Source: The Charity Commission published on this website Tuesday 18 November 2025 by Jill Powell

The Matt 6.3 Charitable Trust was registered with the Commission in 1998 and has purposes of advancing and promoting the Christian faith.  

In October 2024, the regulator became aware of serious concerns about governance failings and unauthorised payments at the charity. 

The charity’s advisors told the trustees they must cease all unauthorised payments to connected parties and appoint an independent board of trustees. However, some payments continued to be made and the charity has so far not recruited any independent trustees.  

The charity’s latest accounts were submitted 123 days late and qualified, as the auditor had concerns over the charity’s governance.  

The regulator has now escalated its engagement with the charity to a statutory inquiry. This will examine the extent to which the trustees are complying with their legal duties in respect to the administration, governance and management of the charity, and in particular: 

• management of conflicts of interest and private benefit 
• whether the charity has appropriate policies and procedures in place 
• the extent to which the trustees have complied with previously issued professional advice. 

The Commission may extend the scope of the inquiry if additional regulatory issues emerge.   

It is the Commission’s policy, after it has concluded an inquiry, to publish a report detailing the issues examined, any action taken, and the inquiry’s outcomes.  

Source: The Charity Commission published on this site Friday 14 November 2025 by Jill Powell

The Charity Commission has set an expectation that the Archbishops’ Council should implement independent safeguarding structures as endorsed by the Church’s General Synod in February 2025 within 18 months from now – a year sooner than current plans indicate – and in the meantime, put robust interim measures in place to keep people safe.

The expectation is part of a Regulatory Action Plan issued to the Archbishops’ Council, a registered charity whose objects are to co-ordinate, promote, aid and further the work and mission of the Church of England. It follows the Commission engaging with the charity over whether its trustees are taking sufficient steps to address the safeguarding concerns and implement recommended changes raised in a number of safeguarding reviews.

Background

The Commission’s engagement with the Archbishops’ Council began towards the end of 2024, following the publication of an ‘Independent Learning Lessons Review’ into the case of John Smyth (the “Makin Review”). This followed other independent reviews in recent years, including the report by Sarah Wilkinson into the Church’s Independent Safeguarding Board, and the ‘Future of Church Safeguarding’ report by Professor Alexis Jay.

Public debate about the Church’s approach to safeguarding following publication of the Makin Review – and the Archbishop of Canterbury’s resignation over the issue – exacerbated regulatory concerns that progress towards safeguarding improvements identified in the various independent reports was not happening with sufficient pace.

The regulatory compliance case was informed by information provided by bishops and Diocesan Boards of Finance, as well as the Archbishops’ Council, at the Commission’s request.

While the Commission does not investigate individual allegations of abuse, it does have a responsibility to assess concerns about the extent to which trustees are taking necessary action and ensuring their charity has appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures in place. The Church of England’s National Safeguarding Team is a department of the Archbishops’ Council and develops proposals for safeguarding guidance, processes and procedures for consideration by the General Synod which the trustees of other Church charities are required to follow.

Findings

In summary, the Commission has found that:

• there is insufficient urgency and pace in implementing responses to past safeguarding reviews, and the current approach to doing so is fragmented and overly complex. For example, the Council’s current timescale of 2028 to pass the necessary legislation to implement independent safeguarding is too slow, representing a four year gap since the publication of the Jay Review
• currently the Church does not treat allegations of abuse from an adult not assessed to be “vulnerable” as a safeguarding allegation. The Commission’s guidance is clear that trustees must take reasonable steps to protect from harm all people who come into contact with their charity

Conclusions

The Commission found no evidence of mismanagement or misconduct by the trustees of the Archbishops’ Council, and recognises that the charity has made progress and delivered some improvements to the Church’s safeguarding in recent years. However, the Commission has made it clear that it expects the Archbishops’ Council to take all steps within its powers to implement outstanding safeguarding reforms at a much faster pace.

Where legislative changes will not address safeguarding risks quickly, the charity’s trustees should facilitate interim arrangements sufficient to address identified safeguarding risks until the legislative changes are in place. These should reflect the Commission’s guidance to trustees as well as Church policy and procedure.

Next steps

The Commission has issued a Regulatory Action Plan setting out steps the trustees need to take to address the Commission’s concerns. These include closing the gap on how allegations made by a non-vulnerable adult should be handled in different circumstances, and quicker delivery of the new structures for independent safeguarding which the General Synod “endorsed as the way forward in the short term” in February 2025.

The Commission notes the recent appointment of Dame Christine Ryan as executive chair of the Church’s Safeguarding Structures Programme Board to lead work on the structural changes agreed by the Synod.

The Commission now expects the Archbishops’ Council to identify any safeguarding risks that may require interim non-legislative measures to keep people safe and to put suitable measures in place. Reflecting this approach, the Archbishops’ Council has told the Commission it plans to establish an interim independent scrutiny body for Church safeguarding ahead of legislation.

The Commission understands the risks associated with acting in undue haste, and notes that the Archbishops’ Council’s trustees need to consider how to plan for future engagement with victims and survivors in a meaningful, sensitive and structured way so that it supports the timely delivery of change needed to keep people safe in the future.

The regulator is monitoring the Archbishops’ Council’s progress against the Regulatory Action Plan. Should it receive evidence that raises new regulatory concerns, it will assess this in line with its usual process.

Source: Home Office published on this website Monday 17 November 2025 by Jill Powell

Lord Macdonald of River Glaven KC has been appointed to lead an independent review of laws on public order and hate crime. 

Following the terrorist attack in Manchester on 2 October, the Home Secretary announced an independent review of existing public order and hate crime legislation. 

This resulted from concerns around community tensions and the impact of disruptive and intimidating protests and hate crime on the cohesion and safety of society. 

The government will always protect the right to lawful protest and free speech, but we will not tolerate individuals or groups who intimidate others, incite hatred, or create disorder. 

The review will therefore look at the powers police have to manage protests and the current hate crime laws, including offences for aggravated behaviour and “stirring up” hatred.  

It will examine whether existing legislation is effective and proportionate, and whether it protects communities from hate and intimidation.  

It will also consider if the law protects free speech and peaceful protest, while also preventing disorder and keeping people safe.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said:  

“The terrorist attack in Manchester on 2 October shocked the nation and showed how hatred and division can fuel violence. It happened at a time of growing concern about protests and hate crime in this country.  

“Our laws must protect the public, while upholding the right to protest and free speech. That is why we have asked Lord Macdonald to lead this review. His experience will ensure it is thorough and independent.  

2Lawful protest and free speech are fundamental rights, but we cannot allow them to be abused to spread hate or cause disorder. The law must be fit for purpose and consistently applied.”

This review follows recent changes to the Crime and Policing Bill, which will require police to consider the overall impact of protests in one place before setting conditions on future demonstrations. 

Lord Macdonald is the former Director of Public Prosecutions and brings extensive legal expertise and independence to this work.  

He will be supported by Owen Weatherill, a senior policing expert who brings operational experience from his role as the National Police Chiefs’ Council Lead for Civil Contingencies and National Mobilisation. 

The terms of reference for the review will be confirmed in the coming weeks with the review expected to commence imminently and conclude by February 2026.

Source: Surrey County Council published on this website  Monday 13 November 2025 by Jill Powell

Following the conclusion of criminal proceedings in December 2024, a Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review Safeguarding Practice Review (LCSPR) was progressed in relation to Sara Sharif, with the agreement of the national Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel. This local review was commissioned and overseen by the Surrey Safeguarding Children Partnership (SSCP) and undertaken by independent authors who brought together partners including the police, health, social care and education to review the practice of all agencies involved with the family and identify any learning. 

Terence Herbert, Chief Executive of Surrey County Council said: 

“Sara’s death is absolutely devastating, and we share our sincere condolences with all those affected. The criminal proceedings resulted in some justice for Sara, and the people that are responsible for her murder are rightly facing long prison sentences.  

“The independent safeguarding review took place to consider the practice of all agencies throughout Sara’s life. We welcome both the national and local recommendations in the report and we take the findings with utmost seriousness.   

“We are deeply sorry for the findings in the report related to us as a local authority. We have already taken robust action to address those relating to Surrey County Council, and that work will continue with every recommendation implemented in full. We will also work with partners across the Surrey Safeguarding Children Partnership to ensure a joint action plan is implemented as quickly as possible.  

“In recent years Children’s Services in Surrey have gone from ‘Inadequate’ to ‘Good’, and we are absolutely determined to keep making improvements that can help keep children safe.  

“Although the report does not find a single solution to address all the factors that affected Sara, or hold any one organisation accountable, there are important recommendations for many different agencies that can help reduce risk to children and we must collectively take action.” 

 Tim Oliver, Leader of Surrey County Council said: 

“This horrific and incredibly sad situation was the direct result of adults murdering an innocent child they should have looked after and cared for.  

“I am certain that everyone involved with this family will have reflected on what more could have been done to protect Sara, and my thoughts and condolences are with anyone affected.  

“The independent and detailed review makes a number of recommendations both for national government and local partners and it is now essential that every single person in every organisation involved in child safeguarding reads this report and understands the lessons learnt.   

“I am deeply sorry for the findings in the report that relate to us as a local authority. We will now act on those findings and continue to review and strengthen our culture, systems and processes designed to support good practice in working with children and families, as per the recommendations.  

“Many of the recommendations have already been implemented locally, and I call on the government to review the findings and, where appropriate, legislate for the changes in the national system that it calls for. Whilst there are no guarantees any single change could have prevented this tragic outcome, there are a number of important recommendations for many different agencies that, if fully implemented, can help improve child protection.  

“We are absolutely determined to do everything we can to help protect children and it is vital that people continue to report concerns about children’s safety to the appropriate agency.” 

Surrey County Council will be working to implement all local recommendations relating to the organisation in full. Many of those are well underway or already complete, but practice is continuously reviewed and this report will help all partners improve further. 

Action already taken by Surrey County Council: 

• In relation to the Children’s Single Point of Access (C-SPA) service, there has been significant change to the way it operates since 2023, including: 
  • A task and finish group was set up in July 2022 and a clear plan of improvement for the C-SPA developed in January 2023. A Joint Targeted Area Inspection of Surrey in March 2023 further informed this work, with structural changes beginning in June 2023. Those changes, which included a new rigorous triaging system, ultimately improved oversight and accountability. 
  • The consultation line always has a qualified social worker taking calls. Any concerns being expressed which relate to harm, abuse or neglect would result in a contact being progressed immediately, whilst the full written referral is awaited.  
  • The quality of recording has been improved, and children’s records always include a summary analysis of previous work, enabling better understanding of the child’s history upon any new referral. 
  • There is now a much stronger and detailed Quality Assurance and Audit Framework sitting around all the stages of the child’s journey, from contact to outcome in the C-SPA, which provides immediate learning and where necessary immediate service improvement.   
    • Ofsted referenced the C-SPA in their latest inspection of children’s services in 2025, noting that children who are referred to C-SPA receive a timely and proportionate response, and that practitioners and managers in the C-SPA routinely apply the authority’s continuum of need guidance to inform decision-making, generating a consistent approach to contacts and referrals. It also noted effective partnership working with the police means that initial responses in the C-SPA to domestic abuse and to children who go missing are prompt and child focused, and that parental consent is sought or dispensed with appropriately. The Ofsted report said multi-agency strategy meetings regarding children who are identified as being at risk of significant harm are timely and well attended. These meetings lead to well-considered decisions regarding subsequent actions to explore and to reduce the risks to children. 
    • The full report can be found here..

• In relation to Elective Home Education (EHE), there has been significant change to the way this service operates since 2023, including: 
  • An increase in staff and strengthened systems and process are in place to ensure continuity of work when staff are unexpectedly absent.
  • Staff training has been bolstered around key areas of learning from the rapid review, and this will be reviewed again following receipt of the full report. This includes reminding staff to regularly check and confirm address and contact information with families and schools, and all staff reminded of the legislation relating to off rolling – Regulation 9 of School Attendance Regulations 2024 (formerly regulation 8 – Pupil Registration Regulations 2006). 
  • The EHE notification form has been updated to include a section for schools to provide additional information if they tick the safeguarding concerns box.  
  • Regular audits of practice are undertaken to identify gaps and reduce risk, and further audits are being undertaken with the findings of the LCSPR report in mind. 

• There had already been practice improvements since 2019 in relation to Section 7 reports and court work to improve quality, in addition to: 
  • A full review of all templates and guidance for Section 7 reports completed, ensuring family history and involvement with professional services is incorporated. 
  • There is now a clear expectation for the team manager to ensure the Cafcass safeguarding letter is received and incorporated into the work and a Section 7. 
  • Training has been updated and completed for all staff on Section 7 report work. 
  • Increased training and learning is in place for all staff for improved awareness around parental alienation and domestic abuse, to ensure these dynamics are incorporated into analysis and recommendations. 

The report recommends that we review and strengthen existing culture, systems and processes designed to support good practice in working with children and families. 

This has been done continuously as part of Surrey County Council Children’s Services’ improvement from inadequate to good, and the LCSPR report will enable further review with specific learning in mind.