If the chair gives the wrong answer to a parliamentary inquiry, is it appropriate to immediately raise another parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps a request for information) to correct the chair?

[user]

If the chair gives the wrong answer to a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps incorrectly states a rule in some other situation), is it reasonable to immediately raise a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps a request for information) to correct the chair? Of course I would try to word my correction in the form of a question.

For example, in a very simple situation, perhaps the chair is asked "how many members need to vote in favor for this motion to pass?" and the chair answers "if everyone votes, 5 members" (which is incorrect). Is it appropriate to raise a parliamentary inquiry and say something like "Since this is a majority vote, and there are 11 of us, if everyone votes, doesn't that mean 6 people would need to vote in favor?"

While my simple situation might sound quite reasonable, do you think it's also reasonable to do it if the situation was more complicated and required citing rules?

Should I raise a point of order directly after the chair's incorrect response to the parliamentary inquiry?

What do you think the best thing to do is?

Edited July 7, 2021 at 04:17 AM by user

[Guest Puzzling]

3 hours ago, user said:

If the chair gives the wrong answer to a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps incorrectly states a rule in some other situation), is it reasonable to immediately raise a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps a request for information) to correct the chair? Of course I would try to word my correction in the form of a question.

For example, in a very simple situation, perhaps the chair is asked "how many members need to vote in favor for this motion to pass?" and the chair answers "if everyone votes, 5 members" (which is incorrect). Is it appropriate to raise a parliamentary inquiry and say something like "Since this is a majority vote, and there are 11 of us, if everyone votes, doesn't that mean 6 people would need to vote in favor?"

While my simple situation might sound quite reasonable, do you think it's also reasonable to do it if the situation was more complicated and required citing rules?

Should I raise a point of order directly after the chair's incorrect response to the parliamentary inquiry?

What do you think the best thing to do is?

I do not like the whole "parliamentary question" thing ,I think most parliamentary questions are better done  with a point of order and appeal if needed.

Parliamentary questions are best for questions on minor rules of order and standing rules (do we have to switch of phones during an executive session, how does the voted work and so on)

So in your example, just go to the vote and if there is a  5 for, 6 against vote and the chair rules that the motion was adopted raise a point of order , maybe followed by appeal.

Maybe the chair means that if there is (without his vote) a 5-5 vote he will vote in favour breaking the tie and the motion is adopted.

[Guest Zev]

I would state it as a parliamentary inquiry first. However, if you remain silent then I think both of us know what the result would be. 

[Richard Brown]

I disagree with guest Puzzling and agree at least in part with guest Zev. 

in the first instance, a parliamentary inquiry as to the vote required is absolutely appropriate. That is the very purpose of a parliamentary inquiry. BTW, the correct term is “parliamentary inquiry”, not “parliamentary question”.  

As to what to do if the chair answers the parliamentary inquiry incorrectly, I believe a follow-up parliamentary inquiry as you suggested is perfectly permissible. If the chair again answers incorrectly your only option may then be to let matters proceed and then raise a point order immediately if the chair incorrectly states the result of the vote. But by having made your parliamentary inquires, you may have a chorus of others shouting “Point of order, Mr. Chairman!” when he incorrectly announces the outcome of a vote, causing him to realize he likely made a mistake   

In conclusion, I disagree strongly with guest puzzling when he says that you  should not bother with making a parliamentary inquiry. Making one is appropriate for many reasons, not the least of which is to inform the members of the parliamentary situation and to get the chair to think in advance of the vote required on a motion. 

 

 

 

[Josh Martin]

7 hours ago, user said:

If the chair gives the wrong answer to a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps incorrectly states a rule in some other situation), is it reasonable to immediately raise a parliamentary inquiry (or perhaps a request for information) to correct the chair? Of course I would try to word my correction in the form of a question.

Yes. It would be a parliamentary inquiry, since the question relates to parliamentary procedure.

7 hours ago, user said:

While my simple situation might sound quite reasonable, do you think it's also reasonable to do it if the situation was more complicated and required citing rules?

I can't categorically say that it will always be reasonable to raise a Parliamentary Inquiry regarding these sorts of situations. I will say, however, that the fact that "the situation was more complicated and required citing rules," in and of itself, does not necessarily mean it would be unreasonable to raise a Parliamentary Inquiry.

7 hours ago, user said:

Should I raise a point of order directly after the chair's incorrect response to the parliamentary inquiry?

No (or at least not necessarily). A Point of Order may be raised only in response to a breach of the rules. The chair's incorrect response to a question is not itself a violation of any rule. If and when a violation of the rules actually occurs as a result of the chair's misunderstanding, you could then raise a Point of Order, followed by an Appeal if necessary.

"The chair's reply to a parliamentary inquiry is not subject to an appeal, since it is an opinion, not a ruling. A member may act contrary to this opinion, however, and may appeal from a resulting adverse ruling by the chair." RONR (12th ed.) 33:5

[user]

Thanks everyone!