The Church of England and independent safeguarding: why GS 2429 falls short
- Version
- Download 166
- File Size 4.00 KB
- File Count 1
- Create Date 3 February 2026
- Last Updated 3 February 2026
2 Comments on The Church of England and independent safeguarding: why GS 2429 falls short
Leave a comment
© 2026 Gavin Drake
Gavin,
Thank you for this comprehensive and well-argued report.
We’ve had our own go at developing a system, see http://www.faithfulresponsibility.com and I’ve linked your report in a blog post about GS2429, which I trust is OK.
Wish I’d found you sooner! Graham
We attended the Synod “debate” last Wednesday. It was deeply depressing.
Apart from Robert’s amendment to create independence from diocesan structures, the only push backs were on detail, not substance.
Where mentioned, the speakers were unanimous in wanting Safeguarding reporting, investigation, etc., to remain in the dioceses, despite noting how difficult it is to get consistent responses across dioceses. Likewise, the inability to recruit volunteer PSOs who are currently relied on to deliver most of the concerns with obvious risks of filtering, was raised by someone supporting the measure. The Bishop of Blackburn’s passionate defense of the status quo was perhaps most depressing of all – have any of them actually read Jay?
The overall tone was, like GS Misc 1447, congratulatory – “Haven’t we done well in the past year in coming up with a new name for the ISB?”
The quandry now is how do we progress? It is evident that the Archbishops Council wishes to continue following Yes Minister scripts. The Safeguarding Structures Programme seems to involve an awful lot of people meeting occasionally over the next few years or even decades rather than doing what could be done in a week.
I should probably go and lie down in a dark room.