Services funded by public money should be open to all, without alienating anyone.
The recent drive to contract out public services to faith groups risks undermining equal access.
Help us keep public services free from discrimination and evangelism.
The government is increasingly pushing for more publicly-funded services to be provided by religious organisations.
Many faith-based groups have carried out social service without imposing their beliefs. But religious groups taking over public service provision raises concerns regarding proselytising and discrimination.
65% of people have no confidence in church groups running crucial social provisions such as healthcare with only 2% of people expressing a lot of confidence.
Any organisations involved in delivering public services should be bound by equality law and restrictions on proselytisation.
Those advocating for faith organisations to take over more public services risk undermining these restrictions, which exist to protect both the public and third sector.
"We have concerns that some religious groups that seek to take over public services, particularly at local level, could pursue policies and practices that result in increased discrimination against marginalised groups, particularly in service provision and the employment of staff. Non-religious people and those not seen to confirm to the dominant ethos of a religious body, such as being in an unmarried relationship or divorced and being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered, could find themselves subject to discrimination."
Unitarian Church (Submission to the Parliamentary Public Administration Select Committee about the Big Society agenda)
There are also concerns about faith-based mental health and pastoral care in public institutions, including chaplaincy programmes in the NHS and the armed forces. Where such services are funded by the state, they should not be organised around religion or belief.
Religious commentators are often keen to document the contribution of religious organisations to the third sector and social activism. But they fail to demonstrate why it should be the state's role to build this capacity or why local authorities shouldn't have legitimate concerns about religious groups running services.
Take Action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to protect secular public services.
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
New NHS guidance requires hospitals to provide pastoral care to non-religious
Posted: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:26
New guidance published by NHS England will require hospitals in England to consider the needs of non-religious patients by ensuring they have access to appropriate pastoral care.
The National Secular Society has cautiously welcomed the new guidance, after previously criticising an earlier draft for failing to adequately recognise the needs of patients who do not identify with a religious faith. The NSS has longstanding concerns about the inappropriate and unsustainable nature of faith-based chaplaincy in the NHS.
The report, Promoting Excellence in Pastoral, Spiritual and Religious Care, sets out to "respond to changes in the NHS, society and the widening understanding of spiritual, religious and pastoral care."
The guidance states that "it is important to note that people who do not hold a particular religious affiliation may still require pastoral support in times of crisis" and defines chaplaincy as "intended to also refer to non-religious pastoral and spiritual care providers who provide care to patients, family and staff".
The guidance also makes clear that patients and service users have a right to expect that chaplaincy care will be experienced as neither insensitive nor proselytising.
NSS campaigns manager Stephen Evans commented: "The acknowledgement that the non-religious should have equal access to appropriate pastoral support is to be welcomed. As the new guidance acknowledges, society has changed drastically in recent years, and a significant number of patients are not being best served by religious-only chaplains.
"However, the adoption of a multi-faith approach, rather than a truly secular system of chaplaincy, is problematic. With finite resources available, there is a real risk that a multi-faith chaplaincy service will still leave the non-religious and those of minority faiths disadvantaged.
"Rather than providing chaplaincy within a religious framework, the NHS should strive to offer emotional and practical support to all patients and staff equally – with pastoral care positions being open to anyone with the necessary skills to provide such support, regardless of their religion or belief.
"Religious care, where required, could be provided and funded by the religious communities themselves".
Dr Antony Lempert of the Secular Medical Forum said: "The recognition by NHS England that it is not only religious people who require comfort and pastoral support at times of distress is welcome and long overdue."
He added that whilst the new chaplaincy guidance is "certainly a step in the right direction" it "doesn't go nearly far enough." Dr Lempert noted that there is still a requirement for chaplains to "abide by the requirements of their sponsoring religious or belief community" and argued that "in certain cases this may result in conflict between the traditional views of some religions and in particular disapproval of certain lifestyle choices or expression of sexuality and the non-judgmental, supportive role that all NHS staff should be offering."
Dr Lempert added that "it is encouraging that the authors of the new guidance have at least recognised this potential conflict and have advised that all chaplaincy staff should adhere to equality legislation above all." However he questioned how this was to be reconciled in practice with the fact that "certain religious groups following religious dogma have fought equality legislation tooth and nail."
"The recommendation that a proportion of NHS jobs be reserved for people of faith runs counter to the direction and spirit of equality legislation. If chaplains are to be employed by the NHS, about which there remains considerable debate, then they should be employed on merit just like everybody else.
"All chaplains should be able to provide succour and support to all patients irrespective of their own or the patients' personal beliefs. If specific religious care is requested by patients then the chaplain should be able to signpost patients in the right direction.
"To suggest that certain religious groups of patients deserve specific religious staff of their own denomination to cater for their special needs serves only to maintain the traditional privileges afforded to religious groups. If chaplains are to be appointed on the basis of their religion to serve patients of their religion then such an overtly religious role should be paid for privately by the religious groups who will benefit from this."
In 2009/10 NSS research revealed £29 million was spent on hospital chaplaincy from NHS budgets.
Police and Crime Commissioner criticised for awarding tens of thousands of pounds to Christian groups
Posted: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 13:14
The National Secular Society has raised concerns about a scheme to "nurture, equip and enable" religious organisations to help reduce crime in Northamptonshire.
Northamptonshire Police and Crime Commission Adam Simmonds, described as a "committed Christian", set up the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) in 2014, promising that "the Office will not favour any particular organisation on the grounds of faith."
However, all religious organisations awarded funding to-date have been Christian. The director of the OFBCI, Helen Boardman, who is paid between £35,000 and £42,000, described herself as an "active Christian" with a "real passion for people who are broken and lost".
The National Secular Society (NSS) has expressed concern that funding is being awarded without any measure of how effective the initiatives are.
NSS campaigns manager Stephen Evans said: "public funding should be dependent on objective assessments of whether the initiatives are genuinely effective and represent value for money. An active Christian with a 'real passion for people who are broken and lost' may not be best placed to objectively assess the merits of spending public money on church based outreach programmes."
Of the £63,410 given out by the OFBCI since its launch in January 2014, £50,000 has been awarded to Christian groups, with the rest going to non-faith based community initiatives.
£16,000 was awarded Crime2Christ to establish school chaplains in three secondary schools to "support young people after school "and have a "visible presence on routes to and from school, on bus routes, around the local community and local shops."
Other funded projects include a 12-step Recovery Support Program run by the Full Gospel Church; Developing Street Pastors run by Corby Street Pastors to provide "a reassuring presence during the night time in Corby"; a family intervention programme run by Crime2Christ; and a crime prevention scheme run by the New Ark Foundation, which promotes "health, education and general social welfare of individuals and families… through culturally competent and faith sensitive services".
Stephen Evans argued that there was a danger that such faith initiatives were being used to "paper over cracks in public service provision", but also raised concerns about the appropriateness of funding groups with a specific religious focus.
"Many Christians have long been concerned about their diminishing relevance and influence in modern society and churches are increasingly using social action to give themselves a purpose. But there is an evangelical agenda behind much of this 'outreach' work and everybody needs to be clear about that. Assisting churches to deliver the gospel of Jesus to the unchurched isn't a proper use of public money – so police forces should think twice before actively supporting or funding churches' missionary work.
"Community initiatives, secular and religious, can provide real benefits to local communities, but faith-based projects should be self-funded and supplementary to secular public services, because in a multi faith and increasingly non-religious society, public services should be equally appropriate and accessible to all – and there's a big question mark over how inclusive groups with specific religious ethos can be."
The lack of funding provided to non-Christian faith groups has been criticised by local religious leaders.
The Reverend David Wiseman, of Northampton Inter Faith Forum, told the BBC that he was "disappointed" only Christian religious groups had received money.
Krishna Thakrar, of Wellingborough's Hindu Temple, said he felt "excluded." A number of non-Christian religious leaders the BBC contacted said they had never heard of the scheme. Mr Thakrar said: "If those administrating it cannot contact certain groups they shouldn't be running it."
Stephen Evans commented: "Another good reason to keep religion out of policing is its potential for divisiveness and the inevitable competing demands of religious groups who feel excluded."
In an interview with the Jesus Army website last year, Mr Simmonds said he would "robustly" challenge the notion that Britain's future belonged to secular humanism. "I passionately believe that religion can be – and is – a huge force for good in our society, and that faith drives many people to do amazing things." He has not yet commented on the controversy surrounding the project.
