if previous question closes debate does it have to wait till everyone's weighed in once?

[Guest loose]

Please confirm. The book seems to indicate that if previous question closes debate it has to wait till everyone's weighed in once, but not twice. Do I have that right?

[David A Foulkes]

Please confirm. The book seems to indicate that if previous question closes debate it has to wait till everyone's weighed in once, but not twice. Do I have that right?

Where is this indicated?

[Robert B Fish]

Please confirm. The book seems to indicate that if previous question closes debate it has to wait till everyone's weighed in once, but not twice. Do I have that right?

You will find no such rule in RONR. Which "book" are you reading? If it IS RONR, you should check FAQ#11. Click here.

-Bob

[tctheatc]

Consider it NOT confirmed!!

[Guest loose]

Where is this indicated?

[Guest Guest]

p. 377, end of section.

[Guest loose]

You will find no such rule in RONR. Which "book" are you reading? If it IS RONR, you should check FAQ#11. Click here.

-Bob

[Kim Goldsworthy]

p. 377, end of section.

There's your problem.

(excerpt, page 377)

As noted under the rules for assigning the floor (42), however, a member cannot make a second speech on the same question the same day until every member who desires to speak on it has had an opportunity to do so once. If debate is closed before the member has an opportunity to make a second speech, none may be made.

A member cannot make a SECOND speech ...

... until others have spoken their FIRST speech.

The first sentence says NOTHING about "Previous Question".

If debate is closed before the member's SECOND speech,

then no SECOND speech may be made.

The second sentence says nothing about others speaking first ahead of the act of closing debate.

You said:

The book seems to indicate that

if previous question closes debate

it [i.e., Previous Question] has to wait till everyone's weighed in once, but not twice.

Do I have that right?

[David A Foulkes]

The quoted text (from p. 377) could even include "If debate is closed before a member has an opportunity to make his first speech, none may be made (by him)." I suppose it is even conceivable for the maker of a motion, who is given first preference in debate, to move the Previous Question even before he says anything else, and if 2/3 of the members concur, no one gets to debate. Not likely to happen though, but I'd wager someone out there has tried, judging from some of the questions we get here.

[Guest loose]

I'm not asking if you have to obtain the floor before you move previous question. I'm asking if you can close debate before everyone who wants to has had a chance to debate.

[Guest loose]

The quoted text (from p. 377) could even include "If debate is closed before a member has an opportunity to make his first speech, none may be made (by him)." I suppose it is even conceivable for the maker of a motion, who is given first preference in debate, to move the Previous Question even before he says anything else, and if 2/3 of the members concur, no one gets to debate. Not likely to happen though, but I'd wager someone out there has tried, judging from some of the questions we get here.

[Guest loose]

The quoted text (from p. 377) could even include "If debate is closed before a member has an opportunity to make his first speech, none may be made (by him)." I suppose it is even conceivable for the maker of a motion, who is given first preference in debate, to move the Previous Question even before he says anything else, and if 2/3 of the members concur, no one gets to debate. Not likely to happen though, but I'd wager someone out there has tried, judging from some of the questions we get here.

That's what I needed to know. Thank you.

[Rob Elsman]

I'm not asking if you have to obtain the floor before you move previous question. I'm asking if you can close debate before everyone who wants to has had a chance to debate.

The adoption of the Previous Question shuts off debate "immediately", RONR (10th ed.), p. 189, l. 30. Thus, members who have not yet made a speech on the question(s) affected by the order are out of luck, so to speak.

If it is desired to limit the number of speeches that each member can make on a question, a different motion is used, Limit or Extend the Limits of Debate, RONR (10th ed.), §15, pp. 183ff.

[Rob Elsman]

The quoted text (from p. 377) could even include "If debate is closed before a member has an opportunity to make his first speech, none may be made (by him)." I suppose it is even conceivable for the maker of a motion, who is given first preference in debate, to move the Previous Question even before he says anything else, and if 2/3 of the members concur, no one gets to debate. Not likely to happen though, but I'd wager someone out there has tried, judging from some of the questions we get here.

It's not that uncommon with completely uncontroversial topics.

[Guest loose]

It's not that uncommon with completely uncontroversial topics.

Many thanks for clarification.