Question of Privilege

[Guest snapper]

A member calls for the orders of the day and the chair tries to move to follow the agenda. Another member raises a question of privilege, asking that all members be allowed to ask questions with a time limit of two hours before going back to the agenda. The chair asks for a vote and a majority (less than 2/3) want to ask questions. The chair allows to vote to determine the direction of the meeting.

Is the request to ask questions actually a question of privilege?

Was the chair right to allow a vote or should the chair have made the decision?

Thanks all.

[Rob Elsman]

No rule in RONR gives the chair the power to admit a request like this using the device, Question of Privilege, RONR (10th ed.), §19, pp. 216ff.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Q. Is the request to ask questions actually a question of privilege?

Q. Was the chair right to allow a vote or should the chair have made the decision?

Your chair missed a minor middle part - the chair should first confirm that the assembly wishes (a.) to continue with the orders of the day; (b.) to set aside the orders of the day.

After #a or #b is chosen, then the "request" (actually a motion to Extend the Limits of Debate) will either be (a.) not in order; (b.) in order.

(A motion To Limit Debate yields to a Call For The Orders Of The Day; so the OoD should be decided first, and it may make moot the Debate motion, depending if it was adopted or not.)

Instead your chair assumed the setting aside the orders of the day to focus on the debate request. That was a hair bit presumptuous of your chair. But not a great error.

No point of order was raised, I take it. A choice was made, even it kind of jumped the gun.

[Rob Elsman]

Your chair missed a minor middle part - the chair should first confirm that the assembly wishes (a.) to continue with the orders of the day; (b.) to set aside the orders of the day.

After #a or #b is chosen, then the "request" (actually a motion to Extend the Limits of Debate) will either be (a.) not in order; (b.) in order.

(A motion To Limit Debate yields to a Call For The Orders Of The Day; so the OoD should be decided first, and it may make moot the Debate motion, depending if it was adopted or not.)

Instead your chair assumed the setting aside the orders of the day to focus on the debate request. That was a hair bit presumptuous of your chair. But not a great error.

No point of order was raised, I take it. A choice was made, even it kind of jumped the gun.

...that all members be allowed to ask questions with a time limit of two hours...

I don't equate a request like this with a motion to Extend the Limits of Debate, RONR (10th ed.), §15, pp. 183ff. Form is important!

[Kim Goldsworthy]

I don't equate a request like this with a motion to Extend the Limits of Debate, RONR (10th ed.), §15, pp. 183ff. Form is important!

Granted.

We know it wasn't a request.

Q. As chair what would you do?

(I'd treat it as - well, you already know!)

[Tim Wynn]

A member calls for the orders of the day and the chair tries to move to follow the agenda.

By a two-thirds vote, the assembly can set aside the Orders of the Day and keep right on truckin' with the pending business. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 215.

Another member raises a question of privilege, asking that all members be allowed to ask questions with a time limit of two hours before going back to the agenda.

Nope. This is not a question of privilege. Members already have the right to ask questions through incidental motions (parliamentary inquiry and point of information).

Setting a time limit for debate is a subsidiary motion known as Limit or Extend the Limits of Debate.

I'm not clear on what your motion intends to do.

The chair asks for a vote and a majority (less than 2/3) want to ask questions. The chair allows to vote to determine the direction of the meeting.

Just out of morbid curiosity... what questions about what? As mentioned, a two-thirds vote is required to "re-determine the direction of the meeting," since the direction has already been set by the Orders of the Day.

Is the request to ask questions actually a question of privilege?

No.

Was the chair right to allow a vote or should the chair have made the decision?

Thanks all.

If the chair feels the assembly wants to proceed with the business at hand, he should announce that the orders of the day have been called and identify what business is in order, and he should ask if the assembly will proceed to the orders of the day. It requires two-thirds in the negative to set aside the orders of the day.

[Rob Elsman]

Granted.

We know it wasn't a request.

Q. As chair what would you do?

(I'd treat it as - well, you already know!)

As far as I can tell from the facts given, the chair should rule that the member's request ("...asking...") "...is [not] in fact a question of privilege...", RONR (10th ed.), p. 217, ll. 7-9, and announce the next item of business in response to the previously-raised Call for the Orders of the Day.

[J. J.]

No rule in RONR gives the chair the power to admit a request like this using the device, Question of Privilege, RONR (10th ed.), §19, pp. 216ff.

It sound like a motion to suspend the rules and permit a Q and A period.

[Rob Elsman]

It sound like a motion to suspend the rules and permit a Q and A period.

As I understand the facts, the member raised a question of privilege. What the poster said doesn't look to me like the form of a motion to Suspend the Rules, RONR (10th ed.), §25, pp. 252ff. Form is important!

[Larry Cisar]

What about it being a motion to go into a Quasi Committee of the Whole? That is what I would take it as being.

[J. J.]

As I understand the facts, the member raised a question of privilege. What the poster said doesn't look to me like the form of a motion to Suspend the Rules, RONR (10th ed.), §25, pp. 252ff. Form is important!

No question form is important, which is why I stated the correct form, to suspend the rules.

[J. J.]

What about it being a motion to go into a Quasi Committee of the Whole? That is what I would take it as being.

If the point is to ask questions, solely, I doubt if that would be the correct form.

[Tim Wynn]

guest_snapper_* just hasn't given enough information to know what's going on.

[Josh Martin]

Is the request to ask questions actually a question of privilege?

No. The chair should have treated it as a motion to Suspend the Rules, which requires a 2/3 vote. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 256, lines 13-24)

Was the chair right to allow a vote or should the chair have made the decision?

The chair was right to call for a vote. He was just wrong on what vote was required.

As I understand the facts, the member raised a question of privilege. What the poster said doesn't look to me like the form of a motion to Suspend the Rules, RONR (10th ed.), §25, pp. 252ff. Form is important!

I think it would be better for the chair to clarify the member's intent and assist the member in making the motion properly suited to his desired purpose than to simply rule the motion out of order.

[Rob Elsman]

No. The chair should have treated it as a motion to Suspend the Rules, which requires a 2/3 vote. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 256, lines 13-24)

The chair was right to call for a vote. He was just wrong on what vote was required.

I think it would be better for the chair to clarify the member's intent and assist the member in making the motion properly suited to his desired purpose than to simply rule the motion out of order.

No. The chair should have treated it as a motion to Suspend the Rules, which requires a 2/3 vote. (RONR, 10th ed., pg. 256, lines 13-24)

I disagree with that. The member had every right to try to raise a question of privilege, and, if by his words he indicates that this is what he is doing, the chair should oblige him. While it is the duty of the chair to help a member smooth a motion, it is not proper place of the chair to re-make one motion into another one because he imagines differently what should be the parliamentary situation.