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
Compromise over cross at crematorium
Posted: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:50
As part of its recent £140,000 refurbishment of Haycombe Crematorium, Bath and North East Somerset Council removed a prominent window with a Christian cross etched on it and replaced it with plain glass. This was an effort to make clear that the building was for the use of the whole community, not just Christians.
The changes brought an immediate outcry from local Christians who claimed that the crematorium was a "chapel" and that the window should either be left as it was or replaced with another cross. They organised a 4,000 strong petition on the basis that the refurbishment represented a further "sidelining" of Christianity.
Now the council has compromised by putting a removable cross in front of the window which will be left in place unless there is a request for it to be removed.
Terry Sanderson, President of the NSS, said: "The idea that the crematorium is some sort of church or church-owned building springs from it being mis-named as a chapel. It is not a chapel or even a consecrated space, it is a council-owned civic facility for the use of the community as a whole."
Mr Sanderson said there was an increasing call for non-religious funerals and it was important for some people that they have a secular send-off. "Religious people are, of course, entitled to use the crematorium and bring in any religious symbols that they might want. But if it is that important to them, they can also have a service at their local church. People who don't want a religious funeral must be able to use a space that is free of the trappings of religion. Being able to remove the cross is an important concession to them."
Woking Council determined to keep free parking for “faith groups” only
Posted: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 12:05
Woking Borough Council in Surrey is to consider extending its policy of offering free parking to churchgoers to include those attending places of worship of other religions.
The move comes in response to a challenge from the National Secular Society which pointed out that offering such concessions only to Christians — as the council was doing — was likely to be illegal under the Equality Act 2010.
Although its legal advisors had informed the Council that the policy was likely to be in contravention of equality legislation, it is determined to continue the practice because it considers the "faith communities" need support. The Council sees it as a "legitimate purpose" to be an "engine for growth" for churches.
Some Council members are also members of the churches that have been receiving the concession.
The Council's cabinet is now recommending that the full Council adopt this Policy Statement:
- Places of worship, and the faith communities that they serve, play an important role, both in society in general and Woking in particular. They encourage people to participate in society, thereby promoting social inclusion. In addition, considerable voluntary work is organised by faith communities, often for the benefit of the more disadvantaged members of our society.
- The Council will, where it is reasonable and proportionate to do so, support the faith communities in the borough of Woking.
- In furtherance of this aim (a "legitimate aim" under the Equality Act 2010), the Council will allow members of a faith community to park free of charge, in the Council's off-street car parks, in order to attend a place of worship for the purpose of, or in connection with, worship on that faith community's primary day of worship.
- This Policy Statement was adopted by the Council on [ ]. It will be reviewed on [date five years in advance] or sooner if there is a material change in circumstances.
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: "Under the Equality Act 'religion and belief' also includes non-belief and 'religion' also includes those who have no religion. None of the people in these categories are accommodated by the Council's proposed new policy.
"The Council says that such people will not suffer disproportionate disadvantage if they have to pay while religious people don't. This makes no sense – if it is no burden for non-believers to pay, then surely it shouldn't be any more of a burden for church or mosque-goers to pay.
"On the assumption that, as is likely, this policy will be adopted by the Council, we are taking further legal advice as to how best to proceed."
Mr Sanderson said that many local authorities around the country have similar policies and in total they probably cost council taxpayers tens of millions of pounds.
See also: Church charges for parking
