London, UK - Phil Woolas, the new Immigration Minister, was again at the centre of controversy last night after contradicting official government policy over the position of the Church of England.
The outcome of the Government’s attempt to reform the House of Lords would be to strip the Church of its privileges, he said. Within 50 years the Church of England would have lost the special position it has held in English life since the Reformation.
Mr Woolas told The Times: “Disestablishment – I think it will happen because it’s the way things are going. Once you open debate about reform of the House of Lords you open up debate about the make-up of the House. It will probably take 50 years, but a modern society is multifaith.”
His remarks caused consternation in Whitehall: the Government has no intention of igniting a political row over the issue, which has consequences for the monarchy.
Mr Woolas has been at the centre of controversy since Saturday when he called for a limit on immigration but then backtracked in a television interview 24 hours later.
The Ministry of Justice issued a statement last night making clear that it has no intention of taking any step to disestablish the Church as part of constitutional reforms.
The statement said: “The Church of England is by law established as the Church in England and the monarch is its Supreme Governor. The Government remains committed to this position and values the establishment of the Church of England.”
Last night there were doubts over whether Mr Woolas’s scheduled appearance tomorrow on the BBC One programme Question Time would go ahead. Senior figures in Westminster were fearful of further damaging headlines after his remarks over curbing immigration and disestablishing the Church.
Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, fully supports establishment and has no wish for the issue to be opened.
The Government has reassured the Church of England that it will not embark on any move towards disestablishment unless the Church asks it to do so. With the Church bogged down in disputes over gays and women clergy, the last thing that it wants is a row over disestablishment. In Lambeth Palace and Whitehall the issue is considered political dynamite.
Sir Alan Beith, chairman of the Commons Justice Select Committee, whose remit includes constitutional reform, expressed surprise that Mr Woolas had mentioned the issue. He said: “This is an issue that is rather off-message at the moment for the Government. It is a huge undertaking.”
Sir Alan added: “I cannot see how it will have been greeted with enthusiasm around the Government. I am sure they do not want this being discussed at the next Cabinet meeting.”
Bob Morris, a former Home Office official who is now an honorary associate at the Constitution Unit of University College London, said: “The Government has gone out of its way to say they want the bishops to remain in the House of Lords. The last thing they want to do is to upset this particular constituency.
“I don’t think the Government have thought about disestablishment at all seriously. They have been concentrating with the composition of the House of Lords. They know they cannot reach an accommodation on composition and my guess is things will carry on much as they are. It is inertia that keeps the bishops there.”
Mr Morris said that he did not understand why the Immigration Minister had talked about disestablishment as it was “on the back burner”.
Mr Woolas made his comments about limiting immigration and about disestablishment during an interview withThe Times that is being described in Whitehall as a “car crash”.
Mr Woolas then made matters worse by saying during a debate that the Government’s handling of asylum had caused “misery and division in the country”. In the Home Office his interventions on immigration are seen as disastrous because they have undermined the Government’s attempts to persuade the country that the asylum and immigration system is robust.
A relationship of service to the nation
The Church of England argues that establishment puts it in a relationship of service to the nation, not of privilege. The Bishop of Winchester, speaking in the Lords, has argued that the “Church is established to serve, sustain and encourage the establishment of the Christian faith as the ultimate point of reference for government”
Disestablishment would put at risk
— The presence of a parish priest for every community
— The right of all, unless there is a separate legal inhibition, to be married, baptised or given a funeral at their parish church
— The Church’s central role in helping the nation to mark important events, such as royal weddings
— The role of the Church as an education provider through church schools
— The public enactment of church legislation. The laws of the Church are part of the laws of England – measures passed by General Synod also need to be passed by Parliament – and therefore the Church’s courts are part of the English legal system
— The role of the Sovereign as supreme governor of the Church
— The role of the Crown in appointing bishops and other senior clergy
— The presence of bishops in the House of Lords – they are not there to protect self-interest but to represent communities in a non-party-political way