Opening Floor to Questions after the Committee Report

[Guest tammysue]

Is is mandatory to open the floor to questions after a Committee Report, or can questions be held until The Good Of The Order? 

[Gary Novosielski]

It is not mandatory to open the floor to questions at either time.  But if a committee wishes to have its recommendations adopted by the parent assembly, it seems like a very good idea to do so.  Most will take questions at the time of the report.

[Josh Martin]

On 1/12/2019 at 9:32 PM, Guest tammysue said:

Is is mandatory to open the floor to questions after a Committee Report, or can questions be held until The Good Of The Order? 

It is appropriate for members to ask questions after a committee report. The committee report is, at that time, the pending business, so a request for information is appropriate. Whether questions are permitted under the good of the order tends to vary depending on an assembly’s rules and customs.

On 1/13/2019 at 1:13 AM, Gary Novosielski said:

It is not mandatory to open the floor to questions at either time.  But if a committee wishes to have its recommendations adopted by the parent assembly, it seems like a very good idea to do so.  Most will take questions at the time of the report.

It seems to me that it is in order for members to make a Request for Information pertaining to the pending item of business, so in that sense, it is mandatory to “open the floor to questions” after a committee report and, in any event, whether to do so is not up to the committee.

I suppose what you are getting at is that the committee is not obligated to answer the questions, although it is generally a good idea to do so.

Edited January 14, 2019 at 06:08 PM by Josh Martin

[Gary Novosielski]

3 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

It is appropriate for members to ask questions after a committee report. The committee report is, at that time, the pending business, so a request for information is appropriate. Whether questions are permitted under the good of the order tends to vary depending on an assembly’s rules and customs.

It seems to me that it is in order for members to make a Request for Information pertaining to the pending item of business, so in that sense, it is mandatory to “open the floor to questions” after a committee report and, in any event, whether to do so is not up to the committee.

I suppose what you are getting at is that the committee is not obligated to answer the questions, although it is generally a good idea to do so.

That is what I was getting at.  Customs vary with respect to whether reporting members, or the chair, invite questions, and to what extent they are welcomed and fully responded to.  But it is always appropriate to raise them, and a very good idea to answer them fully.

[Guest tammysue]

There are usually not recommendations or anything to be voted on following the committee report. It is usually a report of committee accomplishments since the last meeting. The chair would like to hold all questions until The Good of The Order, because we have 12 committees, so this helps to move the meeting along in a more timely manner. I personally do not have a preference, but some attendees are claiming this violates Roberts Rules. I can't seem to find anything in Roberts Rules that says that the floor must be open for questions eminently following a committee report that has no recommendations to be voted on. 

[Gary Novosielski]

Have any of the attendees who believe this violates the rules actually raised a Point of Order?  What happened?

Have any of them tried to raise a Request for Information that was then denied by the chair? 

The decision of whether to answer questions (see §33   Requests and Inquiries) is up to the person being asked, not the chair.  I know of no rule giving the chair the authority to prevent questions from being asked at that time, except with the permission of the assembly.  Did the chair just declare that questions must wait, or did he say "If there is no objection, questions will be taken during Good of the Order."?  If the latter, did anyone object?  What happened then?

The assembly may, if it wishes, adopt a special rule of order regulating questions on committee reports, but it appears the chair is exceeding the limits of the authority of a presiding officer.

You are not likely to find a rule in RONR allowing the assembly to do what it wants, because RONR assumes that, absent a rule to the contrary, the assembly may always do what it wants.

[Josh Martin]

On 1/17/2019 at 6:25 PM, Guest tammysue said:

There are usually not recommendations or anything to be voted on following the committee report. It is usually a report of committee accomplishments since the last meeting. The chair would like to hold all questions until The Good of The Order, because we have 12 committees, so this helps to move the meeting along in a more timely manner. I personally do not have a preference, but some attendees are claiming this violates Roberts Rules. I can't seem to find anything in Roberts Rules that says that the floor must be open for questions eminently following a committee report that has no recommendations to be voted on. 

“A Request for Information (also called a Point of Information) is a request directed to the chair, or through the chair to another officer or member, for information relevant to the business at hand but not related to parliamentary procedure.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 294)

“With respect to the requests and inquiries growing out of the business of the assembly that are listed
above, the following rules apply: 

1. All take precedence over any motion with whose purpose they are connected, and can also be made at any time when no question is pending.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 292)

Although I have not found an explicit statement on this subject, it is my understanding from reading the pages pertaining to the order of business and orders of the day that a committee report, even if for information only, is an order of the day and item of business and is therefore the “business at hand.” Therefore, it seems clear to me that such questions are in order at that time.

If the assembly itself wishes to decide that all such questions shall wait until Good of the Order, either by adopting a special rule of order or a rule of order for a particular session, it is free to do so, but the Chairman acting alone does not have the power to make such a decision.

[J. J.]

While a Request(s) for Information would be in order, there are some problems with raising them during, or after, a committee report, when no motion grows out of it.

The reporting member has the floor, and has a limited amount of time to occupy the floor.  If the report is long, and/or the question(s) and/or answer(s) are long, the reporting member or inquiring member may not get a chance to finish.

[Josh Martin]

3 hours ago, J. J. said:

While a Request(s) for Information would be in order, there are some problems with raising them during, or after, a committee report, when no motion grows out of it.

The reporting member has the floor, and has a limited amount of time to occupy the floor.  If the report is long, and/or the question(s) and/or answer(s) are long, the reporting member or inquiring member may not get a chance to finish.

Does RONR limit the time for making a committee report? I am not aware of such a limit.

[J. J.]

14 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

Does RONR limit the time for making a committee report? I am not aware of such a limit.

The way pp. 388-89 (through lines 1-2) is worded, it could be.  It does not refer to debate specifically.  It refers to speaking "to the same question," not debate on that question.  So the only question, no pun intended, is if a committee report is a "question," and as such, has a time limitation?   Can a reporting member can speak for an unlimited amount of time when giving a report?

If push came to shove, I would say yes, that rule does apply to oral committee reports and the reporting member cannot speak beyond the time limit without the assembly suspending the rules. 

There is also the situation where a special rule limits the time that a reporting member can use to give a committee. 

This would not apply if a motion growing out of a report is offered by the reporting member.

[George Mervosh]

Sorry, J.J., you lost me on this one.

[Josh Martin]

32 minutes ago, J. J. said:

The way pp. 388-89 (through lines 1-2) is worded, it could be.  It does not refer to debate specifically.  It refers to speaking "to the same question," not debate on that question.  So the only question, no pun intended, is if a committee report is a "question," and as such, has a time limitation?   Can a reporting member can speak for an unlimited amount of time when giving a report?

If push came to shove, I would say yes, that rule does apply to oral committee reports and the reporting member cannot speak beyond the time limit without the assembly suspending the rules. 

There is also the situation where a special rule limits the time that a reporting member can use to give a committee. 

This would not apply if a motion growing out of a report is offered by the reporting member.

I am not at all persuaded that a committee report is a “question” in the parliamentary sense. Based on the discussion of the process for consideration of a motion, which extensively discusses the consideration of the “question” stated by the chair, it seems clear that is the sort of “question” referred to here.

I agree that the assembly may adopt a special rule on this subject if it wishes.

[J. J.]

The distinction between a "question" and something before the assembly is not clear.

Supposed a committee  uses language that would be improper in a motion, or in debate.  A non-disciplinary committee uses harsh language in reference to a member.  Does the rule on p. 344 apply?

Could Objection to the Consideration of the Question be applied to a committee report?  It is a "communication" and it is not from a superior body (p. 268, ll. 2-3).

Do the rules limiting the amount of time someone may hold the floor apply to the report of the committee?

My answer is "yes" to all three.

When someone is recognized and obtains the floor, he must follow the rules relating to debate.

[Josh Martin]

10 minutes ago, J. J. said:

The distinction between a "question" and something before the assembly is not clear.

Supposed a committee  uses language that would be improper in a motion, or in debate.  A non-disciplinary committee uses harsh language in reference to a member.  Does the rule on p. 344 apply?

Could Objection to the Consideration of the Question be applied to a committee report?  It is a "communication" and it is not from a superior body (p. 268, ll. 2-3).

Do the rules limiting the amount of time someone may hold the floor apply to the report of the committee?

My answer is "yes" to all three.

When someone is recognized and obtains the floor, he must follow the rules relating to debate.

I concur that the rules against the use of indecorous language apply to a committee report, and indeed, I think they apply at all times during a meeting.

I am not convinced, however, that Objection to Consideration is the proper motion to prevent the reading of a report, nor that RONR imposes a time limit on reports.

[J. J.]

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

I concur that the rules against the use of indecorous language apply to a committee report, and indeed, I think they apply at all times during a meeting.

I am not convinced, however, that Objection to Consideration is the proper motion to prevent the reading of a report, nor that RONR imposes a time limit on reports.

The exact wording on p. 344 refers to "motions"  and "debate." This is a rule relating to debate.  You extend this rule to committee reports, correctly, IMO.  Why would a limit on speaking not also be applied?

The General held that Objection to the Consideration of the Question was applicable to committee reports, including minority reports (Parliamentary Law, p.155)*.  While I will note that, since 1923, there have been changes in the rules. I do not believe this is one of them.

 

*Now out of copyright and online:  https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.35112104592482;view=1up;seq=14

 

[Guest Zev]

3 hours ago, J. J. said:

The General held that Objection to the Consideration of the Question was applicable to committee reports, including minority reports...

Just to be clear, here is the relevant passage. My emphasis.

Quote

Incidental main questions, as the report of a committee on a subject upon which it has been ordered to report, or an amendment to the by-laws, cannot be objected to, but the report or opinions of a minority of a committee may be objected to. The report of a committee which it has not been ordered to make can be objected to, just as any other original main motion. The consideration of petitions and communications from members or subordinate organizations may be objected to, but not communications from a superior organization.

 

[J. J.]

1 hour ago, Guest Zev said:

Just to be clear, here is the relevant passage. My emphasis.

 

The key, for the purposes of this tread, is the phrase, "... just as any other original main motion. "  The General clearly saw a link between a committee report and a main motion, at least as far as debate (or its suppression)  are concerned. 

[Richard Brown]

6 hours ago, J. J. said:

*Now out of copyright and online:  https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.35112104592482;view=1up;seq=14

Thank you, JJ! I did not know that Parliamentary Law is available online.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 1/22/2019 at 9:09 AM, J. J. said:

The way pp. 388-89 (through lines 1-2) is worded, it could be.  It does not refer to debate specifically.  It refers to speaking "to the same question," not debate on that question.  So the only question, no pun intended, is if a committee report is a "question," and as such, has a time limitation?   Can a reporting member can speak for an unlimited amount of time when giving a report?

If push came to shove, I would say yes, that rule does apply to oral committee reports and the reporting member cannot speak beyond the time limit without the assembly suspending the rules. 

There is also the situation where a special rule limits the time that a reporting member can use to give a committee. 

This would not apply if a motion growing out of a report is offered by the reporting member.

it seems to me that a report is not a question unless and until someone makes a motion arising from it.

[J. J.]

8 hours ago, Gary Novosielski said:

it seems to me that a report is not a question unless and until someone makes a motion arising from it.

That was not the General's opinion, in regard to suppressing a report. He equated it with a main motion. 

I would say that the rules relating to decorum in debate would apply.  A report could not normally contain language improper in debate, for instance.   Likewise, the reporting member must obtain the floor, and when occupying it, would be treated as if he was speaking in debate.

[Josh Martin]

10 hours ago, J. J. said:

That was not the General's opinion, in regard to suppressing a report. He equated it with a main motion. 

I would say that the rules relating to decorum in debate would apply.  A report could not normally contain language improper in debate, for instance.   Likewise, the reporting member must obtain the floor, and when occupying it, would be treated as if he was speaking in debate.

I stand corrected on objection to consideration.

I still struggle with this idea of applying the rules of debate (beyond the rules of decorum) to a committee report. Generally, the rules of debate are that a member may speak twice per debatable question per day, for up to ten minutes each time. Certainly this rule does not apply, in full, to the report of a committee (unless the report contains recommendations, in which event motions are made to implement those recommendations, which are fully debatable). The suggestion would seem to be that the reporting member (and no one else) may speak in “debate” on the committee report, for either ten or twenty minutes (perhaps with a break after ten minutes in the latter case). This is a substantial deviation from the standard rules of debate, so it would seem that if this was in fact the case, the text would explain this procedure.

Edited January 24, 2019 at 02:19 PM by Josh Martin

[J. J.]

1 minute ago, Josh Martin said:

I stand corrected on objection to consideration.

I still struggle with this idea of applying the rules of debate (beyond the rules of decorum) to a committee report. Generally, the rules of debate are that a member may speak twice per debatable question per day, for up to ten minutes each time. Certainly this rule does not apply, in full, to the report of a committee (unless the report contains recommendations, in which event motions are made to implement those recommendations, which are fully debatable). The suggestion would seem to be that the reporting member (and no one else) may speak in “debate” on the committee report, for either ten or twenty minutes (perhaps with a break after ten minutes in the latter case). This is a substantial deviation from the standard rules of debate, so it would seem that if this was in fact the case, the text would explain this procedure.

I would treat is more as a question of taking the floor.  If an item of business in properly before the assembly, and a member may speak on it, how long can he speak on it? The rule on pp. 388-9 (ll. 1-2) refers to speaking "to the same question on the same day."  It does not refer to "speaking in debate" or to "debating" a question.

Robert, in 1923, did equate the suppression of debate on a main motion which the presentation of a committee report.  I think we are in agreement that a committee report (with the censure and disciplinary exceptions) could not use language that is improper in speaking while on the floor. That is a rule found primarily relating to debate, but it applies to committee reports as well.  Why would another rule relating to debate not apply to committee reports?

I see this rule as applying to the occupant of the floor, regulating his conduct.  It does not apply to the committee report, but to the person giving that report.  This is especially true since the General held that, in delivering a committee report, a member's presentation could be suppressed in the manner of an original main motion. 

There is also the practicability consideration.  Can a reporting member and/or some questioners eat up hours of the assembly's time without the consent of the assembly?  My answer is no, and that RONR does not create a loophole for unlimited occupancy of the floor.

(I would add that this does not apply to a motion growing out of a committee report.  That motion comes before the assembly as a result of a committee report is separately subject to debate.  I think we are on the same page as that.)

[Dan Honemann]

19 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

I still struggle with this idea of applying the rules of debate (beyond the rules of decorum) to a committee report. Generally, the rules of debate are that a member may speak twice per debatable question per day, for up to ten minutes each time. Certainly this rule does not apply, in full, to the report of a committee (unless the report contains recommendations, in which event motions are made to implement those recommendations, which are fully debatable). 

You're right. The rules which impose time limits on debate do not apply to someone who is presenting a committee report.  (RONR, 11th ed., p. 388, ll. 21-25)

[J. J.]

3 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

You're right. The rules which impose time limits on debate do not apply to someone who is presenting a committee report.  (RONR, 11th ed., p. 388, ll. 21-25)

Then what, if any, rules, apply to the reporting member and to the members asking questions?

There are at least two circumstances where a member may take the floor, speak, but not actually debate a motion; do the rules related to debate (decorum, time limits) appy?

I am suggesting that those rules apply to someone who has the floor, and is speaking, even if the speaker is not entering into debate. 

[J. J.]

On 1/22/2019 at 9:23 AM, George Mervosh said:

Sorry, J.J., you lost me on this one.

I think that there is a difference between speaking and speaking in debate.  Speaking in debate is a subset to speaking in debate.

I suggest the rules on pp. 388- 389, ll. 1-2 , apply to speaking, not merely speaking in debate.

While a committee report is not debate, very clearly, it is speaking, and subject to those rules.

There are a few cases where a member may speak without a question being pending; in those cases, the rules related to speaking still apply.