|
- 71 -
4.1 Procedure
We now come to the central object of the study - to consider alternative methods of allocating the diocesan share either by improving the present system based on potential income or by suggesting alternatives. The approach made was analytical - first seeking to isolate those factors which determined the abilities of parishes to provide finance to the Diocese - second ceasing to treat the diocesan share as necessarily a homogeneous whole, and considering the possibility that it might be composed of separate elements which could, or even should, be allocated on differing bases - and third endeavouring to match up criteria emerging from the first part with the differing elements from the second and thence evolving a formula. This took some time - it necessarily involved considerable feed forward and feed back - and concomitantly an appraisal was made of the potential income system. This appraisal suggested strongly that the extant system was not only highly successful (raising, in 1977, some 99.7% of the share requested, and since its inception never less than 95.6%); but that it was also very favourably regarded by most of those who were interviewed, either personally or via the parochial questionnaire. As anyone familiar with taxation systems will readily concede, any method of raising revenue which can produce such a yield should not lightly be abandoned, what- ever its imperfections, in favour of a new untried system, no matter how well that new system may have been thought out. A point which is reinforced when we remember that the Diocese can only persuade, not compel, parishes to pay their share. When this degree of success became evident, it seemed obvious that the Diocese would be best advised to retain their present system, but none the less it was felt there was merit in pursuing the analytical approach to a conclusion; partly because there are differing opinions on potential income and this study would allow those to be more openly expressed; and partly because if |
| |
|
|