Primus: my task is to be the person who helps SEC to relate to central bodies of the Anglican Communion. Task is to set out the context in which the SEC looks at the Covenant. Does not think in itself that it is unreasonable to have a document setting out what our commnunion is.

As a missional community, Anglicanism has been successful. Bonds of affection are perhaps not enough to hold us together. Covenant arises from Windsor report which followed the appointment of Gene Robinson.

In many of our churches there are 2 pics. Baptism in Stonehaven Gael and Consecration of Seabury. Latter was a great moment in Anglican Communion. We were at heart of move to create independent provinces in commuion.

We are deeply involved in communion life – we will remain so even if we say no to covenant. Formal levels and informal. Lambeth Conference, ACC and also diocesan links.

Intention of covenant is to lead us into deeper communion.

Question is whether we need an institution of structure to hold communion in place. But is it the case that covenant may push away what it is intended to safeguard?

Legacy of colonialism is significant part of communion life.

What matters is whether we who are heirs to those who consecrated Seabury can be part of a new starting point of communion life or does covenant make this less likely?