Church votes to 'hibernate' publishing arm

The controversial decision was taken as John Brown, the brother of former prime minister Gordon Brown, resigned from a key Kirk committee in protest at the move, claiming that the Saint Andrew Press was being "killed".

The plans put forward by the Mission and Discipleship Council will see the debt-laden publishing house, which has existed for more than half-a-century, reduced from its current four-strong staff to a single employee who will manage the imprint and its back catalogue, while concentrating its focus on producing resources for congregations.

During a long and impassioned debate over the future of the publishing house, supporters of the council's proposals described it as a "sacred cow that needs to be sacrificed", while opponents appealed to its importance in supporting the Kirk's theological and intellectual reputation.

Setting out the grounds for the changes, the council's convener, the Rev Mark Johnstone, said that the since 2005, the Press had run up a deficit of 696,000, which was projected to increase by almost 95,041 by the end of 2010, a situation he described as "unsustainable".

In its report to the General Assembly, the council said that though sales figures last year rose by 10 per cent, Saint Andrew Press had missed its business plan target and that this necessitated change in how it was run.

The council itself is currently grappling with a 1.2 million budget deficit.

He insisted that it was a resource that could be "remodelled and reshaped for the long-term future", and attempted to reassure the Assembly that Saint Andrew Press would continue to publish its back catalogue and maintain the church's intellectual heritage.

The bid to save the publishing house was led by the Very Rev David Miller and the Rev Prof David Fergusson, who raised counter motions to freeze the redundancy process and hand the council's findings over to the powerful Council of Assembly for urgent review with a view to finding an alternative place within the church for it or to sell it on as a going concern.

Mr Miller said, despite the council's claims that the publishing house could not go on in its current form, there had been a revised business plan for it to continue on a slimmed-down basis, but that this had been rejected.

John Brown, who had sat on the council's publishing committee which oversaw the Saint Andrew Press, spoke of his anger at the decision to reject it.

Announcing his resignation yesterday, he said: "I am absolutely furious at what the church is doing to Saint Andrew Press. It's an absolute disgrace. They are killing off an asset."

Describing the decision as a "travesty", he warned that "it's something the church will greatly regret in the future". However, Mr Johnstone said that there had been "substantial risks" within the revised business plan.

The Assembly vote supported the council's plans by 274 to 178.

New rules on background checks 'would turn away people we need'

A MOVE by the Kirk to require teenagers over the age of 16 involved in organising youth activities to undergo background checks came in for criticism yesterday as being "over the top".

The Church's Safeguarding committee, which ensures the protection of young and vulnerable people who come into contact with it, has introduced the age limit for disclosure checks to ascertain whether there is any history of sex offending.

David Partner, of Orkney Presbytery and a retired Boys Brigade officer, described the legislation as a "tyranny" and that it would alienate many people who wished to get involved in Kirk youth organisations.

"I see this legislation turning away many upstanding people who are not prepared to have their private lives checked in this way," he said.

"An organisation such as the Boys Brigade, Scouts, youth clubs, sports clubs are all suffering.

"Despite the media disclosure of the abuse scandals in the Catholic Church recently, most abuse occurs in the home. Are parents to be subjected to disclosure as well?"

Mr Partner added that the country had reached a "topsy turvy" situation where "we were are guilty until proven innocent". His concerns were echoed by other commissioners, some of whom questioned the practicality of asking 16-year-olds to undergo disclosure checks, stating that they found it difficult to satisfy the procedure's requirements.

However, committee vice-convener Ranald Mair insisted that the checks were absolutely necessary.