Revd Barron expressed her pride at the cultural changes achieved in the areas of Safeguarding but those from a UKME background need to be embraced and welcomed fully, both in church and in society. • Revd Barron closed by saying that she was excited by the potential within the Lament to Action report and asked us to consider, “If not now, when”? “If not us, who”? The Chair of the House of Clergy thanked Revd Barron for her input and introduced two video contributions under this Agenda item; the first from Revd Tim Yau, Pioneer Missioner (Cringleford Benefice) and Mission Enabler. Some particularly noteworthy points highlighted by Revd Yau’s presentation were as follows: • Revd Yau felt that the Lament to Action report is most timely. It recognises the pain witnessed within the Panorama documentary and the growing sense of increased action being needed following the death of George Floyd. • Revd Yau advised that he had grown up in a legacy of racism, which had been painful. He explained the need for wanting to fit in and a feeling of leaving identity behind. • Revd Yau outlined that if we are to have a Christian presence in every community, it is essential that representatives from UKME backgrounds have involvement at every level; from the local parish to the House of Bishops. • Church should be available for all of God’s people and to enable that to happen, all need to feel comfortable. • If you want to see change, you have to feel a part of that change. • In closing, Revd Yau voiced his hope that we will truly see a change and that the Church of England will become known, widely, as a Church for all. The second of the two video contributions came from Mr Blessing Chishanu, an Ordinand due to serve within the Sprowston Benefice. Particularly noteworthy points from Mr Chishanu’s presentation were as follows: • The Lament to Action report is welcomed but Mr Chishanu expressed his weariness at the fact that we could meet again in five years’ time and there would still be issues to overcome. The current report has 47 recommendations. The time to act is now. • Mr Chishanu expressed his passion for preaching the Love of God and referenced Ephesians 2 and the Book of Revelation. • Churches must take the lead in illustrating the Love of God to all. • The Diocese must take the lead in welcoming all and taking positive steps forward. The Chair of the House of Clergy gave his thanks to both Revd Tim Yau and Mr Blessing Chishanu, for their insightful and Spirit-led contributions; and introduced The Revd Karlene Kerr, Acting Team Rector of the Gaywood Benefice and Bishop’s Adviser for UK Minority Ethnic Affairs. Revd Kerr outlined her three hopes as a result of the publication of the report: 1) A sincere hope that this is the last report. The phrase “the last straw” is used within it and Revd Kerr’s hope is that if another one is published, it will be one of review and evaluation. 2) A hope that the Diocese, Deaneries and Parishes take responsibility/action and ask “what does this look like where I am in my parish”; perhaps by discussing aspects of the report

Page 9 of 12

in PCC meetings and determining how change can be implemented, perhaps by issuing an anti-racism statement, perhaps by incorporating other cultures at Mothering Sunday or Carol Service events. Revd Kerr referenced John 8:32 “Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free”. 3) Revd Kerr feels that God is holding a mirror up to us all and all is not well. It is time to get our house in order and set aside judgement, guilt, or embarrassment. It is time to accept that racism does exist in our churches and commit to doing something about it. In that way, we will truly move from Lament to Action.

The Chair of the House of Clergy thanked Revd Kerr for her presentation and advised that a break- out session would now take place, reflecting upon “What one thing can I do to move from Lament to Action”?

A BREAK-OUT ROOMS SESSION FOLLOWED TO REFLECT ON THIS QUESTION. A REQUEST WAS MADE FOR EACH GROUP TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN LINE ON THE PROPOSALS FOR ACTION, VIA THE CHAT FACILITY.

The Chair of the House of Clergy invited questions from the Synod members.

Comment received from The Venerable Steven Betts, Archdeacon of Norfolk: Archdeacon Steven wished to add his support and encouragement of the need for change. As a serving Archdeacon for some considerable time, Archdeacon Steven voiced the fact that he had been rarely shocked but had been so when hearing for himself overtly racist comments made at PCC meetings. “All God’s people are welcome and can flourish in the Church”. Archdeacon Steven advised that we have a lot to learn from the past and to be inclusive of all God’s people, we need actions, not just words.

Comment received from Douglas Bain (Blofield): Mr Bain suggested that pressure be exerted via Synod members writing to their respective MP’s and suggested that, collectively as a Church, we need to be able to grasp the situation with both hands.

Question received from Mr Paul Dunning, Director of Education, to Revd Sonia Barron: Mr Dunning outlined that, within his group, it had been mentioned that many do not have experience of other cultures, through no fault of their own, but by living in some quite remote areas of the countryside. They are therefore lacking in confidence in speaking into the report. What would Sonia suggest?

Response from Revd Sonia Barron: Revd Barron advised that Lincoln Diocese is of a similar demographic to Norwich and felt that there was a need for people to be ever conscious of the need to develop a greater understanding and a change of mindset to enable them to think in a different way.

7) Approval of an Instrument of Delegation to the Bishops of Thetford and Lynn: Mr Stuart Jones, Diocesan Registrar, outlined the fact that this was a technical item which related to the Diocesan Bishop delegating power to the Suffragan Bishops in a range of matters. The Instruments of Delegation had been circulated to members of Synod and the approval of them was now sought in view of the timely arrival of the incoming Bishop of Lynn, who is to be

Page 10 of 12

Consecrated on 23rd June. Mr Jones asked for a show of hands in favour of the Instruments of Delegation. This was agreed unanimously.

8) General Synod Report: Mr Jones outlined that there would be a General Synod meeting held in July and issued a reminder to members regarding the summer elections to General Synod, commenting that it would be a positive step to have the well represented. Similarly, nominations relating to lay members to Diocesan Synod are also upcoming and should be encouraged to ensure that we have an active and effective Synod in operation.

Question received from Douglas Bain (Blofield): Mr Bain took the opportunity to ask if the Lament to Action report would need to be approved by General Synod or wider.

Response from Mr Stuart Jones (Diocesan Registrar): Mr Jones anticipated that this would be regarded as a policy paper, expressing a need for the Church of England more widely to promote the report, and underlining that urgent action/change was needed.

9) Questions under Standing Order 71

Revd Martin Young had asked the following question: “Thank you for the Governance review and the reorganisation of the committees of the Diocese, aiding transparent and efficient governance. What steps are being taken to empower the Diocesan Synod itself to play a more informed, active and effective role in governance”.

Response from +GN: +GN thanked Revd Young for his question and advised that the Governance Review, Chaired by Mary Chapman, had put forward a recommendation agreed at the Synod held in March of this year that a small group of staff and members, to include the Chair of the House of Clergy and the Chair of the House of Laity build on recommendations around Synod effectiveness and put forward an action plan for improving working practices. +GN explained that Kandi Kammoun and Patrick Richmond are leading on this, have sought ideas from other Diocese’ and have already brought ideas to the Agenda Planning Group. +GN advised that whilst, ironically, his own experience of this Synod has been solely on Zoom over the last two years of being our Bishop, due to the constraints off the pandemic, his hope is that the new Synod in October will be able to meet in person, in the Cathedral, starting with the Eucharist and then with a view to gathering around via the use of café style seating to facilitate small group discussions. There will be a range of styles of presentation, interaction, and discussion to help Synod members to participate. The Bishop advised that we will also be looking at how new members are inducted. As well as the Agenda papers for this meeting, Synod members were invited to read a report and watch a Panorama documentary, so as to inform discussion and prayer. Ahead of the last Synod meeting, some very successful workshops on the Governance Review proposals took place. The Bishop emphasised that colleagues leading on Agenda items are always willing to receive questions in advance, not least because this can help them draw things out in their presentations or make corrections where there are errors within their presentations. The Agenda Planning Group are always keen to hear from Synod members with ideas about how participation can be further enhanced.

Page 11 of 12

The Chair of the House of Clergy thanked Revd Martin Young for his question and for +GN for his response and asked if there were any supplementary questions. None were received.

10) Close of Business In closing the meeting, +GN wished to record his particular thanks to the following:

• A huge thank you to the Finance Team; to Mark Jeffries (NDBF Chair), Susan Bunting, (Diocesan Director of Finance), and her Finance Team.

The Bishop commented that Miss Bunting is an excellent Director of Finance and her work, and that of her team, is exceptional and greatly valued.

• A thank you to Rosemary Pearce, (this being her last Synod as Interim Diocesan Secretary), for her wisdom and valuable contribution to the Diocese during the course of the last six months. Tim Sweeting, the incoming Diocesan Secretary will join the Diocese in September.

• Thanks to both Mrs Kandi Kammoun (Chair of the House of Laity) and Revd Dr Patrick Richmond (Chair of the House of Clergy) for their respective leadership.

• Particular thanks to two members of Synod/Bishop’s Council who had joined this evening’s meeting for the final time:

Vivienne Clifford-Jackson (Humbleyard). Thanks were recorded to Vivienne, who had brought an immense contribution to Synod, through her insightful comments and questions.

and

David Pearson (Gt Yarmouth) who had served on Synod for a period in excess of fifty years. Thanks were recorded to David for all he had contributed, both at Synod and within the church he so loves and cherishes in Gt Yarmouth. +GN wished both Vivienne and David long and happy retirements.

Closing Prayer and Blessing +GN closed the meeting with Prayer and bestowed a Blessing on all in attendance.

Page 12 of 12