Spiritualist National Union (SNU) Close Psychic News - Why?

The million dollar question, why would the SNU decide to close Psychic News and then go on to liquidate Psychic Press. From other threads we know it is because they decided that it was too costly to run. In the outgoing President's address at the Blackpool conference this is the theme which is taken up by
Duncan Gascoyne:

“From the lack of response received it would appear to me as President of the Union that there was no real motive or incentive from the majority of SNU Spiritualists or the Movement in general to keep it going, apart from a few individuals who feel it should be kept going for historic or sentimental reasons.
However feeling sentimental about it does not pay the high costs involved in publishing a weekly newspaper.

You have all been circulated with a copy of the Union’s Financial Statements for 2009 and in these you should have noted that in the Trustees’ Report on page 12 their concerns over the financial situation regarding Psychic Press (1995) Ltd.

As the situation stands at present the Company cannot continue, as it is no longer in a viable financial position to do so and we now have no choice to take the appropriate action and liquidate it.”

However in the incoming President's address we find a rather different theme, and I will break the paragraph in two parts with emphasis

David Bruton:
“I state here and now that I fully support the need for a mouth piece for our movement, for too long we have hid our light.

Psychic News is too important to lose, however we have to accept the need for change and evolve the format into one acceptable in this modern age, this is the challenge and I will pledge to you today that every effort will be made to secure success, this is one aspect of our history that is too important to lose.”
I did this to emphasise a clear point, the new President is saying the SNU has been hiding its light. The ongoing comment about Psychic News clearly identifies that it has not helped the SNU shine its light although it is an important part of our (SNU's) history.

Indeed, it is an important part of Spiritualism’s history, and its purpose was to shine the light for all Spiritualism, not just the SNU version. Its role was to report and comment even if that comment may be construed as criticism by the SNU. Indeed it was a platform to allow people to present alternative views, history, current events and for everyone.

Let us look at a couple of other things Mr Bruton said:

“Looking to many of our Churches and the Committees that run them, many sadly are at best weary of the Union, they view the Districts and the NEC with distrust. How many times have we heard it said, The Union only wants to move in and sell our Church from under us.”

“Let’s put behind us suspicion, rumour, misinformation and instead concentrate our time and energy on moving forward together.”

“I recognise the NEC holds a considerable responsibility within this, too often we fail to communicate the decisions we make and the thinking behind them, this feeds rumour and into the void we have created mistrust and misunderstanding flourish unchecked.”

“I believe we need to look at all channels of communication throughout the movement and face head on some of the difficult questions, what do we have to be afraid of? How can talking to each other and sharing ideas make us weaker? I think in time we may find it actually makes us stronger as an organisation, let’s not hide our faces when change confronts us but instead embrace that change, be prepared to learn lessons from our peers in society and from each other, strength comes does it not from cohesion, “divide and conquer” it is said well I am not in the mood to be conquered are you?”

These show how important Mr Bruton feels that trust and communication are. Strange then that, had this site not seen a warning post on June 4th, about the potential loss of PN, which led to a warning siren in early July, the first anyone would have known about Psychic News closing would have been at the Blackpool Conference whilst its last edition was being prepared.

Clearly not a good start in illustrating what Mr Bruton means when speaking about open communications to stop misinformation, distrust and rumour.

Additionally Mr Bruton highlights the distrust between the NEC and its member churches yet removes an independent newspaper which allowed people to openly discuss problems with less fear of big brother intervening.

However his speech does give us a clear indication of the thinking behind closing the existing Psychic News. He committed himself to a new format for PN and one which clearly he intended to be used to showcase the SNU and help internal communication. This clearly presaged a “new” PN as an SNU publication.
I do not know how Mr Bruton exactly expected people to react to this. If there is distrust in an organisation does he really expect people to openly contribute their thoughts to a magazine run by NEC members and edited by them. It’s a bit like the Russian Communists expecting their citizens to write openly of their grievances in Pravda. If members did not feel safe writing to what was a nominally independent (and to all intense and purposes under Susan Farrow a genuinely independent) Psychic News why would they write to an internal Paper.

However, we see the edge that is behind this issue. That independence had obviously grated upon them and they wished to ensure that what was printed with SNU money towed the current line of the NEC. Hardly surprising they would feel this but this outcome was achievable in other ways. Yet the 'no alternative' because of the losses is the line that is being peddled.

We know that at times the losses were not substantial and the SNU received good rent from Psychic News for the offices, income that is now lost. I have already said that had Mr Bruton peddled his no alternatives line in the strategic planning section of my Postgraduate Course he would have failed his MBA.
We also know there was alternative, cash from outside parties for a marketing campaign, cash to cover their losses. Even most recently we know they had an offer to a buy Psychic Press,from an independent party which would save Psychic News, the employee’s jobs and the money of other creditors. Alternatives abounded and included the NEC also activating an internal newspaper in their own right. Yet they remain apparently unwilling to let key assets go.

Hmm I will return to look more closely at this shortly

David Bruton: “I believe we need to look at all channels of communication throughout the movement."



If "we need to look at all channels of communication throughout the movement" what are "we" doing killing off the movement's most famous channel of communication? I'm also interested in Bruton's use of the word "movement". What exactly does he mean by it? Does he mean the SNU or is he referring to the dynamic, independent, free thinking, fearless, pioneering body of people who relished debate and the exchange of ideas? Sadly, it appears to be only the former. Debate and freedom of thought in today's SNU are as lifeless as Psychic News.

The following comments by Geoff Griffiths were posted on another thread relating to the closure of Psychic News, however, I believe that it is also relevant to this thread so post it here with Geoff's permission.

"Regarding the proposed purchase by the 'White Knight' buyer, my info is that this is now dead in the water. The cost asked was too high - considerably above the £30K bandied around. It would seem that when the meeting took place, the NEC had no intention of selling and were simply going through the motions - "We met the buyer, but could come to no agreement." would be the NEC's line.

It was therefore initially felt that it might be cheaper to let the liquidation go ahead and try to buy it from the liquidator. However, the SNU is likely to exclude the PN's title and the archive from the deal. Not sure if it can 'asset-strip' a company on the point of liquidation, but you never know. The fact that the SNU is the main creditor may have a bearing on this, but that seems to be the intention. In which case there is nothing of any worth to buy from the liquidator.

This brings another issue; in turning down the offer the NEC denies the SNU members the prospect of retreiving some of its losses (say £30K or so) from the liquidator, in which case the NEC may be in dereliction of their fiscal duty to the members.

However, as Lavine has shrewdly suggested, what if the Union - via a proxy of some sort - were to buy the assets from the Liquidator? That would explain the NEC's refusal to sell. Clearly there is an agenda of some kind going on here. It would really not be about money as the NEC claimed.

Curiouser and curiouser . . . ."

I left this subject alone for a while to see if any more information would come to light. However, apart from the clear fact that the NEC intended to quickly liquidate Psychic Press and buy back its assets for a knock down price it remains unclear as to why?

On the latest Paranormal Review this issue has been looked at by one comment left by Gerry;

I've been following the ongoing SNU drama on this site and others and find myself more confused every time I read them. Nothing makes sense. For all the theories that have been put forward for the SNU's actions I feel not one really explains the whole situation.......

... So what is going on? The SNU leaders can't be entirely stupid and must know they are in a high profile pickle that's doing their reputation no good and isn't going to go away. So why can't they face up and make a decision? If it's not about independence, not about liquidating, not about accepting offers of funding, not about selling to a reputable buyer, just what is it about? There is no logic in any of it and that suggests only one thing to me. Politics. But who is driving that and for what reason?

Now I have always refused to accept that they were liquidating it because it was trading insolvently. I would guess that, if it only made a profit on a few of the 15 years the SNU were running it a similar situation may have occurred previously. Additionally I do not buy the as a charity we could not support a loss making commercial business. There are too many ways in which this could have been achieved, such as forgoing the rent the SNU were charging. Additionally Psychic Press had a unique role and place within Spiritualism which I doubt would have created the legal issues claimed.

On top of that, as I have already suggested on the liquidator thread, had the NEC followed Brutons mantra from the July Conference as shown in my first post in this forum, an intention to communicate to create trust he, as Chairman of Psychic Press, would have ensured the problem was published in Psychic News with calls for support and assistance. We know that, despite the attempts of the NEC to pretend nothing was happening, as soon as a rumour of closure appeared offers of money were forthcoming from several directions. I think we must assume that the NEC would have been clever enough to realise that, if they had asked for help, it would have been forthcoming.

Well we know the cash was turned down and Charles Coulston at the meeting of creditors came up with the fanciful suggestion that donations would not have prevented insolvency as the excuse for refusing them. We can instantly dismiss the suggestion that as donations fell below the profit line they did not prevent the business trading insolvently. Many companies lose money regularly but because of their cash position they are not insolvent. The donations would have corrected the cash flow problems in the balance sheet.

So the reality is we have a small group the executive director mark Bradley, the Chairman of PP and incoming SNU President David Bruton, another member of the new NEC Andrew Hadley, (as I understand a relative newcomer moving quickly through the ranks) plus the then SNU President Duncan Gascoyne. They form a working party and meet a liquidator. We know from the liquidation thread that some liquidators are suggesting this is a good route to allow the owners/directors to buy back assets at a knock down price. Without considering any alternative they jump at this opportunity. Indeed if it had not been for some unknown action, when rumours of closure leaked out, we know that PN would have closed late June and all the staff would have been terminated.

We also know that even at this early stage they had no intention of paying out Creditors or Staff. Indeed it is quite clear that they knew this would be a direct consequence of their action and appear to have given no consideration about whether this was in accordance to the acceptable morals or ethics of a Spiritualist Organisation.

Stranger still, having started this course of action, they claimed that they already owned the masthead and archive. This is the only asset of value and the only thing which would make such a rushed action be of any value to the NEC. It is inconceivable that they wanted to acquire anything else at a knock down price.

At the informal creditors meeting the assistant general secretary claimed that the masthead and archives were never put into Psychic Press at the acquisition but we know this is disputed by the other party. I would suggest that this disputed ownership goes to the heart of stopping the liquidation. The liquidator would have been forced, in the circumstances surrounding the events (plus the levels of protest involving the Companies Investigation Bureau), to investigate this matter. Clearly the NEC will make the verbal claim to ownership quite happily but I suspect that the NEC is not sure it would stand full scrutiny. Hence their decision to leave Psychic Press in limbo, paying neither staff nor creditors and trying to ensure it does not get placed into liquidation.

In many ways the other issue that makes things seem even stranger is the unwillingness to sell the JV the entire company, including masthead or archives, when there was a chance to do so. This would have protected all the creditors, staff and subscribers. At the time they refused the offer they must have been aware the original scheme was no longer workable. Not unless they still believed they could liquidate despite the amount of information available to them upon the web that this was no longer possible. This was their chance to escape with goodwill more or less intact. It may even exist if they sold the assets from Psychic Press (even masthead and archives) now to raise the funds to pay out staff and creditors .

Neither of these steps seems at all likely. The NEC seem totally intent upon holding their ground whatever the cost to the ex employees, the reputation of the NEC/SNU and to the damage done to the general Spiritualist movement.

So why? We have in the previous paragraphs effectively discredited the claimed reasons and given many variations which offered superior outcomes for everyone. Yet the NEC are not budging and keep taking the criticisms on the chin hoping they will eventually all go away.

There has to be some underlying reason that suggests something was decided and agreed to which has nothing to do with the stated, “practical”, reasons to close PP, which do not stand the scrutiny we have given them.

Let’s look at the facts we have, the NEC want to hang on to the masthead and archives. In Bruton’s own words they want to see a publication continuing in another format. We know suggestions have been made of an in house publication guided by an SNU committee with possibly a notionally independent editor. Yes it can be accepted PN was having difficulties and may have needed revision but we can be quite sure it would have received all the necessary support to achieve that, especially as an independent publication

I think we are forced then to look at Gerry’s suggestion of politics. In this area we hit two clear facts which are of a timely nature.

1. Psychic News published the AFC tutors collective statements on a range of controversial issues on the 6th March 2010. The debate lasted for many weeks with readers making clear that they strongly disagreed with the Tutors and thought it improper that this statement had been published.
The replies by the tutors showed clear irritation at this response, with each reply it was made clear the level of knowledge they had and the collective experience that had put together this epistle. To compound this we know that the then President Duncan Gascoyne was challenged about this publication by the SNU’s own Philosophy and Ethics committee he responded with such a verbal personal attack that its chairman resigned his position, albeit remaining in placeon teh committee. Currently it is also notable that at the AGM in July there was no appointees to this committee.

This event must have had the capacity to create political waves throughout the then NEC. One can only imagine a level of irritation that the editor of a publication owned by the SNU allowed such criticisms equal space.

2. The SNU Presidency race was on and it is possible that David Bruton may not have been a certainty to gain the role. All elections carry an element of politics and promises. It is not inconceivable that this became intermingled in the events at Psychic Press.

I may posit a further one, that the apparent wealth of the AFC which Gascoyne referred to in his retiring President's speech may play some part. It is clear Duncan Gascoyne was proud of the AFC and its achievements, mentioning that it could now contribute funds to help the SNU.

It also means that the roles between the Union and the College have now been reversed. Instead of the Union having to find funds for the upkeep of the Hall and College, it is now the College which provides an additional means of financial support to the Union, which has ultimately saved the necessity of having to increase Church or Class B membership fees on a regular basis as in the past. During 2009 the College contributed either directly or indirectly nearly£180,000 towards Union expenditure. Church and Class B membership fees only contributed £138,511.

It is hard not to imagine that such a change created a new variable in the power structures in the SNU, where it was becoming dependent upon the work of the AFC and its staff. Clearly a number of these staff could be irritated that there was no control over the independence of the editor of Psychic News.

I also notice in regard to the Philosophy and Ethics Committee he said the following

In a President’s Address some years ago I spoke about putting the ‘Spirit’ back into SNU Spiritualism. This led to the formation of the Philosophy and Ethics Committee with the remit of enhancing the philosophical aspect of Spiritualism, which has now published two books. Since then the spiritual aspect of the Union has been further strengthened by the added provision of a Vice-President (Spiritual) which is proving to be of great benefit. The profile of Ministers and Officiants is constantly being looked at and recently a Council of Ministers has been established.

I raise this one as a possible cause of more politics, by that stage the Committee was, as it is now, vacant. It did not report to the VP Spiritual, who one would feel wanted to take a stronger hold. Additionally we have a higher profile for the new Council of Ministers. Bruton had similar feelings about the importance of Ministers and Officiants. He commented upon this in his incoming speech:

Looking first at the Ministry - We clearly need to promote the work of the Ministry, MAC has spent two years improving the training and review of current Ministers and Officiants, I believe we must find ways of increasing the numbers of ordained Ministers and Officiants....
..... We currently have 59 Ministers and 46 Officiants. Realistically that number needsto grow considerably over the next five years if we are to fully support both our Churches and their congregations and begin to address the needs within our organisation and beyond.

So the emergence of the strength of the Ministry and the promotion to develop its profile is a new element in the dynamics of SNU politics. The need to develop this area also could tie in with a stronger role, potentially, for the VP Spiritual and a deeper role in providing future guidance such as the tutor’s collective statements.

There are probably whole other areas to explore about the change this will bring to the SNU over time, formalising it much more into a traditional RELIGION with structure and quite possibly theology, as opposed to a less formal philosophy/religion. This falls outside the PP issue so will be discussed, in time, elsewhere.

Of course this is not the only time when individual tutors would have been angered by letters in Psychic news. In January 2009 a letter exchange took place, over the childrens’ books about Mr Splitfoot written by Stella Upton, SNU Officiant and TSNU, between Garth Willey, Stella Upton and Lis Warwood. This exchange started by Garth Willey stating it was inappropriate that wrong history was purveyed because Mr Splitfoot was not in the original history it was a later addition. Stella Upton responded saying it was there in Owen’s Footfalls book from the EE Lewis 1848 record. She then quoted the appallingly inaccurate Leah Fish Fox Underhill’s 1885 Missing Link not Footfalls. Lis Warwood then drew attention to the original 1848 publication and the real record made by EE Lewis.

The matter dropped there but of course Stella Upton’s husband, Minister Stephen Upton, TSNU and current NEC member had made the video History of Spiritualism for the SNU containing the same incorrect fact.

Much earlier in the 2000's dispute had occurred because Psychic News published the work of Paul Gaunt which showed that the 7 Principles were not given down in 1871 at Cleveland Hall from the Spirit of Robert Owen. This is very substantively documented yet the SNU policy appears to remains in support of the immaculate conception of the 7 Principles in 1871.

Clearly this type of critique from those outside the SNU to the history (or in Paul Gaunt's case from within it) that they have accepted, even if the facts are fully validated enabling it to rewrite that history if it wishes to, must be irritating, especially when facilitated by a publication the SNU owned.

So we certainly have a number of trigger points all potentially acting or interacting together and possibly requiring a resolution in the eyes of a variety of people with varying motivations.

We also had the key trigger to work with, Psychic Press was insolvent and needed liquidating (probaly not the first time it was "insolvent"). If even half of the above issues were in play it may well have seemed that there was no other alternative which would have given a result satisfactory to all those different wants.
Additionally bringing the publication in house would allow the NEC control over the news which would be published, strengthening their position and hold over the SNU. I suspect too many people were in winners places, if the deal was pulled off, for any of them to want to back down.

Sadly too many people have lost from the events that have transpired most particularly the staff. In addition limbo is not a solution and continues to expose the NEC to hostility and ridicule. Not only that but when the company is liquidated, as it must be, then the protest will start again. This whole issue has a very expensive potential downside for the SNU and really they should all agree it was a nice try but get over it and let PN get on with life.

I am sure over time other possible political motivations will come to me and I will add them as they do.

Hmm I really cannot get around the possibilities surrounding Brutons election needs. He seems to me to be a person who has actively sought and wanted the position of power and prestige that the Presidency offers.

For my sins I have been a committee volunteer for many years, various cricket and table tennis clubs. Junior Coordinator of a strong South Australian Cricket Club here asked to become Chairman. Various roles on the Spiritualist centre here and now leader. Director/Treasurer of a Government funded Theatre Group. You name it for almost all of my life I have been on the committee of one or more voluntary organisations.

Commonly I find it is the politicians and power seekers who look for position whilst many of the best just get on with things. I also faced many political battles on my way through business its a way of life when you are at work. However some of the worst political interplay I have often found in the voluntary sector where people seek prestige, there are no interviews, to often with image or presentation overwhelming substance.

I can only guess at the interplay between personalities on the NEC. However, after my experience it would be an informed guess that it is far from sweetness and light. I think the most dangerous weapon in Spiritualism is Love and Light, used to distract attention from the words preceding them.

I could also guess that the NEC members may each have their own coterie of followers and supporters so they may represent quite a power block in a close election. Indeed if at some stage Bruton thought he may lose an election then one may expect he would be especially desperate to attract their support.

Hmm its an interesting idea and one worth looking at, why did he, an apparently ardent supporter of PN who helped just before the end of 2009 to have extra pages added and who as we see on the web, called the editor the best thing that happened to PN get to where he did so quickly.

They went into liquidation mode so fast, trying to end it on the 13th/14th June 2010 (now folks do not believe the circular to members they left some critical inconvenient facts out). As we have said elsewhere, firstly let the other stakeholders know the problem. I am sure that this would have solved the issue of solvency for Bruton but not brought the paper in house.

Well my bet is something else was going on in that change and the Presidency does look like one possible factor.

Of course many others who read this may have a much closer view of events and can fill in the dots better than I.

Hi all this topic has also got a little dusty but my eye was drawn to Roy Stemman's article "A Question of Ethics" in Paranormal Review http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20110419 .

This covered the unpleasant way the members of the Philosophy and Ethics Committee were treated despite the public plaudits for the two books they produced. "The Philosophy of Spiritualism" and "The Religion of Spiritualism".

It is hard not to notice one of the major points raised in this

Problems began for the Philosophy and Ethics Committee (P&EC) when an Arthur Findlay College Course (AFC) Organisers' and Tutors' meeting took place at Stansted Hall in February 2010 at which, following discussions, a number of conclusions were reached on sometimes controversial subjects and statements were agreed collectively. Topics ranged from abortions and aliens to evil spirits and possession. A report of the meeting, including the statements issued, was published in Psychic News (6 March 2010), resulting in readers' letters voicing criticism of the tutors' views.

Barry Oates, a Spiritualist for 45 years, an SNU minister since 1992 and recipient of the Union's Award of Merit in 2005 and 2009, tells me that he had differences of opinion with Duncan Gascoyne over the tutors' statements because they gave the impression that they expressed Union policy on various ethical issues.

"The reason the P&EC was set up was to deal with these very issues, but we realised nothing is as straight forward as it seems and it was taking a long time to get the balance right, especially if they were to be accepted by the National Executive Council (NEC) as Union policy."

Following those differences, Oates resigned as chairman but remained on the P&EC in order to get their second book finished and launched in time for the SNU AGM in 2010.

Now we have a major problem for the Philosophy and Ethics committee which mirrored the hostility that was expressed by the tutors to the comments and criticism of their statement which were published in Psychic News.

Clearly, for some reason unknown, this whole issue had touched a raw nerve for the Tutors, or those involved in issuing the statement. Indeed it must be assumed, from the strength of the reaction, that the Vice President Spiritual Judith Seaman and the then President Duncan Gascoyne supported the position of those tutors.

It really seems that this was a major turning point for both that Committee and for Psychic News. I have posted about the Psychic News items earlier in this thread so I will not repeat those events.

We know what happened to Psychic News after this and the various machinations the NEC used to try and hang onto that publication whilst destroying its independence. Roy's article lets us have new insights into what happened to the members of the committee.

To quote Roy again

After his election as SNU president in 2010, David Bruton took a number of new faces onto the NEC. He also phoned Oates and asked him to consider becoming chairman of the P&EC. Oates explains that there was a condition to that appointment, "being that they would expect changes to the committee – in other words, ‘we don't want those who have produced two very successful books for the SNU'. I refused the chairmanship, of course, and later I discovered that is what the NEC expected me to do."

Then we get the reaction of another member of the Philosphy and Ethics committee another who like Barry Oates left the NEC at the 2010 elections.

Meanwhile, David Hopkins had similar issues with the AFC tutors' statements, and had objected – "as a member of the NEC, i.e., as a director of the SNU" – to them and the implication that this "policy" came from the AFC, which was a sub-committee of the NEC. "The response from Duncan Gascoyne was to issue a personal attack on me, coupled with an attack on the P&EC. This led to Barry Oates' resignation as the committee's chairman."

David adds: "Voicing criticism of the AFC or its paid tutorial staff was not popular. One got the impression that the AFC was a ‘sacred cow' with some, against which criticism was seen almost as blasphemy."

Continuing from further on

Hopkins, who had been a member of the P&EC since it was established in 2004 and was its chairman up until the 2010 AGM, did not resign from the committee, nor did Carole Austin. They were, he says, "dumped". Oates, as we have already seen, turned down the chairmanship because of that condition.

Rubbing salt into the wound is the fact that they were not told why, after the success of their two books, their services were no longer required on the P&EC. But they were not even told they were no longer required. It became apparent, however, when the SNU website displayed the membership of its committees ... with the exception of the P&EC.

Indeed they were only to find out they were no longer committee members when it was posted upon the internet. Using a quote by David on Roy's site

"We were not told we were being replaced. I would have expected at least the courtesy of a contact from the President or Vice-President Spiritual (as P&E is part of the responsibility of the holder of that position) but we waited and waited ... and waited, knowing only when, months later, new names appeared on the website that our services had been dispensed with."

Judith Seaman, SNU vice-president (Spiritual), is shown as the committee's chairman and Brian Gledhill, Tony Penketh and Linda Smith are members.

Once again the behaviour of the NEC towards people who have worked hard for them is highlighted and found wanting. The uncaring approach with no communication or common decency.

However in this case we suddenly realise that an issue which we had not taken sufficient notice of is extremely serious. The right of the AFC tutors to publish guidelines on the philosophy and ethics of Spiritualism without receiving any comment or criticism. It appears quite possible that to this end Psychic News was acted against and an independent Philosophy and Ethics Committee removed.

Interestingly in this matter Duncan Gascoyne was clearly one of the movers and shakers. However it appears from the comments in his farewell interview with Roy http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20110402 that ongoing events and actions by the NEC have now caused him to step away.