May Chair Enter Debate to Correct a Statement

[CNH]

As the chairman of a group I know that I should refrain from entering debate on most occasions. However, at our last meeting a member made an incorrect statement during debate. I waited a few moments after he finished speaking to see if someone was going to correct him, but none did. I then felt that I had to provide the correct information, and I did so. Was my action appropriate?

[Tim Wynn]

As the chairman of a group I know that I should refrain from entering debate on most occasions. However, at our last meeting a member made an incorrect statement during debate. I waited a few moments after he finished speaking to see if someone was going to correct him, but none did. I then felt that I had to provide the correct information, and I did so. Was my action appropriate?

Probably not. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 382.

However, if this is a small board or committee, the chair can debate.

[George Mervosh]

Regardless of the size of the assembly, I think it's fine for the chair to make a factual correction. For example, if during debate on a motion to donate money, a member stated that there was $1000. in the bank account as of today, blah blah blah, I think it's ok for the chair to point out the balance is $900 if he knows that's the correct amount. If the chair is careful, it will come off as nothing more than a casual factual correction and not look like he's advocating something.

[Rob Elsman]

Regardless of the size of the assembly, I think it's fine for the chair to make a factual correction. For example, if during debate on a motion to donate money, a member stated that there was $1000. in the bank account as of today, blah blah blah, I think it's ok for the chair to point out the balance is $900 if he knows that's the correct amount. If the chair is careful, it will come off as nothing more than a casual factual correction and not look like he's advocating something.

I agree with Mr. Mervosh. Just offering a fact is hardly participation in debate.

[Tim Wynn]

I concur with Mr. Mervosh, as well, though it should not become a practice for the chair to critique the accuracy of members' debate.

The "correction" could have just as easily been in the nature of debate, though. There's no way for us to know what this "incorrect" statement was. Oh, wait. Yes, there is. We could ask CNH.

[Rob Elsman]

I concur with Mr. Mervosh, as well, though it should not become a practice for the chair to critique the accuracy of members' debate.

The "correction" could have just as easily been in the nature of debate, though. There's no way for us to know what this "incorrect" statement was. Oh, wait. Yes, there is. We could ask CNH.

Hopefully, it doesn't start with, "Frank, you are a liar and you know it..."

[Tim Wynn]

Hopefully, it doesn't start with, "Frank, you are a liar and you know it..."

I envision it being something like, "If this motion is adopted, it will devastate the community." The correction being, "No it won't."

[CNH]

Thanks for the input. I appreciate the clarification.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

As the chairman of a group I know that I should refrain from entering debate on most occasions. However, at our last meeting a member made an incorrect statement during debate. I waited a few moments after he finished speaking to see if someone was going to correct him, but none did. I then felt that I had to provide the correct information, and I did so. Was my action appropriate?

Do you mean, like correcting an error in speaking?

Like a Freudian slip?

***

Sample script:

CHAIR: I am sure the member meant, "raise [i.e., build up] the new clubhouse," and not "raze [i.e., tear down] the new clubhouse."

or

CHAIR: I think the treasurer misspoke when the treasurer said we are "$1.1 billion in the red," when the graph shows that we are actually "$1.1 million in the red."

***

[CNH]

What happened was that the member said that we had donated $1,000 to a particular group since January 1, 2010. In fact, we had donated $4,000 to said group since 1/1/10.

CNH

[Rob Elsman]

What happened was that the member said that we had donated $1,000 to a particular group since January 1, 2010. In fact, we had donated $4,000 to said group since 1/1/10.

CNH

Don't worry about it. The presiding officer did no more than he would have done in response to a Point of Information, if one had been asked of him. He did nothing that would put in jeopardy his appearance of impartiality.

[Tim Wynn]

Don't worry about it. The presiding officer did no more than he would have done in response to a Point of Information, if one had been asked of him. He did nothing that would put in jeopardy his appearance of impartiality.

It's not as bad as I feared.