A CONTROVERSIAL proposal to exclude church halls from West Devon?s village hall grant scheme were thrown out by borough councillors at a meeting in Tavistock last week.

Officers recommended that the borough?s economic and community development committee updated the council?s guidance notes for the grant scheme, to exclude church-owned facilities from being eligible to apply.

West Devon countryside officer Esther Richmond said there needed to be clarity whether or not church-owned halls were funded.

She said: ?Grants available are small. If we opened up the scheme to church halls it would reduce the amount available.

?Church halls can apply for Heritage Lottery funds but village halls cannot.?

The committee heard currently there were applications under consideration from church halls in Monkokehampton and South Tawton.

Cllr David Weeks said he could not agree with the recommendations to exclude church halls.

Cllr Weeks said: ?There is no bottomless pit they can get money from. They have to be maintained by the parish. I would suggest they be considered on their individual merits.

?They are very important for those with no other facilities, such as Monkokehampton.?

He said Monkokehampton hall was built by voluntary effort in 1842 as a school, which closed in 1944.

?There is no restriction on use. I urge the committee to reconsider this policy,? he said.

Cllr John Darch said South Tawton hall was built in 1480. It was held in trust and run by a management committee.

It had recently been awarded a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund, but further funding was required to complete its refurbishment and other organisations were contributing.

?If the Dartmoor National Park can help, why can?t we?? he asked. ?Neighbouring authorities give grants to church halls.?

Cllr Robert Williamson said he recognised the borough faced very serious budgetary problems and did not have enough money to support all the village halls the council would like, but he urged grants should be allocated on criteria such as social factors.

He said in Princetown, the only place to book space was in the Wesley Hall, which was heavily subsidised by the church.

?In most cases the differences between village and church halls are not significant,? he said.

?We should maintain a system where they are judged and funded on the same basis as other halls. They are a contribution to local life.?

The committee was told that following enquiries, representatives from one of the halls under consideration said some bookings could take preference over others, for example, a wake following a funeral.

Cllr Williamson replied that he considered a funeral taking precedence was not a negative, and that a village hall would probably do the same.

Cllr Dick Eberlie suggested modifying the guidance notes by adding the wording ?if the church hall is the only hall in the community? as a criterium. ?We want to be positive and demonstrate we are able to help,? he said.

Councillors voted unanimously against the officers? recommendations to reject church halls and asked them to take the matter back to re-word the criteria based on social benefit, however owned, and bring it to the next meeting. The two current applications from church halls would remain on file.