Pre the Special Investigation |
|
Last week the Daily Telegraph in Australia, ran a special investigation into the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church (PBCC), each day covering different topics and carrying interviews with Dean and Charles Hales, two of the sons of brethren leader Bruce Hales.
It was framed as ‘Church or Cult’, as the Telegraph was invited inside the secret world of the Plymouth Brethren. We were delighted to see that the journalist was James Willis, his previous work was evidence that his general style is tough and challenging
Whenever there is a published story about the PBCC, a large part is spent providing background on the Plymouth Brethren. At Brethren Exposed we were excited to see extended coverage, which we hoped would enable a much deeper dive into the Plymouth Brethren. We were glued to our seats in anticipation!
After years of reporting we believe that framing the brethren as ‘Church or Cult’ is missing the key point of whether it is a ‘Church or Corporation’.
In the initial piece the Telegraph reports that they were approached by the PBCC, they made a cautious and calculated decision, that this would not be a positive public relations campaign, it would be a live interview with no questions off limits and that the church would allow the Telegraph to examine the most intimate details of their beliefs and practices.
We pushed aside our disappointment, when we saw the usual mistakes starting early, with “Australia proudly champions religious freedom and that it must be respected as part of this investigation”.
We have often said the greatest marketing trick employed by the brethren was to include the word ‘Church’ in their rebrand from Exclusive Brethren. It forms the connotation that this is a form of mainstream Christianity, and for the public and journalists often becomes the focal point when discussing or reporting on the PBCC.
We believe it is nothing to do with religious freedom, this is a church that interprets bible scripture to fit commercial need, and the real question is not about whether they are a ‘Christian Church or Cult’, but if they are a ‘Commercial Corporation’ using religion, coercion and fear as a cover for financial gain.
We were much more encouraged however, that the article then went straight to how many people would be deeply troubled by the practice of separation, that women are destined to run the household, how websites are filtered on members’ devices, blocking certain subjects at school and banning university attendance for young brethren. Asking the question, is this deliberately shielding members from things that could make them question their faith and leave?
It was framed as ‘Church or Cult’, as the Telegraph was invited inside the secret world of the Plymouth Brethren. We were delighted to see that the journalist was James Willis, his previous work was evidence that his general style is tough and challenging
Whenever there is a published story about the PBCC, a large part is spent providing background on the Plymouth Brethren. At Brethren Exposed we were excited to see extended coverage, which we hoped would enable a much deeper dive into the Plymouth Brethren. We were glued to our seats in anticipation!
After years of reporting we believe that framing the brethren as ‘Church or Cult’ is missing the key point of whether it is a ‘Church or Corporation’.
In the initial piece the Telegraph reports that they were approached by the PBCC, they made a cautious and calculated decision, that this would not be a positive public relations campaign, it would be a live interview with no questions off limits and that the church would allow the Telegraph to examine the most intimate details of their beliefs and practices.
We pushed aside our disappointment, when we saw the usual mistakes starting early, with “Australia proudly champions religious freedom and that it must be respected as part of this investigation”.
We have often said the greatest marketing trick employed by the brethren was to include the word ‘Church’ in their rebrand from Exclusive Brethren. It forms the connotation that this is a form of mainstream Christianity, and for the public and journalists often becomes the focal point when discussing or reporting on the PBCC.
We believe it is nothing to do with religious freedom, this is a church that interprets bible scripture to fit commercial need, and the real question is not about whether they are a ‘Christian Church or Cult’, but if they are a ‘Commercial Corporation’ using religion, coercion and fear as a cover for financial gain.
We were much more encouraged however, that the article then went straight to how many people would be deeply troubled by the practice of separation, that women are destined to run the household, how websites are filtered on members’ devices, blocking certain subjects at school and banning university attendance for young brethren. Asking the question, is this deliberately shielding members from things that could make them question their faith and leave?
Post the Special Investigation |
|
At Brethren Exposed we appreciate how difficult it is to provide the full background in every area when reporting on the Plymouth Brethren. Reflecting on the Telegraph series on the Plymouth Brethren. We can see that there was balance between the answers provided by the Hales family and the stories from Lavinia Richardson and Ben Woodbury. We can also see that the reporting was balanced when covering the oddities of the brethren, the ATO raid, wealth and the other topics covered.
At the end of the week, we felt a little deflated. We believe that any exposure about the Plymouth Brethren is positive, however, the Telegraph had fallen into using many of the common generic questions and stereotypes when reporting on the Plymouth Brethren. It completely missed the ‘beating heart’ of the brethren, with some astonishing omissions.
We felt that the Special Investigation by the Daily Telegraph fell short in three key areas.
Preparation Time
We suspect that the period from the initial offer by the Plymouth Brethren to provide exclusive access to the undertaking of the special investigation would have been short.
The amount of online information surrounding the brethren is also large and there will always be issues with verifying individual online stories. The size and wide-ranging topics that would need covering in an investigation would be immense.
Considering this, the lack of preparation was evident in the reporting, and answers that were provided could clearly have been challenged and instead were simply accepted and published.
Knowledge
At Brethren Exposed we have spent over 5 years researching and understanding how the brethren operate. We are still uncovering new stories and building our knowledge. It is with absolutely no disrespect to James Willis, the reporter from the Daily Telegraph, that his lack of knowledge was evident by what he missed.
It is understandable but disappointing that reporting on the Plymouth Brethren is often stereotyped, we see focus on them as a church and their ‘rules’ around watching movies, listening to the radio and eating separately. In this special investigation it missed the funding of Bruce Hales and his family, we estimate that Bruce and his sons have received over $100 million since 2002, There was not one mention of the ‘ecosystem’, the Global Funding Team or most importantly the Global Advisory Panel.
An analogy, it is like reporting on how a Human functions from a biological perspective without mentioning that a Human has a heart and a brain.
Soft Touch
We categorised the overall investigation as soft touch. This is not because we believe in some big conspiracy theory between the brethren, politicians, and the media. It is due to the lack of any challenge, particularly, to the answers provided by Charles and Dean Hales. We believe this is down to the lack of preparation time and knowledge.
It is the reason why at Brethren Exposed, we felt somewhat deflated, despite what we believe were the honest endeavours of both James Willis and the Telegraph to provide a great exclusive balanced story.
We do believe that no questions were off limit, sadly they simply did not ask the right questions.
At the end of the week, we felt a little deflated. We believe that any exposure about the Plymouth Brethren is positive, however, the Telegraph had fallen into using many of the common generic questions and stereotypes when reporting on the Plymouth Brethren. It completely missed the ‘beating heart’ of the brethren, with some astonishing omissions.
We felt that the Special Investigation by the Daily Telegraph fell short in three key areas.
Preparation Time
We suspect that the period from the initial offer by the Plymouth Brethren to provide exclusive access to the undertaking of the special investigation would have been short.
The amount of online information surrounding the brethren is also large and there will always be issues with verifying individual online stories. The size and wide-ranging topics that would need covering in an investigation would be immense.
Considering this, the lack of preparation was evident in the reporting, and answers that were provided could clearly have been challenged and instead were simply accepted and published.
Knowledge
At Brethren Exposed we have spent over 5 years researching and understanding how the brethren operate. We are still uncovering new stories and building our knowledge. It is with absolutely no disrespect to James Willis, the reporter from the Daily Telegraph, that his lack of knowledge was evident by what he missed.
It is understandable but disappointing that reporting on the Plymouth Brethren is often stereotyped, we see focus on them as a church and their ‘rules’ around watching movies, listening to the radio and eating separately. In this special investigation it missed the funding of Bruce Hales and his family, we estimate that Bruce and his sons have received over $100 million since 2002, There was not one mention of the ‘ecosystem’, the Global Funding Team or most importantly the Global Advisory Panel.
An analogy, it is like reporting on how a Human functions from a biological perspective without mentioning that a Human has a heart and a brain.
Soft Touch
We categorised the overall investigation as soft touch. This is not because we believe in some big conspiracy theory between the brethren, politicians, and the media. It is due to the lack of any challenge, particularly, to the answers provided by Charles and Dean Hales. We believe this is down to the lack of preparation time and knowledge.
It is the reason why at Brethren Exposed, we felt somewhat deflated, despite what we believe were the honest endeavours of both James Willis and the Telegraph to provide a great exclusive balanced story.
We do believe that no questions were off limit, sadly they simply did not ask the right questions.
Full Review of the Special Investigation |
|
Inside the Secret and Strict Brethren
In the initial coverage Dean & Charles talk about what is a cult? Dean calls out three features of a cult, absolute control, brainwashing members, recruitment. The interview then branches off into the usual stereotypical brethren questions, not listening to the radio, or going to the movies or attending sporting events, not celebrating Christmas, getting married on a Tuesday and not holidaying, and finishing up with how they never sit down for a meal with non-brethren. We then see the common discussion around not eating with those not in fellowship, with reference to their interpretation of scripture and how this was introduced by a brethren leader 60 years ago.
The omission of any challenge or follow up questions is the first time we felt genuine frustration and feared that the interview was going to be ‘soft touch’. We would have asked “If you have no rules as such, why was a new rule introduced after 130 years and what is preventing another leader changing the interpretation and rule by saying they could eat with non-brethren?”
The interview then branches into discussing members being confined. The brothers say this involved ‘being restricted from church services’ and would generally be the result of ‘some level of unfaithfulness’ and assured the Telegraph that it did not involve ‘locking someone in their bedroom’. They talk about the numbers of members that have left in Sydney, how they help them, and Dean says if someone left and went off about the church, then he probably wouldn’t speak to them. He goes on to say it is up to individual family members to decide if to continue contact.
Our frustration level increased, as often with these interviews, the lack of preparation is revealed. It doesn’t take much investigation to uncover examples of where ex-members and even current members have been confined. We would have used these specific examples to delve further into confinement. It created an opportunity to question Dean, ‘Would you not consider it be Christian and forgive those if they went “off about the church”?’
The interview continues with Charles talking about gay members departing on amicable terms and how it doesn’t mean immediately being put out from the brethren. Again, the lack of preparation means that there are no follow up questions around gay ex-members experiences.
The story then covers that the answers given by Dean and Charles are not reflected by some former members, including Lavinia Richardson, who endured vastly different experiences in the brethren to that the Hales brothers claim.
This is excellent however it doesn’t raise the experience of former members directly with Dean and Charles.
The final section in this story is interesting as it touches on how it is unclear how Bruce Hales became the leader or ‘Minister of the Lord in the Recovery’, and who the next leader might be. The answer from Dean that is there no formal process, no paid clergy or structure per se.
Again, there are no follow up questions asked, and we would have asked ‘If there are no paid clergy, how much have you both received and how much has Bruce Hales received in donations from the members since 2002?’*
We would also question, that as Bruce Hales is the ‘Minister of the Lord in the Recovery’ and is named as having the ultimate say in the governing documents of all the Gospel Trusts. If the money received via collections from members of Gospel Trusts should be declared as income and therefore be taxable?”
*Brethren Exposed estimates that this is well over AUD$100 million
The interview also discusses Dean opening his phone and showing an app (Connect), that lists all members across the globe, with pictures, marriages, births, deaths and how Dean could find directions to a member’s home if invited for lunch. They say it is choice if pictures are included and laughed at the suggestion that the app could be used to track members. They say they have a filtering tool, but that it doesn’t track devices, saying it would be illegal.
There was no follow up, again suggesting no preparation to discuss or funnel deeper. At Brethren Exposed we have evidence that what members look at on their devices is monitored, along with the sites visited. Though based on the use of private investigators by the PBCC, we agree that members might not be physically tracked by their devices.
I left, so my now my family’s barred me from own sister’s wedding
It was very positive to see a counter experience to the claims of the Hales brothers published on the same page. The story about ex-member Lavinia Richardson had been picked up in the ABC Four Corners documentary.
Her story uses the fact that she can’t attend her sister’s wedding in Victoria, how her contact with family is almost non-existent and how the practice of separation is the cause. Lavinia talks about how the brethren put their beliefs above everything including family. She highlights how her family would often tell her not to play with non-brethren children in the park**, how aside from WhatsApp message she had no access to social media.
It finishes with a line where Lavinia says she is “a firm advocate for religious freedom in Australia, but there were ‘restrictions’ she had experienced in her family which had nothing to do with religion”
We fully endorse Lavinia's comments, as looking at the brethren through the lens of a Christian church, is often the first mistake people make when reporting or discussing the brethren.
**since this article was published, the PBCC have released a podcast featuring both Charles & Dean Hales talking fondly at length, of how when they were young, that they had friends outside of the brethren that they played with. Which would suggest one rule for the leaders and one rule for everyone else.
No radio, no Christmas, no movies: A Brethren life
In a series of somewhat obvious and stereotypical brethren topics, Charles & Dean Hales give their views on
Radio, Movies & Sport
Soft questions, they reply there are no set rules, they encourage members not to use radio, or idolise sport people, but admit to watching sports highlights and documentaries.
On Social Media
An area we agree on their views, however, there is no funnelling further into the recent leaked global communication to brethren members around not using social media.
Pets
Continues a constant theme, that there are ‘no, set rules’.
Christmas, Easter, Birthdays, Wedding and Holidays
Continues the soft questions.
School, Universities
Again, confirms what the majority already know.
Fellowship
The replies offer up the opportunity for further questions, sadly they are not asked, particularly around “It’s almost like an unwritten contract or a covenant” (basically translates to there are a set of rules!)
Confinement of Members
There is an admittance that it happens but then as stated previously, the opportunity to ask about specific examples is not taken.
Former Members
The underlying question remains unanswered and that is when someone is confined but they deny the ‘charge’ for why the have been confined, what then happens? It would suggest on the surface that unless they admit to an ‘error’ they will not be reconciled and allowed back into the ‘church’. This would appear grossly at odds with it being something quite serious, and "some kind of unfaithfulness" provides the ‘church’ with many options to confine and ex-communicate members.
There is a real lack of challenge in general by the media and politicians to this practice. Despite, there being many hundreds of ex-member examples. It is interesting that Charles states there have been 8 members leave in the last 10 years in Sydney. It is very difficult to estimate but we believe there have been circa 2,000 members leave globally in the last 50 years (not including, the schism following the Aberdeen incident), and we believe that the vast majority consider the PBCC as a Cult.
At Brethren Exposed we have spoken to many recent leavers that do not participate in ex-brethren social media groups or speak out publicly. The constant theme is fear of some kind of retribution particularly in access to see family members or impact on their post brethren careers. It is an under reported area that concerns us greatly, and includes control, coercion and even payment for former members.
Gay Members
Charles talks about how he and Dean both know of individuals who have come out as gay and remained in the ‘church’ for more than 10 years, ultimately departing but amicably. Coming out as gay does not mean you are immediately put out of asked to leave. He goes on how the lifestyle is against the law of God and incompatible with the brethren fellowship.
The sheer weight of evidence from former members who are gay and their experiences within the brethren and since leaving should without any doubt led to much more in depth questioning. The Telegraph, to their credit did use a counter story from former member Ben Woodbury but did not refer to the many other examples. In our opinion the lack of further questioning of Charles & Dean on this subject, is one of the key reasons we formed the view, that the interview was soft PR and counter to the Telegraph’s opening statement.
Heaven
Charles & Dean gave their view.
Surely the follow up question in reply to their answers, would be to ask why the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church exists?
Respected and speak our minds
One area that Brethren Exposed regularly focuses on is the treatment of female brethren members, and to their credit the Telegraph also interviewed Nerolie Hales, Abby Hales and Shelley Little.
The background provided was the media reports claiming brethren members are ‘subject’ to their husband. They talk about where they sit in the church and refer to the ‘wives submit to you husbands’ being taken out of context. The article goes on to say how this is at odds with ex-member Lavinia Richardson’s experience.
We consider this to be one of the better parts of the interview, it gave a direct counterbalance with Lavinia Richardson’s comments, Abby Hales unlike her husband Charles or Dean, refers to the bible. Nerolie Hales, wife of Dean, may as well have said I am the wife of a multi-millionaire, why would I not be happy. It was interesting to see someone brought in that was not a Hales, though it is worth commenting that Shelley Little is the sister-in-law of Greg Hales. A question that could have been raised is why with over 600 charities globally that there is not one female trustee. It could also have asked if male brethren members are allowed to have a female boss in the workplace. In summary asking three extremely wealthy women do they feel subject to their husbands, is unlikely to merit an enlightening response, nor does it come across as the most objective question.
Church links to business and Albanese Cult comment behind $700k lobby group donation
Brethren Exposed found this part of the interview quite fascinating,
It starts with the revelation that members of the PBCC donated at least $700,000 to Conservative lobby group Advance during this year’s federal election campaign. This is a first, a fact that had not been published and where it would appear the PBCC has actively tried to get ahead of an election story.
The story continues with how PBCC members, historically don’t vote and that it was their business and opposition to Labor’s industrial relations policies, that led to many members volunteering for the Liberals at the polling booths.
It talks about their disgust with Anthony Albanese labelling them as a ‘cult’ and how it resulted in brethren children being bullied at a local primary school. It mentions the upcoming inquiry into the election and the likely inclusion of the brethren members campaigning. Brethren member Gavin Little (brother-in-law of Greg Hales), talks about how Albanese’s ‘lashing’ prompted more members to begin handing-out for the Liberals. Little talks about “don’t poke the bear” and how as a tightly connected religious organisation, it is treated as very personal. He goes on to talk about how many business owners are members and industrial relations laws and interestingly, how much someone is entitled to, we were all like, we just need a change of Government.
There appears to be little evidence of further questioning from the Telegraph. The use by Mr Little of “tightly connected” and “we were all like”, surely this would merit further investigation into whether this was an organised brethren response. We would also ask about the timings, in reference to “Poking the Bear”, as Albanese’s ‘Cult’ comment came following widespread reporting of brethren members involved in the election. We would also query the Christian values of a group that would respond in force and who were ignited by Labor talking about how people are “entitled to” things.
Dean Hales talks about he saw Albanese’s comments as “inciting hatred against Christianity” and then in a remarkable leap, compared it to Charlie Kirk being assassinated for his love of Christianity and love of Christ.
At Brethren Exposed we were certainly not admirers of Charlie Kirk’s views; however, we respected his ability to discuss these views openly and candidly and debate them with people who did not agree with him. We strongly believe that no one should be killed for their political viewpoint and that Free Speech is important in a democracy. The comparison between the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and Charlie Kirk is like comparing apples with office interior design. The Plymouth Brethren ex-communicates members who don’t believe in their view and see evil in those that don’t share their fellowship. It is the absolute opposite of the willingness to discuss beliefs and the freedom of speech that Charlie Kirk represented.
Charles Hales repeats Gavin Little’s story of brethren children being bullied at a local school where Albanese had repeated the ‘Cult’ comment. Dean Hales describes Albanese’s comments on Quid Pro Quo as laughable.
In terms of the bullying of children after Albanese labelled them a ‘Cult’ for the second time, in an interview outside the Winthrop Primary School, Perth. The interview is online and can be viewed, Albanese does not refer to the brethren as a ‘Cult’ in this interview.
The Hales brothers talked how traditionally brethren believed that “Government is by God – and we leave it to God”, however, in recent years it was left up to individual choice. They go on to add “that the church is not and will not be involved in elections, that this wasn’t an us versus them – the Prime Minister scenario and that they pray for him every night”. In terms of the donations neither Charles or Dean had donated, and that during the campaign a spokesperson for the church said it had “asked some parishioners who are known have strong political views as to their donations”, “Based on our inquiries five parishioners came forward who said they had made individual political donations to Advance, totalling around $700,000”. The article gives an overview of Advance and then discusses the brethren links to the Liberal party with donations in 2004 and 2007 and explains some the background during the 2025 elections.
This part of the interview is probably the most balanced, and the answers provided by Charles & Dean do appear somewhat opaque. We would have liked to see further insight of how a spokesperson for the brethren, could quickly establish $700,000 going to Advance without a high level of control and communication and how the change from traditionally being reliant on God, changed to individual choice in an organisation with no formal rules.
Behind the High Walls of a Secret Church (Men at the front, women at the back as Brethren opens it door for the first time)
In this section, James Willis the Telegraph journalist talks about his visit to a meeting at the main Sydney meeting room.
The obvious questions are Why ‘a man attends church service’ is a worthy news story, is this because it is a Cult and not a Church? If truly a church then why would someone turning up without prior approval, result in them not being allowed access to the service?
Church left me on my own when I came out
In a balanced view to the interviews given by Charles & Dean Hales, it was excellent to see an interview with Ben Woodbury.
As we have mentioned previously, Ben’s story could have been used to question Charles & Dean Hales further on gay members.
Huge donations help fund a global school with no biology or Harry Potter.
An overview is provided of OneSchool Global, the brethren education system. It confirms that brethren children attend non-brethren schools from kindergarten through to 6-7 years old before moving to OneSchool Global, the reason provided is to make ‘non-brethren’ friends. The article covers subjects or topics not taught in brethren schools. It highlights how teachers are all non-brethren and goes on to explain this is due to brethren members being unable to attend University in person, making teaching jobs implausible. It mentions how one member discusses how they would discourage children from any employment which may impact on weekly worship, such as, someone having to work nightshift. It highlights the careers available to brethren members and mentions the thousands of businesses owned by brethren members. It covers the large donations that go into OneSchool Global, with $37 million going into OneSchool Global Australia in 2024. It highlights the tax-payer funding in Australia and points out that globally this accounts for only 12% of the cost to run OneSchool Global. It ends with a note about how some brethren members have been known to donate seven-figure cheques to fund the building on new OneSchool campuses and references Jamaica.
In fairness to James Willis to cover the OneSchool Global education system in full detail could take a week of column space! The are many areas that could be investigated in much more detail. At Brethren Exposed we have consistently ‘banged the drum’ around the severely limited career options for brethren members. There are so many career choices that are not open to brethren members and the limited choice of jobs borders on forced labour. If no question was off limit, we would have asked If a brethren member can work for a company that wasn’t owned or had not been recently sold by a brethren member? Why there are no public servants from the brethren community? If it was acceptable to make a choice between becoming a doctor or losing your family? There is the whole issue around the funding of OneSchool Global, and the obvious question. Are school fees reduced because of the charitable funding and does the chain involve brethren parents benefitting through the profits of their brethren businesses going to brethren charities and ultimately to the brethren owned OneSchool Global.
Church defends its tax record
This article covers the ATO raid in March 2024 on the Universal Business Team (UBT), highlighting UBT’s $200 million a year annual revenue and that the church members run thousands of companies and that they employ 22,000 people from outside the church. UBT informed the Telegraph that profits were invested into education, charities and other not-for-profit organisations. It covers the charities registered at the same address as UBT and reports the assets of the charities. In a balanced approach they report on the public facing Rapid Relief Team (RRT) and how other charities are much more secretive and offer limited public information. Dean Hales says that the church would “typically go out to the member businesses and say to them ‘would you be willing to participate via a donation to support your local school?”, “But the is no obligation whatsoever. It’s their matter”. Charles Hales also provides commentary to confirm they pay their taxes. It then discusses the brethren meeting rooms and organisations and the $100 million facility in Rydalmere, reporting on the underground car parking and escalators. It finishes with more on the ATO and the reason provided by UBT on the closing of UBT Accountants in Australia, which it says was “driven by commercial and personnel factors”. The final line is from UBT saying it had “cooperated fully with the ATO during its recent information gathering process”.
Similar, to OneSchool Global, no one page article could provide the scrutiny required to cover the financials of UBT, Gospel Trusts, Charities and Members Businesses. At Brethren Exposed this has been a fundamental part of our investigations for the last five years. We think for the column inches covered by the Telegraph, that they did a decent job, though it leaves many questions unanswered.
Our major disappointment is that there is no mention of the Global Funding Team (GFT) or the Global Advisory Panel (GAP), these are the most important organisations within the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church. They are the organisations at the heart of the brethren and involve the highest-ranking members and leaders of the brethren. The omission of these GFT and GAP is the major reason we believe the Telegraph article was ‘soft PR’ and didn’t deliver on its original promise. At Brethren Exposed we have hard evidence that would have challenged many of the answers provided to the Telegraph by Charles and Dean Hales.
Our wealth is why people attack us
This covered the Hales family and their personal wealth, covering the businesses they own, along with a brief commentary on the Covid contracts won by the Hales owned businesses. In defence of the Hales, the subtitle is somewhat misleading and the actual comment from Charles Hales reported at the end of this piece “the wealth of particular families, has added to the reasons why people would continue to attack the church”
This article is brief, and we suspect that this is due to the topic being covered at length previously by other media outlets. Though, we still believe that only a small percentage of the story has ever been reported. We would have liked to see further investigation and to have asked Charles Hales, Did the Hales family benefit from the sale of UBT’s PPE arm to Coshield Global?
In the initial coverage Dean & Charles talk about what is a cult? Dean calls out three features of a cult, absolute control, brainwashing members, recruitment. The interview then branches off into the usual stereotypical brethren questions, not listening to the radio, or going to the movies or attending sporting events, not celebrating Christmas, getting married on a Tuesday and not holidaying, and finishing up with how they never sit down for a meal with non-brethren. We then see the common discussion around not eating with those not in fellowship, with reference to their interpretation of scripture and how this was introduced by a brethren leader 60 years ago.
The omission of any challenge or follow up questions is the first time we felt genuine frustration and feared that the interview was going to be ‘soft touch’. We would have asked “If you have no rules as such, why was a new rule introduced after 130 years and what is preventing another leader changing the interpretation and rule by saying they could eat with non-brethren?”
The interview then branches into discussing members being confined. The brothers say this involved ‘being restricted from church services’ and would generally be the result of ‘some level of unfaithfulness’ and assured the Telegraph that it did not involve ‘locking someone in their bedroom’. They talk about the numbers of members that have left in Sydney, how they help them, and Dean says if someone left and went off about the church, then he probably wouldn’t speak to them. He goes on to say it is up to individual family members to decide if to continue contact.
Our frustration level increased, as often with these interviews, the lack of preparation is revealed. It doesn’t take much investigation to uncover examples of where ex-members and even current members have been confined. We would have used these specific examples to delve further into confinement. It created an opportunity to question Dean, ‘Would you not consider it be Christian and forgive those if they went “off about the church”?’
The interview continues with Charles talking about gay members departing on amicable terms and how it doesn’t mean immediately being put out from the brethren. Again, the lack of preparation means that there are no follow up questions around gay ex-members experiences.
The story then covers that the answers given by Dean and Charles are not reflected by some former members, including Lavinia Richardson, who endured vastly different experiences in the brethren to that the Hales brothers claim.
This is excellent however it doesn’t raise the experience of former members directly with Dean and Charles.
The final section in this story is interesting as it touches on how it is unclear how Bruce Hales became the leader or ‘Minister of the Lord in the Recovery’, and who the next leader might be. The answer from Dean that is there no formal process, no paid clergy or structure per se.
Again, there are no follow up questions asked, and we would have asked ‘If there are no paid clergy, how much have you both received and how much has Bruce Hales received in donations from the members since 2002?’*
We would also question, that as Bruce Hales is the ‘Minister of the Lord in the Recovery’ and is named as having the ultimate say in the governing documents of all the Gospel Trusts. If the money received via collections from members of Gospel Trusts should be declared as income and therefore be taxable?”
*Brethren Exposed estimates that this is well over AUD$100 million
The interview also discusses Dean opening his phone and showing an app (Connect), that lists all members across the globe, with pictures, marriages, births, deaths and how Dean could find directions to a member’s home if invited for lunch. They say it is choice if pictures are included and laughed at the suggestion that the app could be used to track members. They say they have a filtering tool, but that it doesn’t track devices, saying it would be illegal.
There was no follow up, again suggesting no preparation to discuss or funnel deeper. At Brethren Exposed we have evidence that what members look at on their devices is monitored, along with the sites visited. Though based on the use of private investigators by the PBCC, we agree that members might not be physically tracked by their devices.
I left, so my now my family’s barred me from own sister’s wedding
It was very positive to see a counter experience to the claims of the Hales brothers published on the same page. The story about ex-member Lavinia Richardson had been picked up in the ABC Four Corners documentary.
Her story uses the fact that she can’t attend her sister’s wedding in Victoria, how her contact with family is almost non-existent and how the practice of separation is the cause. Lavinia talks about how the brethren put their beliefs above everything including family. She highlights how her family would often tell her not to play with non-brethren children in the park**, how aside from WhatsApp message she had no access to social media.
It finishes with a line where Lavinia says she is “a firm advocate for religious freedom in Australia, but there were ‘restrictions’ she had experienced in her family which had nothing to do with religion”
We fully endorse Lavinia's comments, as looking at the brethren through the lens of a Christian church, is often the first mistake people make when reporting or discussing the brethren.
**since this article was published, the PBCC have released a podcast featuring both Charles & Dean Hales talking fondly at length, of how when they were young, that they had friends outside of the brethren that they played with. Which would suggest one rule for the leaders and one rule for everyone else.
No radio, no Christmas, no movies: A Brethren life
In a series of somewhat obvious and stereotypical brethren topics, Charles & Dean Hales give their views on
Radio, Movies & Sport
Soft questions, they reply there are no set rules, they encourage members not to use radio, or idolise sport people, but admit to watching sports highlights and documentaries.
On Social Media
An area we agree on their views, however, there is no funnelling further into the recent leaked global communication to brethren members around not using social media.
Pets
Continues a constant theme, that there are ‘no, set rules’.
Christmas, Easter, Birthdays, Wedding and Holidays
Continues the soft questions.
School, Universities
Again, confirms what the majority already know.
Fellowship
The replies offer up the opportunity for further questions, sadly they are not asked, particularly around “It’s almost like an unwritten contract or a covenant” (basically translates to there are a set of rules!)
Confinement of Members
There is an admittance that it happens but then as stated previously, the opportunity to ask about specific examples is not taken.
Former Members
The underlying question remains unanswered and that is when someone is confined but they deny the ‘charge’ for why the have been confined, what then happens? It would suggest on the surface that unless they admit to an ‘error’ they will not be reconciled and allowed back into the ‘church’. This would appear grossly at odds with it being something quite serious, and "some kind of unfaithfulness" provides the ‘church’ with many options to confine and ex-communicate members.
There is a real lack of challenge in general by the media and politicians to this practice. Despite, there being many hundreds of ex-member examples. It is interesting that Charles states there have been 8 members leave in the last 10 years in Sydney. It is very difficult to estimate but we believe there have been circa 2,000 members leave globally in the last 50 years (not including, the schism following the Aberdeen incident), and we believe that the vast majority consider the PBCC as a Cult.
At Brethren Exposed we have spoken to many recent leavers that do not participate in ex-brethren social media groups or speak out publicly. The constant theme is fear of some kind of retribution particularly in access to see family members or impact on their post brethren careers. It is an under reported area that concerns us greatly, and includes control, coercion and even payment for former members.
Gay Members
Charles talks about how he and Dean both know of individuals who have come out as gay and remained in the ‘church’ for more than 10 years, ultimately departing but amicably. Coming out as gay does not mean you are immediately put out of asked to leave. He goes on how the lifestyle is against the law of God and incompatible with the brethren fellowship.
The sheer weight of evidence from former members who are gay and their experiences within the brethren and since leaving should without any doubt led to much more in depth questioning. The Telegraph, to their credit did use a counter story from former member Ben Woodbury but did not refer to the many other examples. In our opinion the lack of further questioning of Charles & Dean on this subject, is one of the key reasons we formed the view, that the interview was soft PR and counter to the Telegraph’s opening statement.
Heaven
Charles & Dean gave their view.
Surely the follow up question in reply to their answers, would be to ask why the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church exists?
Respected and speak our minds
One area that Brethren Exposed regularly focuses on is the treatment of female brethren members, and to their credit the Telegraph also interviewed Nerolie Hales, Abby Hales and Shelley Little.
The background provided was the media reports claiming brethren members are ‘subject’ to their husband. They talk about where they sit in the church and refer to the ‘wives submit to you husbands’ being taken out of context. The article goes on to say how this is at odds with ex-member Lavinia Richardson’s experience.
We consider this to be one of the better parts of the interview, it gave a direct counterbalance with Lavinia Richardson’s comments, Abby Hales unlike her husband Charles or Dean, refers to the bible. Nerolie Hales, wife of Dean, may as well have said I am the wife of a multi-millionaire, why would I not be happy. It was interesting to see someone brought in that was not a Hales, though it is worth commenting that Shelley Little is the sister-in-law of Greg Hales. A question that could have been raised is why with over 600 charities globally that there is not one female trustee. It could also have asked if male brethren members are allowed to have a female boss in the workplace. In summary asking three extremely wealthy women do they feel subject to their husbands, is unlikely to merit an enlightening response, nor does it come across as the most objective question.
Church links to business and Albanese Cult comment behind $700k lobby group donation
Brethren Exposed found this part of the interview quite fascinating,
It starts with the revelation that members of the PBCC donated at least $700,000 to Conservative lobby group Advance during this year’s federal election campaign. This is a first, a fact that had not been published and where it would appear the PBCC has actively tried to get ahead of an election story.
The story continues with how PBCC members, historically don’t vote and that it was their business and opposition to Labor’s industrial relations policies, that led to many members volunteering for the Liberals at the polling booths.
It talks about their disgust with Anthony Albanese labelling them as a ‘cult’ and how it resulted in brethren children being bullied at a local primary school. It mentions the upcoming inquiry into the election and the likely inclusion of the brethren members campaigning. Brethren member Gavin Little (brother-in-law of Greg Hales), talks about how Albanese’s ‘lashing’ prompted more members to begin handing-out for the Liberals. Little talks about “don’t poke the bear” and how as a tightly connected religious organisation, it is treated as very personal. He goes on to talk about how many business owners are members and industrial relations laws and interestingly, how much someone is entitled to, we were all like, we just need a change of Government.
There appears to be little evidence of further questioning from the Telegraph. The use by Mr Little of “tightly connected” and “we were all like”, surely this would merit further investigation into whether this was an organised brethren response. We would also ask about the timings, in reference to “Poking the Bear”, as Albanese’s ‘Cult’ comment came following widespread reporting of brethren members involved in the election. We would also query the Christian values of a group that would respond in force and who were ignited by Labor talking about how people are “entitled to” things.
Dean Hales talks about he saw Albanese’s comments as “inciting hatred against Christianity” and then in a remarkable leap, compared it to Charlie Kirk being assassinated for his love of Christianity and love of Christ.
At Brethren Exposed we were certainly not admirers of Charlie Kirk’s views; however, we respected his ability to discuss these views openly and candidly and debate them with people who did not agree with him. We strongly believe that no one should be killed for their political viewpoint and that Free Speech is important in a democracy. The comparison between the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and Charlie Kirk is like comparing apples with office interior design. The Plymouth Brethren ex-communicates members who don’t believe in their view and see evil in those that don’t share their fellowship. It is the absolute opposite of the willingness to discuss beliefs and the freedom of speech that Charlie Kirk represented.
Charles Hales repeats Gavin Little’s story of brethren children being bullied at a local school where Albanese had repeated the ‘Cult’ comment. Dean Hales describes Albanese’s comments on Quid Pro Quo as laughable.
In terms of the bullying of children after Albanese labelled them a ‘Cult’ for the second time, in an interview outside the Winthrop Primary School, Perth. The interview is online and can be viewed, Albanese does not refer to the brethren as a ‘Cult’ in this interview.
The Hales brothers talked how traditionally brethren believed that “Government is by God – and we leave it to God”, however, in recent years it was left up to individual choice. They go on to add “that the church is not and will not be involved in elections, that this wasn’t an us versus them – the Prime Minister scenario and that they pray for him every night”. In terms of the donations neither Charles or Dean had donated, and that during the campaign a spokesperson for the church said it had “asked some parishioners who are known have strong political views as to their donations”, “Based on our inquiries five parishioners came forward who said they had made individual political donations to Advance, totalling around $700,000”. The article gives an overview of Advance and then discusses the brethren links to the Liberal party with donations in 2004 and 2007 and explains some the background during the 2025 elections.
This part of the interview is probably the most balanced, and the answers provided by Charles & Dean do appear somewhat opaque. We would have liked to see further insight of how a spokesperson for the brethren, could quickly establish $700,000 going to Advance without a high level of control and communication and how the change from traditionally being reliant on God, changed to individual choice in an organisation with no formal rules.
Behind the High Walls of a Secret Church (Men at the front, women at the back as Brethren opens it door for the first time)
In this section, James Willis the Telegraph journalist talks about his visit to a meeting at the main Sydney meeting room.
The obvious questions are Why ‘a man attends church service’ is a worthy news story, is this because it is a Cult and not a Church? If truly a church then why would someone turning up without prior approval, result in them not being allowed access to the service?
Church left me on my own when I came out
In a balanced view to the interviews given by Charles & Dean Hales, it was excellent to see an interview with Ben Woodbury.
As we have mentioned previously, Ben’s story could have been used to question Charles & Dean Hales further on gay members.
Huge donations help fund a global school with no biology or Harry Potter.
An overview is provided of OneSchool Global, the brethren education system. It confirms that brethren children attend non-brethren schools from kindergarten through to 6-7 years old before moving to OneSchool Global, the reason provided is to make ‘non-brethren’ friends. The article covers subjects or topics not taught in brethren schools. It highlights how teachers are all non-brethren and goes on to explain this is due to brethren members being unable to attend University in person, making teaching jobs implausible. It mentions how one member discusses how they would discourage children from any employment which may impact on weekly worship, such as, someone having to work nightshift. It highlights the careers available to brethren members and mentions the thousands of businesses owned by brethren members. It covers the large donations that go into OneSchool Global, with $37 million going into OneSchool Global Australia in 2024. It highlights the tax-payer funding in Australia and points out that globally this accounts for only 12% of the cost to run OneSchool Global. It ends with a note about how some brethren members have been known to donate seven-figure cheques to fund the building on new OneSchool campuses and references Jamaica.
In fairness to James Willis to cover the OneSchool Global education system in full detail could take a week of column space! The are many areas that could be investigated in much more detail. At Brethren Exposed we have consistently ‘banged the drum’ around the severely limited career options for brethren members. There are so many career choices that are not open to brethren members and the limited choice of jobs borders on forced labour. If no question was off limit, we would have asked If a brethren member can work for a company that wasn’t owned or had not been recently sold by a brethren member? Why there are no public servants from the brethren community? If it was acceptable to make a choice between becoming a doctor or losing your family? There is the whole issue around the funding of OneSchool Global, and the obvious question. Are school fees reduced because of the charitable funding and does the chain involve brethren parents benefitting through the profits of their brethren businesses going to brethren charities and ultimately to the brethren owned OneSchool Global.
Church defends its tax record
This article covers the ATO raid in March 2024 on the Universal Business Team (UBT), highlighting UBT’s $200 million a year annual revenue and that the church members run thousands of companies and that they employ 22,000 people from outside the church. UBT informed the Telegraph that profits were invested into education, charities and other not-for-profit organisations. It covers the charities registered at the same address as UBT and reports the assets of the charities. In a balanced approach they report on the public facing Rapid Relief Team (RRT) and how other charities are much more secretive and offer limited public information. Dean Hales says that the church would “typically go out to the member businesses and say to them ‘would you be willing to participate via a donation to support your local school?”, “But the is no obligation whatsoever. It’s their matter”. Charles Hales also provides commentary to confirm they pay their taxes. It then discusses the brethren meeting rooms and organisations and the $100 million facility in Rydalmere, reporting on the underground car parking and escalators. It finishes with more on the ATO and the reason provided by UBT on the closing of UBT Accountants in Australia, which it says was “driven by commercial and personnel factors”. The final line is from UBT saying it had “cooperated fully with the ATO during its recent information gathering process”.
Similar, to OneSchool Global, no one page article could provide the scrutiny required to cover the financials of UBT, Gospel Trusts, Charities and Members Businesses. At Brethren Exposed this has been a fundamental part of our investigations for the last five years. We think for the column inches covered by the Telegraph, that they did a decent job, though it leaves many questions unanswered.
Our major disappointment is that there is no mention of the Global Funding Team (GFT) or the Global Advisory Panel (GAP), these are the most important organisations within the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church. They are the organisations at the heart of the brethren and involve the highest-ranking members and leaders of the brethren. The omission of these GFT and GAP is the major reason we believe the Telegraph article was ‘soft PR’ and didn’t deliver on its original promise. At Brethren Exposed we have hard evidence that would have challenged many of the answers provided to the Telegraph by Charles and Dean Hales.
Our wealth is why people attack us
This covered the Hales family and their personal wealth, covering the businesses they own, along with a brief commentary on the Covid contracts won by the Hales owned businesses. In defence of the Hales, the subtitle is somewhat misleading and the actual comment from Charles Hales reported at the end of this piece “the wealth of particular families, has added to the reasons why people would continue to attack the church”
This article is brief, and we suspect that this is due to the topic being covered at length previously by other media outlets. Though, we still believe that only a small percentage of the story has ever been reported. We would have liked to see further investigation and to have asked Charles Hales, Did the Hales family benefit from the sale of UBT’s PPE arm to Coshield Global?