CHANGES to the standing orders referring to the Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) — the body which recommends recent bishops to the Crown — were carried on Saturday morning. A series of amendments to the standing orders were successfully moved by Clive Scowen (London) with none objections from the ground.
His first amendment made provision for CNC members elected from the General Synod and who were unable to attend a gathering of the CNC to nominate an alternate.
Currently, it was within the hands of certainly one of the Archbishops, as chair of the CNC, to nominate a alternative, with no guarantee that they might be of the same mind to the absent member. This, Mr Scowen said, “seems unfair”, and his proposal meant that the member could nominate someone from the membership of the Synod whom they thought suitable, subject to the approval of the chair of the relevant House.
Nicola Denyer (Newcastle) supported the amendment, but asked for consideration of the balance of Northern and Southern Province representation on the CNC.
Jamie Harrison (Durham) also backed the amendment, and said that, until 2021, replacing CNC members fell to the chair and vice-chair of the House of Laity, which had worked well.
Luke Appleton (Exeter) was also in favour, but urged the Church to get to a spot where it was now not showing partiality of any kind, and didn’t must “co-opt people due to their skin color”.
The Archbishop of York said that he and the Archbishop of Canterbury welcomed all of the amendments, and thanked the CNC central members for his or her flexibility. It was vital that the CNC represented the breadth of the Church’s diversity, he said. There was more to do around gender, disability, geography, and church tradition.
Sarah Tupling (Deaf Anglicans Together) asked whether non-voting members of the Synod, reminiscent of her, might be co-opted on to the CNC.
Mr Scowen said in response that he was wary of introducing too many constraints and criteria on who could serve on the CNC, and that it was right down to the members when voting to consider which province a candidate got here from. Non-voting members couldn’t be co-opted, he confirmed.
The amendment was carried.
Mr Scowen then moved his next amendment, which might enable a disabled member of the CNC to have another person attend meetings to help them if needed. It was carried.
Mr Scowen then moved one other amendment, to permit the co-option of a Global Majority Heritage (GMH) member of the Synod to the CNC if there was not already a GMH person present. He said that, on account of the resignation of certainly one of the members of the CNC, and the ordination of 1 who had been elected as a member of the laity, there was now only one GMH person among the many ten remaining members.
Canon Andrew Cornes (Chichester) said that he understood that a co-opted person could attend the CNC but not vote, and said that ought to this be specified by the standing orders.
Mr Scowen said that this was the case, but that it could be addressed in a subsequent amendment.
The amendment was carried.
Mr Scowen then moved his next amendment, which explained that a co-opted GMH member of the CNC couldn’t vote.
The amendment was carried.
Mr Scowen moved a technical amendment to create an exception within the standing orders’ general prohibition against co-option. It was carried.
Mr Scowen moved an extra technical amendment correcting a reference. It was carried.
Mr Scowen moved an amendment making the identical provisions as already allowed for co-option, but when one half of a pair of elected members had already stood down. It was carried.
Mr Scowen moved an extra two amendments to tidy up the definition of GMH people within the standing orders. They were carried.
Mr Scowen moved a final technical amendment, which was carried.
