Edian Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:46 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:46 PM During our last Board of Trustees, after a motion was introduced and seconded, the President (Chair) advised that only questions about the motion would be entertained, but not opinions.Can the Chair limit discussion/debate on a motion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:50 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:50 PM Not on his own. the assembly can take that action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:57 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2012 at 02:57 PM Not on his own. the assembly can take that action.The assembly can limit the number of times each member may speak, or the duration of each opportunity to speak, but I question whether the assembly has the right to prohibit the expression of opinion about the motion (see p. 191 on ways in which the assembly can limit debate). There are rules of decorum, of course, but that's a separate issue.The chair, of course, has no right to set limits as described by Edian in the original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tctheatc Posted February 4, 2012 at 03:24 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2012 at 03:24 PM but I question whether the assembly has the right to prohibit the expression of opinion about the motionAgreed, Trina. I was only answering the question as asked, separate from the vignette. I probably should've used the quote function to be clearer, but sometimes I'm lazy..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted February 4, 2012 at 07:15 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2012 at 07:15 PM If the chair simply doesn't understand the rules it would be wise to advise him that he can't do what he said, as the others have noted. I doubt it's that benign and the assembly might want to consider disciplinary proceedings against the President. His action is particularly egregious in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edian Posted February 7, 2012 at 11:59 PM Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 at 11:59 PM Thank you for your input. I will explain this to the Chair at tomorrow night's meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 8, 2012 at 04:14 AM Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 at 04:14 AM The assembly can limit the number of times each member may speak, or the duration of each opportunity to speak, but I question whether the assembly has the right to prohibit the expression of opinion about the motion (see p. 191 on ways in which the assembly can limit debate). There are rules of decorum, of course, but that's a separate issue.The assembly could achieve the desired purpose by closing debate with an order for the Previous Question. Since Parliamentary Inquiry and Request for Information are in order even after debate has been closed (although care must be taken that the latter does not turn into debate), this would indeed allow questions while preventing the expression of opinions (debate).As noted, however, the chair certainly has no authority to do this on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted February 8, 2012 at 10:52 AM Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 at 10:52 AM The assembly could achieve the desired purpose by closing debate with an order for the Previous Question. Since Parliamentary Inquiry and Request for Information are in order even after debate has been closed (although care must be taken that the latter does not turn into debate), this would indeed allow questions while preventing the expression of opinions (debate).As noted, however, the chair certainly has no authority to do this on his own.Interesting. However, since Previous Question is not debatable, the member making the motion for Previous Question would not actually be able to mention this reason (wanting to restrict any further talk to questions only) for his motion. The assembly would have to be well versed in the rules to recognize the opportunity to keep talking about the motion (without further debate, of course) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted February 8, 2012 at 06:56 PM Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 at 06:56 PM Interesting. However, since Previous Question is not debatable, the member making the motion for Previous Question would not actually be able to mention this reason (wanting to restrict any further talk to questions only) for his motion. The assembly would have to be well versed in the rules to recognize the opportunity to keep talking about the motion (without further debate, of course) .Not necessarily.One (admittedly non-standard) use of the Parliamentary Inquiry is to signal one's intent in this regard. Upon being recognized, one could inquire of the chair whether, if the Previous Question were ordered (ending debate), it would then be in order to entertain questions under a Request for Information. Upon hearing the (presumably affirmative) answer, the inquiring member would reply, "In that case I move the Previous Question." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted February 9, 2012 at 03:18 AM Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 at 03:18 AM Not necessarily.One (admittedly non-standard) use of the Parliamentary Inquiry is to signal one's intent in this regard. Upon being recognized, one could inquire of the chair whether, if the Previous Question were ordered (ending debate), it would then be in order to entertain questions under a Request for Information. Upon hearing the (presumably affirmative) answer, the inquiring member would reply, "In that case I move the Previous Question."That's one option. Also, see RONR, 11th ed., pg. 396, lines 17-27. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.