The Ecclesiastical Committee examines measures affecting the Church of England, advising both Houses of Parliament on matters of doctrine, worship and church governance. It sits in the House of Lords as a joint committee with representation from both chambers, and takes oral evidence from witnesses with relevant expertise. The committee scrutinises ecclesiastical legislation before it reaches the main parliamentary timetable, providing detailed reports that inform wider debate. Recent sessions have focused on oral evidence from Kiran Kaur, who appeared before the committee on 12 November 2025 and again on 28 October 2025, though the precise nature of these inquiries cannot be determined from session titles alone. The committee's work ensures that changes to Church of England law and practice receive proper parliamentary attention before enactment.
Meeting activity
0 sessions published in the last 12 months
MonWedFriSun
AugSeptOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAug
LessMore· cell = sessions per day
Select a day
Click any cell in the heatmap to see the sessions held that day and the insights extracted from them.
The committee scrutinised the Church of England’s Clergy Conduct Measure (CCM) as the replacement for the 2003 Clergy Discipline Measure (CDM). It examined the three-track framework (grievance, misconduct, serious misconduct), the governance and policing of investigations, interactions with the police, timings for rules and implementation, and safeguarding alignment with disciplinary processes. Key commitments include drafting of rules, funding/recruitment planning, and phased implementation with certain provisions coming into force immediately and others April next year.
The committee scrutinised two Church measures: (1) Chancel Repair (Church Commissioners’ Liability) Measure, which shifts chancel repair liability from land/contract to a statutory duty held by the Church Commissioners (with continued liability for certain land and a framework for arbitration). (2) Church Funds Investment Measure, aimed at tidying up and standardising small church funds via CAIF/CBF arrangements. Witnesses argued the measures reduce admin burdens for PCCs, provide clearer funding certainty by centralising liability, and modernise charity investment reporting. Questions centred on scale, public impact, and process for handling disputed liabilities, including amendments via arbitration. Key references included the Land Registration Act 2002 and the Tithe Act 1936.