I see Ruth Gledhill reports (amongst other things) that
She doesn't say whether the conference would have been worth £5m+ had decisions been made.
Some of the most senior bishops in the Church of England are among those questioning the wisdom of a cash-strapped church spending more than £5 million on a conference it could not afford, and which has failed to reach any significant decisions.
More importantly, to the best of my knowledge, no-one has attempted to put together a budget for the covenant mechanisms, nor for other proposed developments in the international structures of the Anglican Communion.
I guess the Americans, who contribute heavily to the present costs of the communion, won't want to pay for structures designed to exclude them. I think the English Church will resent paying. I don't think the Nigerians will pay for something that doesn't exclude the Americans - and if that goal is achieved why should they pay subsequently?
I suspect that most big donors will have an agenda to pursue when deciding where to put their money - and that few are likely to make an open ended commitment to revenue spending.
Perhaps there will be an impost on all covenant members - guaranteeing that only smaller provinces would be vulnerable to expulsion? If so, will it be based on membership, perhaps - in which case the number of Anglicans will rapidly shrink (England's claimed 23m will immediately become the more realistic 1.3m, for example).
So: how much? Who pays? What influence do you get for your money? What happens if you stop paying?