Steven P Posted January 16, 2013 at 06:21 PM Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 at 06:21 PM I'm confused about the use of the motion to "Extend the Limits of Debate." If a question is pending, and a member makes the motion to extend debate that is not specific to any one member and is also open ended as in "I move that that limits of 10 minutes per speech and twice per day per question be removed for the consideration of this question"; is this motion in order as it does not specify at time when debate will cease. Consider that this assembly does not have special rule of order and is governed by RONR latest edition as our parlimentary authority.I ask this as the examples on pp. 196 and 197 are either specific to a person (additional time for one person to continue speaking) or specifying a time when debate will cease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David A Foulkes Posted January 16, 2013 at 08:52 PM Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 at 08:52 PM Looking at p. 191 ll. 24-25, I'm inclined to think there has to be some specificity either when allowing more speeches (eg. 3 instead of only 2) and/or longer speeches (eg. 15 minutes instead of 10). The motion is to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate, not Remove Limits of Debate.Your example motion removes any and all restrictions without setting any new parameters. By analogy, it seems like the difference between saying that the 65mph speed limit will be raised to 75mpg until midnight, and saying there is no speed limit for the rest of the day. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted January 16, 2013 at 09:07 PM Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 at 09:07 PM If it's a small group that is meeting, you might want to see if Informal Consideration RONR (11th ed.), pp. 540-541 fits your needs. This method suspends the rule limiting the number of times a member can speak in debate on the main motion and amendments, though the 10 minute per speech limit is applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrEntropy Posted January 16, 2013 at 09:50 PM Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 at 09:50 PM I would opine that a motion to extend the limits of the debate to unlimited time and an unlimited number of speeches is in order*. I am not saying this is wise however. In the instant case, I agree with George that informal consideration is probably all you need. Ten minutes is a very long time to speak, and if a particular speaker really needs more, the assembly can allow it on a case by case basis.*If you disagree, then how about a motion to extend the limits of debate to 1000 speeches of 1 year each? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 17, 2013 at 12:51 AM Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 at 12:51 AM I'm confused about the use of the motion to "Extend the Limits of Debate." If a question is pending, and a member makes the motion to extend debate that is not specific to any one member and is also open ended as in "I move that that limits of 10 minutes per speech and twice per day per question be removed for the consideration of this question"; is this motion in order as it does not specify at time when debate will cease. Consider that this assembly does not have special rule of order and is governed by RONR latest edition as our parlimentary authority.I ask this as the examples on pp. 196 and 197 are either specific to a person (additional time for one person to continue speaking) or specifying a time when debate will cease.The motion is in order, although it may not be wise, which I suspect is why it is not included in the examples. It is probably best to keep at least some limit on the length of an individual speech, at the very least.I also think the proposed wording is rather confusing. It would probably be better to reword it so it would be clear what the new limits (or lack thereof) would be. Perhaps something like, "I move that members may speak for an unlimited time for an unlimited number of times during the consideration of this question." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P Posted January 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM Good morning and thank you for all of the responses. I just wanted to be prepared in case that something happened at our meeting this Sunday. We are not a small group so Informal Consideration may not be the best option but we will see what the assembly desires. I am reminded of the idea that "just because an assembly can do something, does not mean that it should do something..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.