Most of the electronic voting lists from last month’s meeting of General Synod were published online some weeks ago, and I linked to them here. These contain the names of voting members and how they voted.
The lists for two procedural motions were omitted, but they are now available. Both were motions ‘That the Synod do pass to the Next Business’ and both were carried. The effect of such a motion is that the substantive motion lapses, and the same (or a similar) question cannot be reconsidered in the remaining lifetime of the Synod without the permission of the Business Committee and the general consent of the Synod.
The first was during the debate on item 13 as amended by item 33 (see Order Paper III for Saturday afternoon).
That this Synod noting the wider discussions about the culture and governance of the House of Bishops
a) welcome the decision to undertake an independently led review as proposed in GS Misc 1412 and the importance in the proposed Terms of Reference of the section on Culture and Ways of Working and
b) request that the Report of the Review be published in full and that the cost of the Review be met by the Archbishops’ Council.”.
The second was at the end of Sunday’s debate on the Archbishops’ Council Annual Report. This prevented a debate on Martin Sewell’s following motion on the working of the Audit Committee (see item 35 on Order Paper V).