Should closed cemeteries be maintained at public expense? This was a question which came to be debated by Ryedale District Council at its last meeting.

At present a parochial church council can require the public to take on the maintenance of a closed Church of England burial ground. The question was asked: why only Anglican church yards? An amendment was proposed. If the amendment had asked the government to make this rule apply to all closed burial grounds – whether Anglican, Roman Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Budhist etc., I would have supported it. However, the amendment proposed instead that the government should be asked change the law so that no graveyard should be maintained at public expense. This I could not support, but this is what the Council decided to ask the government to do.

All religions believe in honouring the dead, and I would be surprised if atheists think differently. The idea that any burial ground should be allowed to degrade is repugnant. Just imagine the outcry if this were to happen to the great commonwealth war cemeteries. Should we feel any differently about the graveyards of our families and friends who have not died fighting a war? To allow any public graveyard to degrade is to dishonour the dead.

It was suggested that, if the church could not afford to maintain closed graveyards, the church buildings should be sold to finance this. No doubt this might help improve church finances, but do we really want to see our lovely churches knocked down and replaced by houses or supermarkets? Churches, their towers, spires and steeples are an important part of the landscape in town and country. Do we really want to radically change the character of our beautiful country in this way? It would be like China without pagodas – but then that is what has happened in China. The atheist communists demolished most of the pagodas. So do we really want to follow in their footsteps and live in a landscape which is devoid of churches, minsters and cathedrals?

It was suggested that the UK is no longer a Christian country, and as churchgoers are a small minority, the church should get no public support. This argument misses the point. The issue is: should public funds be used to honour the dead by maintaining closed graveyards? It is therefore irrelevant who the buried people are, how they died, what religion they belonged to, and whether or not they had any religious beliefs at all.

One hopes Ryedale will not pursue this matter.