The 239 Questions (and answers) for this weekend’s meeting of the Church of England’s General Synod were issued today. They can be found online here:
There are two sessions scheduled for Questions: on Friday afternoon (not later than 5.35 pm) and Saturday morning (not later than 11.45 am).
Update Friday
The answers to some questions include material not suitable for inclusion in the questions booklet. This material is displayed on the noticeboard at Synod, and is included in this Addendum to Questions.
Update Saturday
There is further additional material.
An expected observation from me? 2.5 hours for ‘supplementaries’ related to 239 questions? In relation to the July sessions of GS, Ian Paul calculated that at the ‘usual’ rate’ (my words) 170 (of the 258 Questions) might be reached. I failed to record how many were actually reached. I make no observation on the ‘quality’ of answers beyond a ‘feeling’ that they are less ‘defensive’; if that is so I commend it.
I did note in passing (IIUC and IIRC?) that the answer to Q152 contains a reminder of the limit of provision for ‘theological convictions’.
I think your reference to July should be to February. 159 of the 258 questions were reached in February 2026.
Thank you Peter.
Along with goodwill between people, I think there is an element of performance – to demonstrate the principle of being seen to allow questions from members; and in the way some of the questions get answered. There is quite often a reasonable case for a supplementary question, either to clarify, or to counter evasive answers. So it seems good to me that these questions and answers take place at Synod, up to the cut off point (which Peter points out was Q.159 last time). But it seems so obvious to me that the basic tech is there to enable all… Read more »
On questions generally, might I remind TA readers of this important contribution to a debate at General Synod on 20 February 2019 by the Bishop of Willesden, the Rt Revd Pete Broadbent, when the Standing Orders Committee were proposing a 150 words limit to the length of questions, despite the questions and written answers set out in the Questions Notice Paper being taken as read: “Three words: democracy, accountability and transparency. Question time is where you get the chance, from people who are not involved in all the things that go on in the powerhouses of Synod, to be able… Read more »
I have heard it said that at General Synod Q&As, members ask questions they pretend to not know the answer to, and the Establishment pretends to answer them. If there are this many questions more time needs to be allocated if transparency and accountability are to become meaningful. It is often a quality supplementary question that begins to bring out the truth/reality. We need more functionality and less silly game playing from the platform. The TUC used to have a “composite” committee that might be considered in this area as often a number of questions overlap and could be aggregated… Read more »
IIUC Supplementary questions were answered in respect of 129 of the 239 questions set out in the Questions Notice Paper, just under 54%, in the allotted time. That’s fewer than the 159 reached at the February Synod (thank you for the data Peter) and way short of the 170 Ian Paul suggested might be expected in the allotted time. Why? So, fewer questions asked, and even fewer ‘answered’. As may have been said ‘back in the day’ (2019?) ‘I agree with Pete’. Is it that the number of questions (and/or answered?) have been influenced by the ‘Simplification process’ associated with… Read more »