Well attended meeting in Stanhope discusses church hall
OVER 80 people attended a meeting held in St Thomas church, Stanhope, hoping to hear good news
about the rumoured closure of the nearby church hall.
The hall is very well-used facility, catering for innumerable groups, ranging from babies and
toddlers to pensioners with all ages inbetween but the community is worried about its future. And,
as it turned out, they have cause to worry.
It was Rev Prince, former Parish Priest of a church in Liverpool, who welcomed the people as they
flocked together. He works in the Dale and serves on the Parochial Church Council (PCC) here, which
deals with every aspect of the ancient St Thomas church as well as the church hall.
He acknowledged the issues around the church hall in his opening speech and went on to
distribute an architect’s report and plans for the changes to be made in side and outside of the
church and churchyard
He highlighted repairs needed to the church hall roof with a cost of all repairs needed there
standing at £110,000. He added that the hall failed to cover all of its costs in this last year, which has
led to the discussion around its future. He said that the hall is not technically owned by the PCC but
the management of it is the responsibility of the PCC. The Custodian Trustee of the hall lies with the
Diocese Board of Finance.
He highlighted three issues with the hall – the rental situation in order for it to cover its basic
running costs – the rent would need to go up. The costs of repairs: a new roof, the render on front of
the building needs to come off and a raft of other things. The difficulty is around the number of
people who are available to manage the hall, he said.
It became a church hall in the 1950s, Rev Prince continued, when congregations in the church
were much larger than today with a choir and Sunday School and now it is under twenty with 70%
over 70 years of age.
The question for the PCC is does it have the capacity to manage one or two buildings because as
well as the church hall issues, the church itself has problems. In 2020, dry rot was discovered during
the pandemic when there wasn’t regular use of the building. The flooring needs replacing – at a cost
of £200,000 and there are other outbreaks of dry rot.
In terms of tackling these issues, the PCC has been working with historic funds and have now
grounds to liquidate them. As they are investing in the church itself, the PCC has looked at ways of
making it a more flexible community area.
Rev Prince continued as a lecturer would, speaking about rearranging items in the church,
including three of the ancient fonts, one to be taken outside into a new Garden of Remembrance.
He said that ‘some of the stuff going on in the church hall can be transferred here’. He went on to
say that his church in Liverpool, much newer than St Thomas, situated on an estate of 8000 people,
was also the community centre, which worked reasonably well.
Rev Prince handed over to the architect, Michael Atkinson, who drew gasps from the audience
when he mentioned some of the suggestions made, including bringing a new pathway, for better
access, through the graveyard where ancient and important graves are placed. He mentioned
extending the Chancel Dais as a versatile space that could be used during church services and as a
stage. He spoke of removing the church pews and replacing them with moveable furniture to make it
a flexible space for all manner of groups and events. Then there was the new innovative ‘chandelier’
that would provide heating at the rear of the church where the radiators would be removed.
The audience remained, apparently patiently listening although there were murmurs of
discontent until eventually, twenty minutes into the meeting, it was opened up to questions and
dozens of hands lifted to the roof. A renowned local archaeologist was first, asking if the architect
had been informed of the large archaeological feature at the bottom of the graveyard that is only
usually visible after the grass has been cut.
‘Has that been taken into account?’, she asked. ‘Because the archaeologists will be watching!’.
The architect appeared lost for words and did not reply.
A member of the PCC, Kathleen Kirby, spoke to ‘reassure people that the pathway will not affect
any graves but that she hadn’t been aware of the archaeological feature.’
There were other comments about the size of the kitchen needed and other matters until one
member of the audience said that she thought the meeting was about what was going to happen to
the church hall.
‘The cost of the pathway you mention would surely pay for the repairs to the church hall’, she
suggested to a burst of applause.
Unperturbed, Rev Prince replied that the church had to be the PCC’s priority and that the church
hall would probably have to be sold. There were rumblings again of disagreement. He said if the
community wanted to purchase it, that may be a solution but restrictions meant that it would have
to be sold on the open market.
The new Treasurer of the PCC, Paula McLeod, said that she understood the concerns but that
funding had come from endowment legacies, left to the church over a hundred years ago, that had
been cashed in but what it could be spent on was restricted to the church itself. Match funding could
be applied for too. Some were wondering if those legacies were from folk buried in the churchyard
that was about to have a footpath placed over them.
One member said it appeared as though the decision to sell the church hall had already been
made to which Ms McLeod replied, ‘No, not at all’.
A member of the Diocese, who deals with fundraising and suchlike made himself known even
though the Weardale Gazette had been firmly told a few weeks earlier that the church hall was not
the responsibility of the Diocese, which is confusing. He explained his role in helping churches gain
heritage funding. He mentioned the heritage and the key elements of the church. This church is a
huge asset that goes back hundreds of years.
And Indeed it does and is an attraction for visitors and a place of pride for locals (Ed).
County Councillor Anita Savory stood to ask questions directly of Rev Prince. She said, “This
seems to be happening at a great speed and I don’t think the public out there are fully aware of
what’s going on – because there hasn’t been the publicity (from the church).
“You speak of Headliners. Just what is the cost of these Headliners- and that was your word – for
the church hall? Has there been any plea to the community to replace that money for the
Headliners?.’
Rev Prince replied saying the roof will cost £25,000, rendering on the front is £45,000 and on-
going repairs. The real issues are the on-going rates to make it pay its way and then there is the
wherewithal to keep it going.
Cllr Savory continued, asking if they had reached out to the community – with cries of ‘No’ coming
from the audience. She continued unabated, asking if they had applied for any grants.
The reply was: ‘It’s about having the capacity to do all of these things.’
Cllr Savory carried on; ‘And very importantly, have you taken into consideration the importance
of the church hall and the many, many groups, some of them very sensitive, that it serves?
‘And also at the front is the Police station. What happens with that because we need a Police
presence here in Weardale.’
Rev Prince replied saying that the Police are on a leasehold and are part of the building to be
retained by the church so will not be affected. He made no mention of any groups, sensitive or not.
Finally, Anita Savory mentioned the graves in the churchyard that would be affected by a new
pathway. ‘People have been laid to rest there. Is there not an alternative to that pathway? As we
move forward, we will all have a final resting place and I don’t believe anyone here would like to
think that when they are laid to rest, a pathway in the future would go over the top of them.’
There was another burst of applause.
There were questions around the repairs to the church hall and the need for rendering. Michael
Atkinson, the architect then revealed that he had not been asked to assess the church hall. The
church hall roof, the audience heard, does have daylight coming through it so a report was
commissioned.
A man in the audience asked if they would put the church hall on the market with a hole in the
roof. The reply was in the affirmative with one audience member shouting out , ‘So, you want to sell
the church hall to fund the church? Rumblings of agreement with the question and discontent
among the audience.
‘As Trustees’, Rev Prince began, but was drowned out by folks shouting that the PCC did not value
the church hall. Another pointed out it would cost much more to heat the church than the church
hall.
‘As Trustees, you need to think about the people of Stanhope’, said another, ‘because the church
hall is the hub of Stanhope. You’re saying the church is most important. I’ve just gone into the
church hall because I thought the meeting was there and the hall is full of people – the Photography
group and people playing badminton.
‘It really is the absolute centre of Stanhope and when I look at that kitchen in the hall and think
that you haven’t considered about the Root and Branch Café, which really is so fundamental (to the
area) – elderly people go there for a cheap or free meal and we sit there for hours.’
The lady continued, listing the groups and clubs that use the hall. She continued, ‘When I walked in
here, I heard that things happening currently in the church hall can happen here in the church, well I
can’t see anyone playing badminton in here while there is meeting going on or another group is
there, not in this environment.
‘ It seems to me that a decision has already been taken that the church hall goes.’
She went on to say how a friend of hers who is involved in a church locally is regularly contacted
by Durham County Council asking if they would like money from one pot or another.
‘It seems like there is no-one trying to save the church hall and I think there are real issues here –
this meeting has a foregone conclusion, which is disrespectful to the community and people of
Stanhope’.
Another hearty round of applause in agreement.
Yet another member of the audience asked that if the church was to also be a community centre,
how will it work at weekends – or if there is a funeral, which no-one can predict. How would that
affect the groups already booked? The Markets cannot be cancelled at the last minute. They and
other events take a long time to organise.
A lady said that her son-in-law, a tradesman, offered to come and look at the heating in the
church hall free of charge and to make any repairs at cost price. He never once had a reply.
Sarah Foot from the upper Dale, asked if the Community had been consulted or asked to help?
‘There are always people who can do a bit of plastering, painting,’ she said. ‘ £5000 for painting
windows? Give me a pot of paint and I’ll paint what needs doing,’ adding that she had started a
petition, which had gained 57 signatures over four days.
That petition was passed around and almost everyone there signed it as the meeting continued.
‘You should be reaching out to the community for help. We need that hall, we love that hall, and the
amount of people who come to our markets there who suffer from mental health issues is
astounding – they can’t go anywhere else.’
The meeting was asked if the community could have the opportunity to buy the hall. The reply
again was that if it was to be sold, it had to go on the open market because of one of the restrictions.
Another audience member said she agreed that it sounded like a foregone conclusion. ‘In all the
places we have lived – and we have only lived here for six months- I have never seen a hall so well
used. Surely, you communicated with everyone right at the beginning? Can’t we support the church
AND the church hall?’
A man said he thought to close and sell the church hall was short-sighted and if that decision HAD
been made, the decision needs to be changed.
Anne Hodgson, a volunteer at the church hall, asked why there is such a big deficit in the accounts
for it? ‘How have we got to this situation?’
Ms Mcleod replied that the funding was from the previous year and the Treasurer at the time
took some of this funding into 2023 and some of the expenses into 2024 therefore the fall-out has
come into 2024. A member of the audience disagreed with the explanation. The new Treasurer went
on to explain further although it appeared too complicated for most of the audience. Some of the
groups using the hall are subsidised by the church, she said, and they had now come to the situation
where the PCC is no longer able to do that because of the reduced income.
She said she wasn’t disagreeing with what had been said but just to break even, they would now
have to charge £35 an hour just to use the church hall. Who would pay that? A comment came back
that if the community came to use the church then wouldn’t that cost £35 an hour too? Again, it was
pointed out that the church would cost more to heat than the church hall. There was a disagreement
over that and the conversation about finances continued, with one speaking about the flats above
the church hall, which bring funds in through rental. They appear to be empty and have been for
some time.
A man in the audience asked if the church hall could be leased to the community at a peppercorn
rent until funding had been raised to buy it but the simple answer was ‘no’.
The conversation continued with one member pointing out that the only reason everyone was
there was because they had read about it in the Weardale Gazette and they had come to hear about
the church hall, not the church. Why is there no capacity for grants – all the community places in the
Dale operate with the help of grants?
Anita Savory got to her feet again to say, ‘The need for the church hall is greater now than ever
because of the closure of Stanhope Town Hall. It necessitates the need for St Thomas church hall,
especially in the centre of the street.
‘Can I respectively ask you to call another meeting that deals specifically with the church hall and
not to confuse the two with the church because the people are really interested in the church hall
itself.’
There were murmurs of agreement and applause at that suggestion. Rev Prince referred to the
lack of people ‘with the energy’ to do that without committing to another meeting. He also said he
took the point about the Weardale Gazette article.
‘We weren’t expecting the Gazette article to come out. We have not had long to digest the report
commissioned on the church hall but effectively it has been hidden in plain sight. We don’t work as
an independent body, we need permissions and we must take advice.’
He was interrupted by a member of the audience who said, ‘It is not a good look for the church to
be killing a community asset.’
Rev Prince said it was not a decision taken lightly. Another man asked if it was possible to rent it
to the community on 100 year lease so the community could attract funding to keep it going? The
answer was that it would be a question for the Diocese.
Joan Carrick, Chairman of Stanhope Parish Council asked what the church hall had been valued at
and the reply was £450,000. She asked of the audience – ‘Who does NOT want to see the church hall
remain as a church hall. Stand up if you don’t want that’. No-one moved.
She went on, with her knowledge of the history of Weardale to say, ‘This was once the richest
Parish in the country and the church took thousands and thousands of pounds out of this Dale.’
She was referring to the lead, fluorspar and other aggregates that the church owns below ground
and the amount the poor and often starving lead miners had to pay not only to the Bishop of
Durham but also to the Parish Priest of Stanhope.
“And now, all we are asking for is a little bit of consideration so we can keep something that is
really valuable to us here at the centre of the Dale. It is easy to access, people do use it and the
people are here not to talk about the church, as much as we value it, but came thinking we were
going to be discussing the church hall.
‘Everybody here wants the church hall to continue and I think we need to be looking at ways we
can do that.’
Applause.
Local businesswoman, Diane Wright, said she had come there with an open mind and just to listen
to what was happening. ‘We need to pull together’, she said, ‘because there is a can’t do attitude
here when we can all have a can do attitude, we really can.’
Joan added, ‘If we can raise the money for the church then surely, we can raise the money for the
church hall.’
Silence followed before a former member of the PCC gave a few words of encouragement but
also said it was a choice between keeping the church or the church hall. It seemed to us that the
church needed help so we founded the Friends of St Thomas and it’s that group who is trying to raise
funding for the new floor.
‘We all agree that the hall is a brilliant asset for the community and if there are enough people
wanting to help keep it, we might be able to.’
Another asked if the community could help or join the PCC or was it a ‘closed shop’. Rev Prince
said all areas would be explored.
Sarah Foot asked for a show of hands of those willing to help with the dilemma and most raised
them.
There were pockets of those present complaining about the plans for the church amongst
themselves. St Thomas Parish Church is second only to Durham Cathedral in the county. It is part
Norman with early English style dating from the 12th century. In front of the Church grounds can be
found a stone cross which is a remnant of the weekly markets which were held here from 1421 until
the 19th century. It is not a building that should be altered inside or out was the consensus of
opinion.
And so, the meeting closed after an hour and a half of debate and information, leaving those
there with more questions than answers. There is a locally held view that the mortgage of the
church hall was paid off decades ago by three parishioners who handed ownership over to the PCC
and which is now held in Trust by the Diocese. The Diocese, however, has denied ownership.
If the church and PCC thought that the people of Stanhope would simply accept a proposal to
close the church hall without a fight, they were seriously mistaken.
