Minutes of a session of the Bath and Wells Diocesan Synod held at The University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath on Saturday 21

March 2015 at 9.30 am

The Synod was welcomed to the University by Mr M Humphriss, University Secretary, who highlighted that the University, which was one of the top 10 in the UK, included students from 130 countries.

The session opened with worship led by the Revd Preb Angela Berners-Wilson, Chaplain at The University of Bath, and students from the University Christian Union.

Ms Christina Baron, Chair, House of Laity, in the Chair

1 Presidential addressThe Presidential address was given by The Rt Revd Peter Hancock, Bishop of Bath and Wells.

Bishop Peter thanked the Vice Chancellor, Dame Glynis Breakwell and her staff for the welcome we had received, and also thanked Angela Berners-Wilson for her welcome and for leading us in our worship.

We were extremely fortunate to have two leading universities, Bath and Bath Spa, within the diocese.

Meeting in a university gave us the opportunity to think about the place of higher education in our society, and how the church might engage with and respond to changes in higher education. Approximately 43% of 18-25 year olds were in higher education, a figure that reminded us that the church needed to maintain its presence and its witness within the life of colleges and universities.

The church’s involvement with higher education went back to the original foundation of the first universities, and, in 1811, before there was any state provision, the church made a significant move by establishing the National Society and providing the first church schools. The success of this movement had led to the Archbishop of Canterbury urging Bishops to establish teacher training colleges, with the result that by the start of the twentieth century 85% of all teachers were training in church colleges. It

1

was not until the 1902 Education Act that statutory bodies were first given powers to build teacher training colleges.

Most of these original church teacher training colleges have now closed, but some of the church colleges have continued and have become the Cathedrals Group of Universities.

Higher education had changed rapidly and dramatically in recent years. One of the drivers for increasing participation has been to supply highly skilled workers to grow the economy. Whilst legitimate in itself, this has led to a highly instrumentalist view of higher education, in response to which the Church of England has consistently sought to ask the question “What is the purpose of higher education?” and has advocated a richer view of higher education as being about the holistic development of individuals and the formation of communities.

The church has argued that there is an over-emphasis on students as consumers rather than as learners, and has raised questions about the wisdom of so many young people beginning adult life in debt, and seeing debt as something which is normal. In 2010, Bishop John Saxbee had commented “We must ask ourselves whether the normalising of debt in this way is morally defensible or socially sustainable.”

It was encouraging that support for chaplaincies in most higher education institutions appeared to be being maintained and in some places increased, and we can thank God that this is the case. The Bishop referred to the role of Angela Berners-Wilson as Chaplain at Bath University, and the chaplaincy input provided by Jan Knott at Bath Spa University. The Bishop was sure that chaplaincies, along with other services, would increasingly be monitored for impact. But impact in its most mechanistic sense was not what chaplaincy is ultimately about. Part of the calling and ministry of chaplains was not only to provide a prayerful presence, pastoral care and a faithful witness to Christ, but also to keep alive a bigger vision of what higher education is about. Universities and colleges of higher education not only contributed to economic wellbeing and public good but were places where society was helped to reflect on itself.

The Bishop invited Synod to reflect on our responsibility to support students and staff in higher education in developing their gifts and talents for the good of society as a whole. We needed to celebrate the Church’s ministry in higher education, and at the same time take seriously the potential which higher education offered for the Church’s engagement with the world.

2

The Bishop encouraged us to pray for those who work and study here, that horizons may be broadened, that the potential of each person may be realised, such that every student, younger and older, can make a valuable contribution to society.

The Bishop asked us to commit to pray and support chaplains as they worked alongside people of all faiths and none, as they supported Christians working in higher education, and as they sought to bring the insights of their faith to bear in their work. We needed to pray for chaplains in the vital work that they do in proclaiming the Gospel afresh to this generation, and making Him known to those in their care.

2 MinutesThe Synod resolved that the minutes of the session of the Diocesan Synod held on 18 October 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairs.

3 Matters arising from the MinutesShared conversations on Scripture, Mission and Human Sexuality.

Bishop Peter reminded Synod that Archbishops Justin and Sentamu had asked every diocese to take part in “Shared Conversations” which were being organised on a regional basis. The first shared conversation event was taking place in this region in April, and would include people from Bath and Wells, Truro, Exeter, Bristol and Gloucester. There would be professional facilitators leading the event.

The diocese had been asked to send 10 participants who broadly represented the life of the church and the various viewpoints on these issues. The Bishop had invited 10 participants and they were all going to take part. By its very nature this was a very sensitive area, and for that reason we would not be publicising the names of the participants. There was now a website www.sharedconversations.org giving further details.

The conversations had two objectives, both with a focus on the church’s mission. One was to enable the Church of England to reflect, in the light of scripture, on the changes which have taken place in social attitudes. The other was to clarify what it means for the Church of England to live with what the Archbishop of Canterbury has called “good disagreement” on these issues. In bringing this to Synod the Bishop commended these shared conversations to our prayers and led Synod in a brief prayer.

4 Bishop’s Council

3

The minutes of the meetings of the Bishop’s Council held on 5 November 2014 and 27 January 2015 were noted.

5 QuestionsA question had been submitted by Mr John Spencer of Chew Magna Deanery. A copy of the question and answer is attached as an appendix to these minutes.

6 21st Century Chaplaincy in a Secular InstitutionThe Synod received a presentation from The Revd Preb Angela Berners-Wilson, Chaplain at the University of Bath, who referred to the work of the 9 member Chaplaincy Team, including the Chaplaincy Assistants who acted as bridges between the Chaplains and the 16,000 students, 30% of whom were internationals. The presentation included the following points:

The Mission Statement of the Chaplaincy:• 1) To serve the spiritual and religious needs of the University

Community  • 2) To provide pastoral care and friendship for all staff and students

of the University • 3) To enhance the learning experience through exploration of faith,

peace and justice issues.

In worship:• The Chaplaincy provides a space for the daily CU prayer meeting• Midweek Eucharist and mid day prayers twice weekly • Sunday Mass - Friday Rosary - Lectio Divina- Orthodox prayers• Memorial services after student/staff deaths• Private prayer space and praying with people

Pilgimmage: helping students to expand their religious horizons e.g. by attending Student Week on Iona

Public profile• The Chaplains team organises the annual Carol Service in Bath

Abbey• Involvement in special events – eg 50th anniversary of foundation of

the University in 2016/17• The University likes to have a chaplain present at Graduation

Ceremonies• University Chaplain invited to the Installation of new Chancellor,

Founder’s Day events, Chancellor’s Dinner in Graduation week• Public Debates

4

Pastoral Provision• Chaplaincy works alongside the Counselling team in Student

Services. 1:1 listening • Frequent cross referencing from the mental health team• Provision of bereavement counselling; meeting with families;

planning of memorial events

Reaching out-the Chaplaincy organises• Public lectures and debates on faith matters eg ‘What is Blasphemy’

debate following on from the Charlie Hebdo tragedy• Seminars eg gender based abuse• Exhibitions eg Holocaust Memorial Exhibition• Peace vigils on the Parade • Weekly Oxfam lunches

Interfaith relations including an annual 3 Faith Forum with speakers from Judaism, Christianity and Islam

Student life• Many different Christian student societies are based at the

Chaplaincy Centre• The Chaplaincy provides a social space and a safe space for

students to meet and relax in the middle of a very pressured life• “One of the only places in the University where I don’t feel I am

being judged.”• Freshers’ week events including Freshers’ Fair; drop in

centre ;counselling; phone number for concerned parents• Welcoming international students• Hospitality eg Globe café – free weekly lunch for international

students organised by the Christian Union

Responding to the needs of 2,500 university staff• Chaplain on the Staff Society Committee• Organising social events• Chaplaincy available for staff groups

Challenges of Chaplaincy• Showing that Christianity is still relevant in a very pick-and-mix,

multi-cultural environment• Getting known within the Institution• Attracting people to the Chaplaincy Centre• Reaching out to the people who really need us

5

• Ensuring we are available at crises points : – freshers week, exam time, after sudden death

• Speaking truth to power• Keeping ethics in science• Resisting ‘tick box’ mentality • Coping with hostility from atheists• Irrelevance of denominationalism• Being understood by parish clergy

Summary• Chaplaincy is not a church but a signpost to God through provision

of spiritual care; pastoral welfare; hospitality and welcome; outreach• Chaplaincy is at the coal face of mission• By what we do, we take the Gospel to the people, not vice versa• Huge importance of having a visible witness at the heart of a very

secular university e.g. ensuring that ethical issues don’t get lost in the excitement of scientific discovery

• Chaplaincy provides a challenge to the Churches- how can we learn from each other more?

Following the presentation The Revd Berners-Wilson was joined by The Revd C. Sourbut and The Revd B. Chapman for a question and answer session, during which the following questions were asked:

From Mr P LeRoy: “We find it difficult to do apologetics – what opportunities are there to deal with big questions?”

In response, the Revd A Berners-Wilson acknowledged that this could be hit and miss, but referred to the opportunity to take part in debates and talks, and for some individual conversations. The Revd C Sourbut also acknowledged the need for us to get better at this. Having previously taught at the University, during her training for the ministry she had had a number of such conversations.

The Revd S Crossman asked what financial support was received from the University, in response to which the Revd Berners-Wilson stated that she received some £18,000 from the University for the Chaplaincy Centre. She was treated as a member of staff.

In response to a question from Mrs B Walker, the Revd Berners-Wilson agreed that we needed to do more to encourage and guide lay people.

6

In response to a question from Mr J Key-Pugh about limitations on evangelism, it was noted that the Christian Union organised evangelism. She would never have been appointed if evangelism had been her chief concern. However sharing her faith was part of what she did as a Priest.

In response to a question about new ways of church, the chaplain acknowledged the importance social media and of fresh expressions of church; the Christian Union encouraged home groups. There was a need, however, to be wary of cults. .

7 Feedback from October Synod on budget priorities for 2016At the Synod on 18 October 2014 breakout sessions had been convened during which members had been asked to reflect on the question “What three things would you like the Bishop’s Council to consider as budget priorities?”

The feedback from each group was set out in the report. In summary, focusing on the spheres of Ministry, Finance and Structure, the priorities identified by the groups were as follows:

Ministry: The development of lay ministry Ministry to children and young people (e.g. schools and FE Colleges) Investment in clergy e.g. ministry to new housing/ new communities

Financial: Use reserves to boost Fund for Church Growth-to invest in churches

that are growing. What is our theology of money? Look for external sources of revenue. Parish share issues: decline in membership affects individual

contributions; whilst increased membership also leads to increased costs.

Structural: There is a need to review Diocesan Structures Structural change should facilitate mission Should we worship in larger numbers with ministry more centralised?

The Bishop informed Synod that the Bishop’s Council had noted the emphasis on the need to develop lay ministry and on issues of clergy deployment, and had also noted the issue of whether the DBF should fund support for the increasing administrative burden in parishes.

7

The Bishop asked Synod to note that these priorities would be commended to budget holders, the Finance Group and the Bishop’s Council, and taken into account when preparing the budget for 2016.

The Synod noted the report.

8 Report from General Synod – 10-12 February 2015The Synod received a report on the February General Synod sessions from Fay Wilson-Rudd, who would be stepping down later this year after 21 years on General Synod. Miss Wilson-Rudd was grateful for the opportunity to serve on Synod, and referred to the following matters from the February sessions:

Amending Canon No. 33, which allowed women to be consecrated to the episcopate. All in our church would be valued.

The plight of Iraqi Christians had been highlighted at the Synod. The statement by the Archbishop of Canterbury that evangelism and

witness are not strategies, but that we need strategies, as a means to an end. We worship and adore God in Christ, and we need to bear witness to Christ.

We needed to be aware of the tension between Christ as the hope of the world and multi-faith dialogue.

Miss Wilson-Rudd commented on the length and complexity of Synod processes and expressed the hope that discussion groups would in future be facilitated, and that there would be more opportunity for lay involvement in Synod worship.

Past General Synod debates are available to watch/listen to or read on the General Synod webpage.

Miss Wilson-Rudd also referred to the post-Synod briefing on “A programme for Reform and Renewal” which had been tabled. This programme was designed to enable the Church of England to be better equipped for meeting the significant challenge that it faces as a result of decades of declining church attendance and an increasing age profile. The programme included the following elements:

• Developing discipleship• Resourcing ministerial education• Resourcing the future• Simplification of the Church’s rule book • Discerning and nurturing senior leaders• The possibility of time limited distributions from Church

Commissioner Funds to help support elements of the programme.

8

Mrs J Humphreys and the Revd J Dudley-Smith reflected on their experience as members of General Synod and encouraged members to get involved if they wanted to make a difference. It was important that the voice of parishes was heard.

9 Diocesan Synod and General Synod Elections 2015The report set out the proposed arrangements for elections to Diocesan Synod and General Synod, both of which were due to take place in 2015.

(a)Diocesan SynodThese elections would take place at deanery level. In each deanery the Presiding Officer for the House of Clergy elections would be the Lay Chair, and for the House of Laity elections the Presiding Officer would be the Rural Dean, with the Deanery Synod Secretary assisting in each case and supported by the Diocesan Secretary, who would shortly be writing to these officers with detailed guidance and the necessary forms.

The Assistant Diocesan Secretary asked Synod to note a revised list, which had been circulated at the meeting, setting out the numbers of clergy and laity to be elected from each deanery, headed “Diocesan Synod Elections 2015 – Appendix A Revised”.

The timetable was set out in the report and included the following dates: Last date for return of nominations – 31 May 2015 Voting to take place – June 2015 Diocesan Secretary to be notified of results – by 15 July 2015 New members of Synod take office – 1 August 2015 First meeting of new Synod – 17 October 2015

The nominal membership of Diocesan Synod was 220. In response to a suggestion that the Synod should be smaller and more focused, the Bishop indicated that he intended to review the size and role of Synod in time to introduce changes for the 2018 elections. Due to the lead-in required it was not possible to change the size of Synod for the 2015 elections.

(b)General SynodThe timetable for these elections included the following dates: Closing date for nominations – 4 September 2015 Close of ballot – 9 October 2015 Count to be held – Tuesday 13 October 2015 at The Old Deanery

9

The Presiding Officer for these elections would be Nick May, the Diocesan Secretary.

A leaflet produced by Church House, “Your voice counts”, which gave a brief introduction to the General Synod elections and details of the elections website, was tabled.

The General Synod had determined that the number to be elected from this diocese to the House of Clergy would be 4 and the number to be elected to the House of Laity would be 5, which was unchanged from 2010.

The Synod resolved that the arrangements set out in the report, together with the revised Appendix A setting out the numbers of clergy and laity to be elected from each deanery, as tabled, be approved.

10 Update on the See of TauntonThe Bishop had formed a “Bishop’s Advisory Group”, the membership of which was on the website, to assist him in making this appointment. This was a process requiring prayer and discernment. It was intended to interview in April, and there would be a lull before the appointment was made, until after the General Election.

The Synod noted the position.

11 Living Wage in the DioceseThe Synod received a report which proposed that the Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of Finance would pay the national living wage (non-London rate from 1 November 2014 was £7.85 per hour) to all permanent, temporary and casual employees over 18, and suggested that all employing bodies attached to the diocese are encouraged to do the same.

The Living Wage sought to address the issue of the “working poor”. Adopting the Living Wage would be a strong affirmation of our Christian witness to supporting people to move out of poverty.

The total additional cost to the DBF of moving to a living wage would be £1,342 per annum. The Conditions of Service Group had met on 15 December 2014 and had approved increases in salary for a number of employees to bring them up to the Living Wage with effect from 1 January 2015. The Bishop’s Council had resolved that a motion to adopt the Living Wage be approved for submission to the Diocesan Synod.

10

I response to a question it was confirmed that the motion would not commit church-funded schools to pay the Living Wage, although it would encourage them to consider this.

During a debate a number of speakers highlighted the difficult financial implications for for parishes in introducing the Living Wage.

The Dean of Wells, the Very Revd John Clarke, outlined the complex implications for Wells Cathedral, in that whilst the initial costs of introducing the living wage would be some £26,000 per annum, if a rise in differentials was taken into account, the cost would be £232,000. This was unrealistic in terms of the Cathedral’s budgeting. The Government should show a lead by raising the minimum wage to the living wage. Whilst the Dean was in favour of the living wage, he would be abstaining on this proposal.

The Chair noted that the motion did not commit the Cathedral to pay the living wage. Having been moved and seconded, the motion was put to the vote and the Synod resolved:

Bath & Wells Diocesan Synod instructs the Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of Finance to:1) ensure that all direct employees of Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of

Finance (including those employed by any current or subsequent subsidiaries of the board) are paid a minimum of the Living Wage.

2) make known to contractors and service providers that the Bath & Wells Diocesan Board of Finance pays a minimum of the Living Wage to its employees; seek to use contractors and service providers that pay a minimum of the Living Wage to their employees.

3) seek accreditation as a Living Wage employer from the Living Wage Foundation.

4) inform parishes and other employing bodies in the Diocese of the commitment to the Living Wage and encourage all of them to adopt the Living Wage as the minimum paid to their employees.

The Dean of Wells, the Very Revd John Clarke asked for his abstention to be noted. A number of other members abstained.

12 Promulgation of Amending Canons

(a) Amending Canon No. 33 11

The following notice was read to the Synod:

“I give notice that, at its November 201 group of sessions, held in London, the General Synod resolved that Amending Canon No. 33 be made, promulged and executed.

Amending Canon No. 33 amends Canon C 2 so as to allow women to be consecrated to the episcopate. It also amends Canon C 4, and repeals Canons C 4A and 4B, so that there is now a single canon relating to ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood, which applies equally to both men and women alike. Lastly, it inserts a new Canon C 28, which requires the House of Bishops to make Regulations prescribing a procedure for resolving disputes arising from the arrangements for which the House of Bishops’ Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests makes provision”.

(b) Amending Canon No. 32 The following notice was read to the Synod:

“I give notice note, at its February 2015 group of sessions, held in London, the General Synod resolved that Amending Canon No. 32 be made, promulged and executed.

Amending Canon No. 32 makes a number of amendments to Canons H 2 and H 3 (which deal with the membership of the Lower and Upper Houses of the Convocations of Canterbury and York respectively), in order to make some modest changes to the composition of the Houses of Clergy and Bishops of the General Synod in advance of the elections to the new Synod later this year.”

13 Amendment to Standing Orders – Circulation of Agenda and Reports for Bishop’s Council and Diocesan Synod

Standing Order 19 currently required the Secretary to post or deliver an agenda for a meeting of Bishop’s Council or Diocesan Synod at least 21 days before a meeting. Whilst it was important for members to receive adequate notice of forthcoming business, the requirement to give three weeks’ notice had some practical disadvantages in terms of the timeliness and completeness of reports, and had led on occasions to the agenda becoming fragmented and the meeting disjointed, when additional information had to be circulated after the agenda had been despatched. It was proposed that in the interests of timeliness and completeness the DBF Standing Orders be amended to provide for agenda and reports to be posted 14 days at least before an ordinary meeting.

In addition all members would be offered an electronic version of the agenda and reports on the same day that the paper copy was posted.

12

During a debate the Assistant Secretary was asked to review the notice period for questions, so as to ensure that Synod members had adequate opportunity to submit questions bearing in mind the later publication of the agenda and reports.

The Synod resolved that Standing Order 19 of the Bath and Wells Diocesan Synod Constitution and Standing Orders be amended as follows:

“The secretary shall post or deliver an agenda paper to every member 14 days at least before an ordinary meeting of the Bishop’s Council or Diocesan Synod or a meeting by resolution or requisition (SO 13) or, in the case of a special meeting called at less than 14 days notice, at the same time as the notice.”

14 Retirement of Mr Tim Berry as the Diocesan Registrar

The Archdeacon of Taunton, The Ven J Reed paid tribute to the service Mr Berry had given the Diocese over many years. He had interpreted ecclesiastical law with clarity and compassion. Mr Berry thanked Synod for the opportunity to serve the diocese.

15 Retirement of the Right Revd Peter Maurice as Bishop of Taunton

The Revd Preb S Stuckes referred to the forthcoming retirement of the Bishop of Taunton and paid tribute to his ministry, including his profound understanding of the human condition and his modelling the policy of “No one alone”. The Clergy Gathering, where we had been able to recreate a sense of community, had been a high point of Bishop Peter’s ministry. Bishop Peter had placed his considerable gifts at the disposal of God’s Church.

In response, Bishop Peter referred to the huge joy and privilege of serving in this diocese. We needed to be concerned not with propping up Christendom, but with building the Kingdom.

16 Date of next meeting: 1 July 2015 at 6.30 pm

The session ended at 12.55 pm

13

Appendix 1

Question to the Chair of the Diocesan Board of Finance from Mr John Spencer, Chew Magna Deanery

A question for the Chairman of the Diocesan Board of Finance:Regarding the cost of Parish Share to church members in 2015.

The assessed Weekly Share per Member in 2015 is as follows (figures taken from the diocesan website):In a parish of Socio-Economic Category A £10.41 per week

14

B £ 9.52 per weeketc.,etc.

In a parish of Socio-Economic Category Gthe lowest category, the least able ........ £ 7.29per week

 In other words, in round figures, members of a 'favourably placed' parish are expected to pay less than £10 per week, whereas in the 'unfavourably placed' parishes in the diocese - where a large proportion of church members may be unemployed and on benefit of one sort or another - members are expected to contribute over £7 per week.

Is this JUSTLY apportioned?

Are the 'favourably placed' parishes showing CHRISTIAN LOVE towards their fellow Christians in the 'unfavourably placed' parishes? Is this exacerbated by the RELUCTANCE of parishes to declare themselves CATEGORY A OR B?What steps are being taken now to correct this imbalance?

Reply from Harry Musselwhite, Chair of the DBF

“Thank you, Mr Spencer, for the question. I am glad to have it. I say this because the question is both interesting and timely. It is timely because the Diocese is heavily engaged in discussions about its strategy for the future and the Common Fund and Parish Share must figure in those discussions.Mr Spencer sets out clearly the weekly share per member for this year, 2015, by socio-economic category.He then asks a number of questions. If I may, I will share relevant facts and talk about next steps rather than offer personal opinions or speculate as a couple of the questions invite me to do. My views will be apparent however.A word by way of background that may be helpful: My role as Chair of the DBF broadly involves looking at the Diocese’s

funding requirements compared with its income and coming forward with proposals as to how the requirements can be met.

Clearly, the financial pressures on parishes are a key consideration in considering these matters. So all these important matters to do with our methodology for determining Parish Share are dealt with by the Common Fund Working Group chaired by Archdeacon John. He will very happy to contribute to this item this morning.

15

Indeed, I am not a member of the Common Fund Working Group although I am aware of the painstaking work the Group undertakes grappling with just the difficult issues you raise, and endeavouring to come to workable and fair conclusions.

So, any changes to the methodology and category weightings would be for the Common Fund Working Group to consider.

There are of course some provisions in place for unfavourably placed parishes. I am thinking of the separate S category in existence for those parishes either in an area of great deprivation, or in extreme circumstances, for a limited period.  The Parish Share allocated to the Parish falls out of the normal category and membership calculation. So in those cases, Parish Share is assessed on an individual parish basis by consultation.  S category designation requires a Deanery recommendation and Archdeacon support. Around 1% of parishes are classified as such across the diocese. And it is not a permanent category.

I would also make the point that where parishes classified as most unfavourably placed are not able to pay their full share, the DBF has to step in and provide for the shortfall.

These are very relevant considerations: the S category and the DBF’s role.

And yes, the situation is exacerbated by the few A category parishes declared – currently 2 when the statistics suggest that there should be about 9. The statistics also suggest that there should be more B category parishes.

 Returning to the question, Mr Spencer contrasts a parish in socio-economic category A with an assessed weekly share per member of £10.41 and contrasts this with a parish in socio-economic category G, the lowest one, where each member is expected to contribute £7.29 per week. Given the very different socio-economic circumstances of a parish in category A compared with one in category G, is that equitable? Well, it is a 30% margin. This 30% margin was applied from the mid 1990s when the current methodology was devised. The view is that it has served us well and I am sure that Archdeacon John would comment on this. All I would say is that widening the margin to say 40% or 50% (as examples) reducing the contributions from say categories E, F, and G needs to be thought through very carefully in relation to its knock-on effects. That is work for the Common Fund Working Group.

But it is a fair question that Mr Spencer asks. And there needs to be an outcome. Archdeacon John has said that he would, as Chair of the Common Fund Working Group, be happy to lead a review. I would

16

certainly like there to be a review in the light of this question. It will be looked at.

I hope this is helpful. Thank you.”

The Chair of the Common Fund Working Group, Archdeacon John Reed stated that the question was timely and that the Group would review the issue, taking account of national statistics, between June and October this year.

17