Presbyterian Assembly to debate PMS crisis
The Presbyterian Moderator made it clear on today's Sunday Sequence that there would be a debate about the Mutual Society crisis at this year's Assembly. A number of PMS savers have told the programme that they were hearing rumours to the effect that the Assembly would hear a "statement", rather than a debate. The Moderator has.
The business of the house is scheduled to turn this subject at 4pm on Tuesday, which is quite late in the day, so the time available for "debate" could be quite limited. We've been hearing from some of those PMS savers who will be protesting at the opening session of the Assembly, but I wonder who will be voicing their concerns from the floor at Tuesday's session. They say they feel betrayed, and they are very angry with Church House officials who appeared, at the outset of the crisis, to be distancing the church from the Mutual Society.
The Clerk of the General Assembly, Dr Donald Watts, told our programme that there was no effort to distance the church from the crisis, even though that's how some savers read the church's insistence that the organisations are "legally separate".
On Tuesday, the Assembly will be asked to receive a report about the church's handling of the crisis, and that report reveals that Church House officials were given a private briefing about the Society's serious financial problems by the chair of the Mutual Society's board of directors before any members of the Society were informed. Officials may claim that this briefing was merely "a matter of courtesy", but this kind of close association will again raise questions from savers about the precise nature of the relationship between the church and the mutual. For savers, like the two who shared their anger on today's programme, this kind of briefing adds more weight to the moral case for increased financial assistance from the church.
On Tuesday, we will find out what view the church's ministers and elders take of the church's handling of this crisis, and we'll find out how they propose to respond to church members who feel betrayed.
Comment number 1.
At 1st Jun 2009, secondveryunhappy wrote:Thank you Will - think you helped us along here and at least there will be a debate at Gen Assembly.
It has been seven long months - and we pray sense will prevail in the end - Approx 65% of the PMS savers are of pension age - we should not be treating our elderly like this.
There is no doubt it was not the Church's fault that this has happened the PMS - however they should never have allowed a Financial Inst to operate using its name - there was a close association - there is no doubt - and they should never have given financial advice - "save within your church"
Too many people had so much faith in the church - look up to their ministers and respected every word they said - so why would people not feel it right to save in the PMS - it was helping build the churches by providing a cheap line of credit for congregations.
Its time to dig in and get this matter resolved - it can be done with a WILL!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 6th Jan 2010, ugg stores wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 6th Jan 2010, ugg stores wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)