14. The Rev Dr James McPherson asked -

The report of the Standing Committee included in the Additional Papers mentions the prospect of a charge being brought against an incumbent under the Tribunal Ordinance.

(a) What financial, legal, and pastoral assistance will the Diocese provide an incumbent who is the subject of such a charge?

(b) What, if any, indemnity and comfort will the Diocese provide an incumbent against such a charge, including regarding the prospects of future employability in this Diocese, the Anglican Church of Australia, or the Anglican Communion generally?

(c) Did the Standing Committee consider the risks and exposures that could impact on the Diocese in the event that Synod passes any or all of the motions 16.8 - 16.10? If so, could the issues and considerations be reported to the Synod members?

(d) Do the Diocese's insurance policies provide any possible support for the exposures and possible costs that could arise from the passing of the proposed motions? Has the matter been discussed with our current insurers, and if so what was the outcome?

To which the President replied -

The "charge" referred to in the question is a charge against an incumbent brought for authorising or purporting to authorise administration of Holy Communion by a deacon or lay deacon. With this in mind, I am informed the answers are as follows -

(a) There are currently no formal arrangements in place to provide for financial or legal assistance for an incumbent against whom such a charge is brought. Standing Committee or the Synod would have to consider making arrangements on a case by case basis. Pastoral assistance may be provided by members of the Episcopal team.

(b) This question seeks a legal opinion, at least in part, and so is out of order under business rule 6.3(4).

(c) Motions 16.8, 16.9 and 16.10 were included on the Synod business paper for Monday 18 October "by request of the Standing Committee". The promotion of each of those motions was the subject of debate at the Standing Committee during which a number of reasons for and against the motions were raised. However, other than the recording of motions and amendments, in accordance with the Standing Committee's usual practice, no record has been kept of the specific matters discussed. Accordingly, it is not possible to answer this question.

(d) This question seeks a legal opinion, and so is out of order under business rule 6.3(4). I am advised however, that the matter has been raised with our current insurers.