“Sad”, “shocking”, “unfortunate” and “a real belly flop”. These are some of the reactions to the government’s proposal for the state budget cutting the grant to churches worthy of conservation and protection. The government instead refers to a new and half-finished financing scheme for culturally and historically important church buildings (the “church preservation fund”), which it will return to in the revised state budget in May next year. The government announced in August that the new fund will have an annual limit of around NOK 500 million and that the “main elements” of the scheme must be in place by next summer. But several news have been in contact with the victory timetable is “ambitious” and “bordering on unrealistic”. The consequence could be a delay in the restoration – at the same time as the churches are in a hurry to make themselves stately for the 1000th anniversary in 2030. – A relaxation and cut in the permits for the maintenance of church buildings can have major consequences, says culture policy spokeswoman in the Frp, Silje Hjemdal She says that cultural and historical values are lost if work is put on hold. – While the government waits, Norwegian churches rot. This process creates uncertainty, and is completely unnecessary, she says. (See answer from Church Minister Kjersti Toppe (Sp) further down.) The government announced in August that the state will spend approx. NOK 10 billion for the renovation of churches over the next 20–30 years. Photo from the renovation of Oslo Cathedral in 2008. Photo: NTB – A big slap in the stomach In the Christian daily newspaper Vårt Land, Kjell Ingolf Ropstad (KrF) characterizes it as “a big slap in the stomach” that the government is cutting transfers for refurbishment before the new funding scheme is ready. – Until the government has finalized the new scheme, the escalation of funds for maintenance must continue, not end, he says to news. He points out that “many ready-made projects” lack funding. – That the government then cuts support is incomprehensible. The new church preservation fund comes from the returns to Opplysningsvesenets fund (OVF). The fund was divided between the state and the church as part of the settlement after the state church was dissolved in 2017. The whitewashing of Sakshaug old church is postponed – We are concerned that the cut will affect planned projects, says Bo Alexander Granbo in the Heritage Association. He reminds that the work at the churches is seasonal, and that the “liming season” extends from May to August. In practice, this means that the whitewashing of Sakshaug old church (see below) can be postponed by one year as a result of the reallocation. – In the new state budget, it seems that cultural heritage and churches may get worse conditions, says Morten Dahl, who is director of the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU). Photo: Fortidsminneforeningen Deputy managing director of the main organization KA, Marit Brandt Lågøyr, tells news that she “shares the concern that the grant for the ongoing maintenance work is zero until the conservation program starts”. – The grant for operational work should have been continued while the rigging of the conservation program is underway, she says. The main organization KA participated in the further work on the conservation strategy together with the Church Council and the National Archives. – In Norway, we had few castles and castles in the Middle Ages, and it was the churches that were the magnificent buildings in society. That is why our churches are an important part of cultural history, says national antiquarian Hanna Geiran. She adds that the churches are “threatened by warmer and wilder weather as a result of climate change”. – Then it is central that the churches are put in order. – The process creates uncertainty, and is completely unnecessary Silje Hjemdal, Frp – It is sad that the government apparently manages to organize its investments so badly that there is actually a cut. Framstegspartiet has always been a champion for taking care of historic church buildings and Norwegian cultural heritage. This process creates uncertainty and is completely unnecessary. I expect the Minister of Culture to clarify as soon as possible whether ongoing restoration and maintenance processes must be stopped or paused due to the government’s budget priorities. Marit Brandt Lågøyr, Hovedorganisationen KA – When Kjersti Toppe states that there is “no reason to have two subsidy schemes for the same purpose”, it gives rise to great expectations for what will come in the revised national budget in the spring. The maintenance backlog at the churches increases year by year, and we have no time for rest. Bo Alexander Granbo, Fortidsminneforeningen – We are concerned that this will affect planned and initiated projects, which are dependent on the funds being announced as planned and in time for the lime season for medieval stone churches from May to August. If planned work does not receive support as planned, a possible later announcement of the same funds will create major challenges. Hanna Geiran, director at the National Archives – The grants for 2023 have been allocated to the churches, and many of the measures financed from these grants will be carried out in 2024. For us, it is about ensuring good restoration of the churches, and that the new church fund gets a good facility that can take care of the church taxes in the best possible way. We and the partners in the church have proposed three conservation programmes, where efforts are directed towards the four areas of conservation, knowledge, experience and commitment. Morten Dahl, director of the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU) – We are not necessarily critical of waiting for the start of a conservation strategy for the churches. Hasty measures lead to incorrect assessments. More money quickly may not be the best solution. The National Antiquities Agency has mapped the expertise required for restoration of the churches and knows that access to professionals is limited. Without the right expertise and without a preliminary project (which will be the first step in the conservation strategy), you do not have the basis needed to start the right projects. This can mean costly and inadequate measures. Our advice would be to wait for the planning, but at the same time to get this completed as soon as possible. Tage Pettersen, cultural policy spokesperson in Høgre – Høgre agrees with the minister that there is no reason to have two subsidy schemes for the same purpose, this was the basis when the Solberg government started work on the law on the fund for the information service. Høgre expects the Minister to get the Church Conservation Fund in place as quickly as possible. Director of the main organization KA, Marit Brandt Lågøyr, tells news that she “shares the concern that the subsidy for the ongoing maintenance work is zero”. Photo: Bjørn Solli – We expect that there will be significantly more money for maintenance Assistant director of the Church Council, Jan Rune Fagermoen, to be happy about the money announced in next year’s revised national budget. – We have a strong expectation that there will be significantly more money for church maintenance than has been allowed for this in recent years, he says. To news, Minister of Religion and Philosophy Kjersti Toppe (Sp) says that it is “illogical to have two subsidy schemes for the same purpose” and that a “robust and effective” church preservation fund will be “a boost” for maintenance. – Reallocation of funds is not a matter of rest. On the contrary, it is a way to get started more quickly with a long-term and predictable financial contribution to the restoration of the churches, which I am sure the municipalities appreciated. (Read the full answer below.) The minister replies: – Reallocation of funds is not a matter of rest. This is what Minister of Faith and Philosophy Kjersti Toppe (Sp) says: – Both the KA and the Association for the Past are misunderstanding here. What comes in the state budget is a big boost for church maintenance! If you read the budget document, it says that there will be a new arrangement in 2024, which is linked to the new church preservation fund and the preservation strategy. This is the biggest promise for church maintenance in recent times. That we then wind up the existing subsidy scheme, which had much lower limits, is completely natural. It is also illogical to have two subsidy schemes in the same budget year. So my message to both KA and the Historical Remembrance Association is that funds will come in 2024. In the budget proposal it is explained that we will now establish a more predictable system, which will not be dependent on prioritizing funds for church maintenance in each state budget. Now we are going to introduce a scheme that ensures the restoration of culturally and historically important church buildings, corresponding to the value of the state’s share of the Information Service’s fund, with annual payments of up to NOK 500 million. By comparison, funds for church maintenance in this year’s budget were NOK 30 million. Now we finally get a boost for church maintenance, and that boost starts in 2024. The conservation strategy, which sets the framework for the work, will be launched before Christmas, a new organization that will have the overall responsibility will be put in place after the New Year and funds will be put in place in the revised national budget. It is good news for churches both in The Church of Norway and for churches owned by the Past Memory Association. Another thing that KA should be the first to know is that it is the municipalities that, according to the Trust Societies Act, have the financial responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the churches in the Church of Norway. This has been the case far back in time. And this is how it will be in the future, the Storting is clear about that. Giving the impression that maintenance and restoration of the churches is on hold after the New Year is therefore a strange approach anyway. For me, it is now important that we put in place a long-term arrangement for the restoration of the culturally historically important churches with funds such as monar. Then we must also establish a grant administration that is robust, efficient and prioritizes measures where the need is greatest. The Storting has asked the government to prepare plans for the conservation work. I am now in the final phase, and this will be the basis for establishing an organization that will manage the grant. Reallocation of funds is not an easy task. On the contrary, it is a way to get started more quickly with a long-term and predictable financial contribution to the restoration of the churches, which I am sure the individual municipalities appreciated. Because if there is any doubt, the state contribution does not change the municipalities’ responsibility for the building, but the state will become a more predictable contributor to the work. – Giving the impression that maintenance and renovation of the churches is on hold after the New Year is a strange approach, says Minister of Religion and Philosophy Kjersti Toppe (Sp). Photo: NTB Kommunikasjon/Prime Minister’s office This is Hesby church on Finnøy in Stavanger. A medieval church, probably built with lime from Moster in the 13th century. Renovation with cement has been devastating. It is too dense and hard, and moisture leads to damage. Now the joints are rebuilt with lime from the mine in Mosterhamn. It is similar to the lime used in the Middle Ages
ttn-69
Alarm after church cuts in the state budget – news Vestland
