On 12 February 2025, the Independent Review into New Wine by Fiona Scolding KC, Alasdair Henderson, and Ben Fullbrook of Landmark Chambers was published. Below are extracts from the the Executive Summary and Recommendations of the 54-page document.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This review has been carried out as an addendum to the Independent Review into Soul Survivor. It has considered the extent to which New Wine knew of the allegations against Mr Pilavachi and/or whether the conduct specified in those allegations was condoned or exacerbated by deficiencies in the governance, policies, practices, arrangements and oversight at New Wine.

We have determined that New Wine and Soul Survivor had significant governance, staffing, financial, operational and other links. Soul Survivor was established out of New Wine and, in this context, we consider that New Wine and those involved bore a responsibility to ensure that Mr Pilavachi was fit for the role which he was being sent to do – i.e. leading Soul Survivor. We consider that senior people in New Wine may have demonstrated some failings in this regard.

However, as Soul Survivor and Mr Pilavachi’s own ministry grew, there was less that New Wine (and its leadership) could be expected to know or do about Mr Pilavachi, and it is difficult to fix it with responsibility for the issues which emerged during this time. The possible exception to this are “low-level concerns”, which people confessed to having about Mr Pilavachi. Had there been appropriate systems in place to log these concerns, it is possible that they could have been acted upon. It is also the case that Mr. Pilavachi’s close relationships with young men were remarked upon at New Wine conferences by some of those who attended.

[…]

RECOMMENDATIONS

We have made a number of recommendations to Soul Survivor, the Church of England and  the church at large in section 6 of the Soul Survivor Review. What follows are  recommendations which flow solely from our examination of New Wine’s role.

1. New Wine should exercise discernment in promoting new leaders even where those leaders are obviously gifted in certain areas. It should ask whether the role that a  person is being promoted to do is actually a good fit for that person’s skillset.
2. If it has not already done so, New Wine should develop minimum vetting procedures for visiting speakers and individuals whose ministry it promotes so as to ensure (as far as possible) that it is not exposing people to harm.
3. New Wine should develop a system for reporting, recording and monitoring low level concerns about the conduct of its staff and visiting speakers.
4. New Wine should have in place a more robust and easily accessible complaints policy which can be used by all those attending its courses, festivals or other activities, which has the opportunity for the complainant to be heard, and listened to and for there to  be some form of investigation (which, if necessary, should be conducted by someone  independent of the organisation).