So the at the press conference Friday 15th Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby did mention LGBT people. The statement didn't but the communique did. The audience and questioning meant a different tone from him, as a sort of gloss to the administration carried through.
And here's a thought. The language of "consequences not sanctions" is the language of the Anglican Covenant. The Covenant, I seem to recall, was voted down by the Church of England, but this doesn't seem to matter. Meanwhile the Americans on the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) seem to be sure that the Primates have no power to remove their participation and voting, and that therefore there are no consequences.
Consequences can only "follow" if the Covenant is agreed and operating, but it isn't, and so the consequence of this is nothing may have happened. Unless The Episcopal Church decides for itself not to vote on doctrine, not to do ecumenical things and not be represented at an Interfaith level. But in the ACC the American Church might just carry on.
Questions for the English General Synod then: Was the Archbishop operating the Covenant? On what basis?