Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Postpone indefinitely after amendment is adopted


Lumpy52403

Recommended Posts

This question arose recently in a group of parliamentarian friends:

 

(1)  A main motion is made and seconded.  (2)  A motion to postpone indefinitely is then made and seconded.  (3)  A motion to amend the main motion is made, seconded, discussed, and adopted.  (The chairman recognizes that amend outranks postpone indefinitely.) 

 

It looks as though the question is now on the motion to postpone indefinitely.  However, the motion to postpone indefinitely was made on the main motion in its original form, which no longer exists.  Some of us said that the motion to postpone indefinitely should fall to the ground for this reason, and others said it should be voted upon.  We could not find a definitive answer to this in RONR, although we did find a similar scenario involving the motion to commit, rather than amend.

 

What are your thoughts on this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This question arose recently in a group of parliamentarian friends:

 

(1)  A main motion is made and seconded.  (2)  A motion to postpone indefinitely is then made and seconded.  (3)  A motion to amend the main motion is made, seconded, discussed, and adopted.  (The chairman recognizes that amend outranks postpone indefinitely.) 

 

It looks as though the question is now on the motion to postpone indefinitely.  However, the motion to postpone indefinitely was made on the main motion in its original form, which no longer exists.  Some of us said that the motion to postpone indefinitely should fall to the ground for this reason, and others said it should be voted upon.  We could not find a definitive answer to this in RONR, although we did find a similar scenario involving the motion to commit, rather than amend.

 

What are your thoughts on this? 

 

The motion to postpone indefinitely becomes the immediately pending question after the motion to amend is disposed of, whether the amendment is adopted or not. Using RONR's example, some may feel it's in bad form to endorse anyone for any political office, whether the original motion itself was amended or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2015 at 8:50 AM, Transpower said:

The sequence here is motion to amend, then motion to postpone indefinitely, then back to main motion (as amended, if amended, and if the motion to postpone indefinitely failed).
 

You must be speaking about the sequence of voting on the motions that have been made already, not the sequence of the motions themselves. Anyway, the question wasn't about the sequence of voting; it was whether Postpone Indefinitely is voted on even after an amendment has been made and adopted while Postpone Indefinitely remained pending.

I can understand why some people might reason that Postpone Indefinitely is no longer applicable after the main motion has been amended, but that reasoning happens to be wrong, as far as the rules in RONR are concerned. Of course, if the member who made the motion to Postpone Indefinitely is satisfied with the main motion as it stands after amendment, he or she can make a request to withdraw the motion to Postpone Indefinitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...