<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Horsell&#039;s Mouth &#187; churches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/tag/churches/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com</link>
	<description>Politics, pedantry and personal interests</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:14:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Tale of two churches</title>
		<link>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2009/09/tale-of-two-churches/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2009/09/tale-of-two-churches/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>simonashall</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Woking Borough Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[churches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[community grants scheme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disability Discrimination Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Woking Conservatives]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://simonashall.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/tale-of-two-churches</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Thursday evening, a number of churches are applying to Woking Borough Council for grants from the community fund. I am pretty uneasy about taxpayers subsidising a religious organisation of any kind, simply because by the very nature of the organisation, a large proportion of the population will never see the benefit of that investment. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<div class="topsy_widget_data topsy_theme_blue" style="float: right;margin-left: 0.75em; background: url(data:,%7B%20%22url%22%3A%20%22http%253A%252F%252Fwww.thehorsellsmouth.com%252F2009%252F09%252Ftale-of-two-churches%252F%22%2C%20%22style%22%3A%20%22big%22%2C%20%22title%22%3A%20%22Tale%20of%20two%20churches%22%20%7D);"></div>
<p>On Thursday evening, a number of churches are applying to <strong>Woking Borough Council</strong> for grants from the community fund. I am pretty uneasy about taxpayers subsidising a religious organisation of any kind, simply because by the very nature of the organisation, a large proportion of the population will never see the benefit of that investment.</p>
<p>Two of the applications, though serve as a perfect contrast to my mind of what should and should not get our money. <strong>St Mary&#8217;s Church</strong> in Byfleet has put in an application for <strong>£5,000</strong> towards provide new disabled toilets. The work involves clearing out a cleaning cupboard and installing drainage and a disabled toilet facility.</p>
<p>£5,000 seems like quite a bit for this work but the council will only provide half anyway. The application by the church will bring it into line with the <strong>Disability Discrimination Act</strong> and also includes future plans to provide a sports/community facility for the area. I hope the organisation gets the money it wants.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the <strong>United Reformed Church</strong> in White Rose Lane is after <strong>£100,000</strong> towards a £2million scheme it wants to put in place to</p>
<blockquote><p><em>&#8220;open up the premises, making them more welcoming and accessible; providing<br />
top-quality facilities for all users, seeking to ensure the church becomes a<br />
focal point for community life and activity; rejuvenating and updating the<br />
entire site; providing space for quiet reflection; providing more space for the<br />
growing youth and children&#8217;s work&#8230;&#8221;</em></p></blockquote>
<p>I cannot see where the benefit to the wider community is here &#8211; only to the current and future congregation and it is not the council&#8217;s job to help the church increase that.</p>
<p>There is reference here only to improving what&#8217;s already there for the benefit of churchgoers and those who want &#8220;quiet reflection&#8221; ie prayer. And the reference to children&#8217;s work doesn&#8217;t cut it either &#8211; <em>why on earth or heaven should the taxpayer foot the bill for to help the URC secure its next generation of followers and funders</em>?</p>
<p>In March, the executive turned down a request for <strong>£50,000</strong>. The officers have brought it back again at <strong>£20,000</strong> using the &#8220;Lisbon Treaty&#8221; version of decision-making. No doubt if £20,000 is refused it will come back next year for £10,000. <em>This isn&#8217;t a good use of Woking residents&#8217; money &#8211; I hope the executive kicks out the URC application once and for all</em>.</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thehorsellsmouth.com/2009/09/tale-of-two-churches/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

