Why restructure – isn't it a sledgehammer to crack a nut?
Several London AMs are at severe risk of not meeting the obligations in their governing documents, as roles can no longer be filled, and some AMs may even collapse unless major simplification can be achieved quite soon. The need for change was set out in paper B of the 2023 Invitation to Commit. Six of the seven AMs have agreed in principle to commit to forming a single London AM.
How many fewer roles will need filling in a single AM, compared with now?
We estimate that 'AM level' roles would reduce from 218 to about 70. Those figures omit all LM appointments, premises committees, Elders and Pastoral Friends, whose numbers would be unaffected, but they do take into account the LQPT Trustees, which would no longer be needed.
Won't consolidating administrative and governance roles make them very burdensome?
The burden would not rise in proportion to the size of the charity – e.g. one set of policies would serve the whole organisation, plus one set of accounts and one focus for LAM discernment on vision and strategy. A small team of paid staff would support these roles, making them more manageable.
Will some local participation and vitality be lost?
Local Meetings would not change much – in fact they should gain from their members having fewer AM-level roles, freeing up energy for other activities. Groups of LMs would be able to choose to do things together, whether in the same groupings as present AMs or in new groupings/clusters.
Aren't we destroying structures and processes tried and tested over centuries?
We would be keeping closely to Area Meeting structures and processes, as set out in Quaker Faith & Practice chapter 4. Change is not new - AM boundaries in London have changed repeatedly over the centuries, and we used to have a London and Middlesex Quarterly Meeting (later called a General Meeting). (See Qf&p 4.12
Should we not be simplifying roles anyway?
Yes. Many LMs are shedding roles and experimenting with new ways of doing things - pastoral care, for instance.
How would the new AM respond in terms of energy and resources to support growth or spiritual leadings at LM level?
All the human and financial assets of the nine current bodies could be used as London AM chooses, while respecting any restricted funds. The London AM and its Trustees would support the outreach, community work and witness initiated and carried out by LMs, making provision for them in budgets. Less Quaker time would be taken up with admin, so more would be freed to follow the leadings of the Spirit. The small staff team would be able to provide some support to LMs, and clusters of LMs, particularly around property (as with LQPT currently), and around finance, websites and communication, as well as providing administrative support to the LAM and the Trustees.