The public should not be “forced to bankroll” religious institutions like the Church of England whilst they spend millions on evangelism, the House of Lords has heard.

This year, the Government introduced the Places of Worship Renewal Fund (PWRF), which will provide £23 million of public money per year for “urgent repairs and essential improvements” to listed buildings that are active places of worship.

Speaking as part of a debate on the fund, Lib Dem peer Paul Scriven criticised the Government’s decision to not routinely consider the financial assets of religious bodies when determining how the PWRF will be distributed.

Scriven highlighted the £11.6 billion in assets held by the Church Commissioners – the body responsible for the Church’s financial assets – and the significant funding allocated by the CofE to evangelism, which could be redirected towards building repair.

In 2025, the CofE spent £35 million on evangelism projects targeting state schools. In contrast, the Church Commissioners provided just £5.9 million in funding to projects for the maintenance and repair of church buildings.

The CofE has consistently lobbied the Government to continue and expand public funding for the repair and maintenance of church buildings.

During the debate, the bishop of Leicester Martyn Snow used his occupancy of one the 26 House of Lords seats reserved for Church of England clergy to criticise the “shortcomings” of the new fund – specifically, a reduction in the amount of money available.

Scriven also criticised the “gross unfairness” whereby secular buildings are excluded by the PWRF’s eligibility criteria, whilst religious organisations remain “fully entitled” to also apply for other general grants.

Scriven also questioned why an “LGBT+, atheist or woman taxpayer” should see their hard-earned money used to “prop up the roof of an establishment that rejects their rights”, highlighting that many of the religious bodies owning these buildings “discriminate in their hiring practices, refuse to perform same-sex marriages or bar women from leadership roles”.

Advocates for public funding for religious buildings sometimes claim the Church Commissioners cannot legally provide funding for local parish churches because its statutory duty is restricted to pensions and clergy salaries. However, in 2025, the Commissioners provided £97.7 million to the Diocesan Investment Programme – the CofE’s primary funding stream for evangelism.

The PWRF replaces the Listed Places of Worship Scheme. Between 2010 and 2025, nearly £350 million was granted to listed places of worship through the previous scheme.

Scriven said the PWRF “ring-fences millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money a year for the exclusive benefit of active religious buildings across the country”.

He added: “This is not a natural exercise in heritage conservation. It is an exercise in state patronage, filtering public tax revenue from citizens of all beliefs and none to subsidise the operational footprints of religious institutions.

“If we are to spend £92 million of public capital on heritage, let us do so through a strictly neutral secular framework, which these buildings and institutions can bid against. Let us build an exclusive fund for public space, not fund the structural fabric of private faith. I urge the Government to rethink this fund and use it to deliver and protect truly secular and inclusive buildings for a 2026 Britain.”

NSS: Government should “robustly scrutinise” religious organisations’ assets before awarding grants

NSS spokesperson Jack Rivington said: “Financial burdens should not be placed on the taxpayer whilst religious institutions fail to meet their responsibilities.

“In recent years the Church of England, one of the largest landowners and wealthiest institutions in the country, has directed significant sums of money towards various evangelism initiatives.

“The prioritisation of such efforts over the maintenance of historic buildings suggests the Church has the capacity to sustain its places of worship independently, but prefers taxpayers to do so.

“We therefore urge the Government to robustly scrutinise religious organisations’ assets and other sources of funding when making decisions over spending, and to minimise unnecessary burden on the taxpayer where those responsible for maintaining places of worship have the available assets to fund their own repairs.”