RunasSudo/PointsOfOrder
1
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Activity

Edition 0.3

Browse Source 
Add discussion of:
- indulgence
- Acknowledgement of Country
- adoption of agenda
- minutes of resolutions and minutes of narration
- comparison of minutes and Hansard
Extend chapter on voting to include elections
Copyediting
Add page numbers to PDF for some cross references
This commit is contained in:
RunasSudo 2021-02-11 20:48:22 +11:00
parent 55cf6d77d6
commit 69311aaba8
Signed by: RunasSudo
GPG Key ID: 7234E476BF21C61A
10 changed files with 322 additions and 109 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

44
altering-flow.rst
View File

@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ A procedural motion is a form of subsidiary motion which relates to the procedur
The term *formal motion* is sometimes encountered in this context – the meaning differs from source to source:
* According to :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>`,\ [#fn1]_ ‘formal motion’ means a motion moved as a ‘formality’ – not because it expresses some novel substantive proposal for discussion, but to accomplish a well-accepted ‘formal’ outcome. This includes procedural motions, as well as motions such as ‘That the minutes be confirmed’.
* According to :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>`,\ [#fn1]_ ‘formal motion’ means a motion moved as a ‘formality’ – not because it expresses some novel substantive proposal for discussion, but to accomplish a well-accepted ‘formal’ outcome. This includes procedural motions, as well as motions such as ‘*That the minutes be confirmed*’.
..
@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Because of this ambiguity, the author recommends the term ‘formal motion’ sh
Moving procedural motions
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A member may move a procedural motion in the same way as described in :ref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, by obtaining the call and saying ‘*I move*’, followed by the words of the motion.
A member may move a procedural motion in the same way as described in :mref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, by obtaining the call and saying ‘*I move*’, followed by the words of the motion.
The forms of various different procedural motions, along with their effects and specific rules relating to each, are presented in this chapter. The forms provided are illustrative only, and minor differences in wording with the same effect should be accepted.
@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ As with an amendment, since the mover and seconder will need to obtain the call,
There is substantial disagreement on which procedural motions are debatable, which require a seconder, and which are accepted only at the Chair's discretion – described in detail in the sections on each procedural motion. To avoid contention, the author recommends that the body's standing orders should make specific provision for these matters.
The Chair then formally proposes the question on the procedural motion, by saying ‘*The question is that*’ (followed by the rest of the procedural motion). If the procedural motion is debatable, it is then opened to debate. As with an amendment, this is a separate question, so members may speak on the procedural motion even if they have already spoken in a debate to which the procedural motion relates. The debate must be confined only to the appropriateness of the procedural motion.
The Chair then formally proposes the question on the procedural motion, by saying ‘*The question is that*’ followed by the rest of the procedural motion. If the procedural motion is debatable, it is then opened to debate. As with an amendment, this is a separate question, so members may speak on the procedural motion even if they have already spoken in a debate to which the procedural motion relates. The debate must be confined only to the appropriateness of the procedural motion.
Unless otherwise noted, a procedural motion may not be amended, and the mover of a procedural motion generally has no right of reply.\ [#fn43]_ Once the debate is concluded (or immediately, if the procedural motion is not debatable), the Chair will put the procedural motion to a vote, and the meeting will proceed accordingly.
@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ Previous question
The previous question may be moved only to a substantive motion, not to an amendment.\ [#fn45]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn17]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn18]_ Unlike other procedural motions, the debate on the previous question is not confined only to the procedural motion itself, but extends also to the substantive motion to which it relates.
If carried, the effect of the previous question is the same as :ref:`next business <next-business>` (as the substantive motion is ‘not now put’). If lost, the effect is the same as :ref:`closure <closure>` (as the substantive motion is ‘now put’).\ [#fn45]_:superscript:\ [#fn17]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn18]_
If carried, the effect of the previous question is the same as :ref:`next business <next-business>` (as the substantive motion is ‘not now put’). If lost, the effect is the same as :ref:`closure <closure>` (as the substantive motion is ‘now put’).\ [#fn45]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn17]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn18]_
:ref:`Magner (2012) <joske>` suggests that two thirds of members voting on the question must vote in favour for the previous question to be carried, but this is not supported by any other Australian authorities.\ [#fn53]_
@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ In practice, the previous question is now primarily used to ‘confuse the meeti
Renewing consideration
----------------------
As noted in :ref:`‘Unacceptable motions’ <same-question-rule>`, meeting procedure usually prohibits a member from renewing a question which has already been decided (the *same question rule*). Procedural motions in this section seek to override this, renewing a motion which was previously defeated (potentially to now agree to it), or reconsidering a motion which was previously agreed to (potentially to now reverse it).
As noted in :mref:`‘Unacceptable motions’ <same-question-rule>`, meeting procedure usually prohibits a member from renewing a question which has already been decided (the *same question rule*). Procedural motions in this section seek to override this, renewing a motion which was previously defeated (potentially to now agree to it), or reconsidering a motion which was previously agreed to (potentially to now reverse it).
.. .. index:: recommittal, motion; recommittal, That; [previous motion] be recommitted
Recommittal of question
@ -465,7 +465,9 @@ Reference motion
Consideration of an item of business may also be deferred by referring that item to a committee by a reference motion. A reference motion may be applied as a subsidiary motion to a substantive motion or amendment, or to another matter, such as a report or letter presented. A reference motion may also be moved as a substantive motion, to refer a matter that is not currently before the meeting.
The text of the motion may specify in greater detail what is desired of the committee, for example, to refer the matter to a committee ‘for action’ or ‘for investigation and report’. The motion may also specify to which existing committee the matter should be referred, or the names of the committee members or how such a committee is to be appointed.
.. index:: committee; special, committee; select
The text of the motion may specify in greater detail what is desired of the committee, for example, to refer the matter to a committee ‘for action’ or ‘for investigation and report’. The motion may also specify to which existing committee the matter should be referred, or, for a new committee (a *special* or *select* committee), the names of the committee members or how such a committee is to be appointed.
The motion is debatable, and may be amended as to the details of the committee and the terms of the reference.\ [#fn91]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn92]_
@ -530,9 +532,9 @@ The motion may prescribe the time and place specifically, or may prescribe, for
If no time is prescribed, the meeting is to be adjourned to the time of the next regular meeting of the body.\ [#fn25]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn26]_
If the motion includes the words ‘*sine die*’ (without specified day), see instead :subref:`AdjournMeetingSD <adjourn-meeting-sine-die>`.
If the motion includes the words ‘*sine die*’ (without specified day), see instead :msubref:`AdjournMeetingSD <adjourn-meeting-sine-die>`.
.. |AdjournMeetingSD| replace:: ‘Adjournment of meeting (*sine day*)’
.. |AdjournMeetingSD| replace:: ‘Adjournment of meeting (*sine die*)’
In general, a meeting has the power to adjourn itself by resolution.\ [#fn65]_ However, this may be altered by the rules of the body. For example, the rules of many bodies provide that the Chair ‘may adjourn the meeting with the consent of the meeting’. In this case, the meeting cannot resolve to adjourn unless the Chair agrees.\ [#fn66]_
@ -611,7 +613,7 @@ Committee of the whole
Sometimes, it may be desired to relax the rule in large meetings that each member (except the mover in reply) may speak only once on each question. The traditional way of doing this is to resolve the meeting into a *committee of the whole*.
If carried, the effect is to appoint a committee made of up all persons at the meeting, refer the matter to the committee, and suspend the meeting of the original body until the committee reports (see :ref:`‘Report progress’ <report-progress>`). Relevantly, until the committee of the whole reports, and the meeting of the original body is therefore resumed:
If carried, the effect is to appoint a committee made of up all persons at the meeting, refer the matter to the committee, and suspend the meeting of the original body until the committee reports (see :mref:`‘Report progress’ <report-progress>`). Relevantly, until the committee of the whole reports, and the meeting of the original body is therefore resumed:
* the committee of the whole cannot exercise any powers of the original body (including to adopt the principal motion)
* the only matter the committee of the whole may consider is debating the principal motion, and recommending amendments to it
@ -655,7 +657,11 @@ If carried, the matter is ‘debated as if in committee’, and hence members ma
General discussion
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
At times, it may be desired to permit discussion without a motion being before the meeting. This may be permitted at the discretion of the Chair, but there is some question as to whether this is an absolute right of members.\ [#fn77]_
At times, it may be desired to permit discussion without a motion being before the meeting. This may be permitted at the discretion of the Chair, but there is some question as to whether this is an absolute right of members.\ [#fn77]_ Alternatively, a motion to :ref:`suspend the rules <suspend-rules>` could be moved to enable a general discussion.
.. index:: indulgence, Chair; indulgence
If only one or a few members wish to speak, :ref:`leave <leave>` of the meeting may be sought to allow those speeches to be made.\ [#fn95]_ Alternatively, the Chair may exercise their discretion to allow the member to speak – in the House of Representatives, this is known as seeking the Chair's *indulgence*.\ [#fn94]_
The more formal method of allowing general discussion is described in the next section.
@ -683,7 +689,7 @@ Grievance debate
| to accept?** | |
+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
This section describes the motion ‘*That the Chair do leave the chair*’ when used as a substantive motion when no other business is before the meeting. See also :ref:`‘Vacate the chair’ <vacate-chair>`.
This section describes the motion ‘*That the Chair do leave the chair*’ when used as a substantive motion when no other business is before the meeting. See also :mref:`‘Vacate the chair’ <vacate-chair>`.
The motion ‘*That the Chair do leave the chair*’ is nominally one on adversely reviewing the performance of the Chair.\ [#fn79]_ However, it is customarily used as a motion on which debate may be taken on all subjects, and therefore as a vehicle for general discussion. It is known, in this sense, as a *grievance debate*, hence the alternative form.\ [#fn78]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn80]_
@ -788,7 +794,7 @@ Want of confidence in the Chair
A motion of no confidence is moved with the intention of securing the resignation of a person from office; for example, the Chair.
It is accepted that, in general, a meeting may replace the Chair of the meeting.\ [#fn35]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn40]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn41]_ Authorities vary, however, on whether the position is different if the rules require a particular person (who is not elected by the body, or who is elected for a fixed term) to be the Chair. :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>`, suggests that it is possible to replace the Chair even in this situation,\ [#fn35]_ while :ref:`Magner (2012) <joske>` suggests this is not possible.\ [#fn40]_
It is accepted that, in general, a meeting may replace the Chair of the meeting.\ [#fn35]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn40]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn41]_ Authorities vary, however, on whether the position is different if the rules require a particular person (who is not elected by the body, or who is elected for a fixed term) to be the Chair. :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>` suggests that it is possible to replace the Chair even in this situation,\ [#fn35]_ while :ref:`Magner (2012) <joske>` suggests this is not possible.\ [#fn40]_
During the debate and vote on a motion of no confidence in the Chair, it would be advisable for the Chair to temporarily vacate the chair and for a temporary Chair to be appointed. If, alternatively, the Chair does not vacate the chair, then the Chair should not participate in the debate.\ [#fn35]_
@ -845,10 +851,12 @@ Replacement of Chair by named successor
| to accept?** | |
+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The motion to replace the Chair by a named successor is the same as the 2 motions above, but instead of electing a new Chair, the named person directly succeeds the removed Chair.
The motion to replace the Chair by a named successor is the same as the 2 preceding motions, but instead of electing a new Chair, the named person directly succeeds the removed Chair.
.. index:: motion; suspend rules, rules; suspension of, That; so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent, That; the standing orders be so far suspended as to enable
.. _suspend-rules:
Suspension of rules
-------------------
@ -872,7 +880,7 @@ Suspension of rules
| to accept?** | |
+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If it is desired to temporarily alter the standing orders, rules or conventions of meeting procedure, a motion may be moved to suspend the standing orders for this purpose.
If it is desired to temporarily alter the standing orders, rules or conventions of meeting procedure, a motion may be moved to suspend the rules for this purpose.
The body's standing orders should make clear how the rules may be suspended. If this is not specified, authorities vary. :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>` suggests that only an ordinary majority would be required,\ [#fn81]_ whereas :ref:`Puregger (1998) <puregger>` suggests that a unanimous vote would be required.\ [#fn82]_
@ -1006,9 +1014,9 @@ Vacate the chair
| to accept?** | |
+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
This section describes the motion ‘*That the Chair do leave the chair*’ when used as a subsidiary procedural motion. See also :ref:`‘Grievance debate’ <grievance-debate>`.
This section describes the motion ‘*That the Chair do leave the chair*’ when used as a subsidiary procedural motion. See also :mref:`‘Grievance debate’ <grievance-debate>`.
Recall from :ref:`‘Chair’ <chair>` that a Chair is a requirement for a validly constituted meeting. From the moment of this motion being carried, the meeting is without a Chair and is therefore not validly constituted, and no further business may be conducted. If carried, the effect of the motion, then, is to terminate the meeting.\ [#fn46]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn27]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn63]_
Recall from :mref:`‘Chair’ <chair>` that a Chair is a requirement for a validly constituted meeting. From the moment of this motion being carried, the meeting is without a Chair and is therefore not validly constituted, and no further business may be conducted. If carried, the effect of the motion, then, is to terminate the meeting.\ [#fn46]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn27]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn63]_
.. rubric:: Footnotes
@ -1071,8 +1079,10 @@ Recall from :ref:`‘Chair’ <chair>` that a Chair is a requirement for a valid
.. [#fn74] :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, p. 373
.. [#fn76] :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶¶52:19–27, which describes 2 variants, ‘quasi-committee of the whole’ (‘consideration as if in committee of the whole’) or ‘informal consideration’. The form of motion proposed in this book is intended to invoke the effect of ‘informal consideration’.
.. [#fn77] :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶7.25; *NRMA v Parker* (1986) 11 ACLR 1; *Stanham v National Trust of Australia* (1989) 7 ACLC 628
.. [#fn95] cf. :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, pp. 500–502
.. [#fn94] :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, pp. 498–500
.. [#fn78] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶12.55
.. [#fn80] :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, p. 586–587
.. [#fn80] :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, pp. 586–587
.. [#fn79] :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶6.80. See also :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, p. 586–587, which discusses the historical background.
.. [#fn32] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶6.26
.. [#fn31] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶12.18

2
conf.py
View File

@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ copyright = '2021 Lee Yingtong Li'
author = 'Lee Yingtong Li'
# The full version, including alpha/beta/rc tags
release = '0.2.1-dev'
release = '0.3'
version = release

4
epub-copyright.xhtml
View File

@ -11,12 +11,14 @@
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="_static/custom_epub.css" />
</head><body>
<p>Edition 0.1 first published 2018<br/>
Edition 0.2 first published 2021</p>
Edition 0.2 first published 2021<br/>
Edition 0.3 first published 2021</p>
<p><a href="https://yingtongli.me/pointsoforder">https://yingtongli.me/pointsoforder</a></p>
<p>Copyright © 2021 Lee Yingtong Li. You may use this book, at your option, under either of the following licences:
<ul><li>the <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence</a></li>
<li>the <a href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.en.html">GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.3</a></li></ul></p>
<p>Authored in <a href="https://www.sphinx-doc.org/">Sphinx</a></p>
<p>Cover image courtesy of Breather Products Inc., licensed under the <a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/">Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication</a></p>
<p>A catalogue record for this work is available from the National Library of Australia.</p>
</body>
</html>

27
holding-meetings.rst
View File

@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Subject to those rules, the body may, by resolution, authorise another person (s
It is also within the power of a court, exercising equitable jurisdiction, to order that a meeting be held.\ [#fn6]_
Since the question of authority speaks to the very validity of the meeting itself, any defects will be difficult to cure – a meeting which is itself invalid has no way validating itself. Requirements for authority are interpreted by courts strictly, and so all applicable rules should be observed precisely, or the meeting may be invalid.\ [#fn5]_
Since the question of authority speaks to the very validity of the meeting itself, any defects will be difficult to cure – a meeting which is inherently invalid has no way validating itself. Requirements for authority are interpreted by courts strictly, and so all applicable rules should be observed precisely, or the meeting may be invalid.\ [#fn5]_
However, if a meeting is attempted to be convened without authority, but the requisite authority ratifies that action in advance of the meeting, the meeting is deemed valid as regards authority.\ [#fn11]_
@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ The notice must contain, at a minimum:
* the general nature of the business to be transacted\ [#fn7]_
* a reference to whose authority the notice is given under\ [#fn8]_
The reference to ‘general nature’ above means that, unless the rules otherwise provide, it is not necessary to exactly describe every particular motion or matter that will be considered.\ [#fn16]_
The reference to ‘general nature’ means that, unless the rules otherwise provide, it is not necessary to exactly describe every particular motion or matter that will be considered.\ [#fn16]_
Notice defines the scope of the meeting
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ How must notice be given?
The notice must be given in a way that can ‘reasonably be expected to come to the attention’ of the members. The notice must be received sufficiently in advance to enable members a ‘reasonable opportunity’ to attend.\ [#fn14]_
The notice is usually given in writing. However, unless the rules require it, written notice is not required at common law, and notice could instead be given, for example, orally or by telephone.\ [#fn39]_
.. index:: clear days
In addition, the rules of a body generally prescribe a certain minimum time between the sending of the notice and the date of the meeting. When the rules prescribe a certain number of ‘days’ (or ‘clear days’) notice, that is exclusive of both the day of issuing the notice and the day of the meeting. Weekends and holidays are counted as ordinary days.\ [#fn15]_
@ -71,10 +73,10 @@ Notice of regular meetings
If meetings are held frequently, at regular intervals – for example, as is the practice of many boards or committees – individual notice of every meeting does not need to be given, so long as all members of the body, including new members, understand and agree.\ [#fn13]_
Inability to cancel notice
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Inability to cancel or amend notice
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
At common law, once notice is given of a meeting, the meeting cannot be cancelled unless this is specifically permitted by the rules.\ [#fn19]_
At common law, once notice is given of a meeting, the meeting cannot be cancelled, and the notice cannot be amended, unless this is specifically permitted by the rules.\ [#fn19]_
As this may be a convenient power to have, the author recommends that a body's standing orders should enable notice of a meeting to be cancelled or amended.
@ -94,7 +96,7 @@ Agenda
The *agenda*\ [#fn21]_ (or *agenda paper*) is a document setting out specifically the order and items of business to be discussed at a meeting. The agenda is a separate concept to the notice, and there is no requirement at common law to prepare an agenda,\ [#fn20]_ but it is usual that an agenda be sent (if available at that time) with notice of a meeting.
The typical items appearing on an agenda are described in more detail in :doc:`‘The order of business’ <order-of-business>`.
The typical items appearing on an agenda are described in more detail in :mdoc:`‘The order of business’ <order-of-business>`.
.. index:: quorum
@ -119,7 +121,7 @@ The rules of a body should specify what the quorum for its meetings is. If no qu
If proxy voting is permitted, then unless the rules provide otherwise, proxies are not considered in determining whether a quorum is present – only those personally present are counted towards the quorum.\ [#fn25]_
If proxy voting is permitted, the rules do permit proxies to be counted in determining whether a quorum is present, and the quorum is more than 1, then unless the rules otherwise provide, there must still be at least 2 people personally present. This is based on the general principle that a meeting must consist of more than 1 person.\ [#fn25]_
If proxy voting is permitted, the rules do permit proxies to be counted towards quorum, and the quorum is more than 1, then unless the rules otherwise provide, there must still be at least 2 people personally present. This is based on the general principle that a meeting must consist of more than 1 person.\ [#fn25]_
If certain members are prohibited by the rules from voting on a matter, those members do not count towards the quorum during that matter.\ [#fn26]_
@ -143,9 +145,7 @@ Who is the Chair?
The rules of the body should specify who is to be the Chair of its meetings, or how the Chair is to be appointed or elected. If the rules do not specify, or the Chair is absent, the first item of business will be to elect a Chair.\ [#fn35]_
Courts have consistently held that a candidate for Chair may not preside over their own election; if a candidate did so preside and were elected, the election would be invalid.\ [#fn36]_ Therefore, some suitable person (for example, the Secretary) usually takes the initiative as ‘interim Chair’, calls for nominations and conducts the election.\ [#fn37]_
.. comment Procedures for conducting an election are described in greater detail in :ref:`‘Elections’ <elections>`.
Procedures for conducting an election are described in greater detail in :ref:`‘Elections’ <elections>`.
.. index:: Chair; role
@ -205,6 +205,7 @@ To this end, the Chair should avoid participating in debate (except in occasiona
.. [#fn17] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.17; :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.10
.. [#fn18] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.18; :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.10
.. [#fn14] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.11; :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.25
.. [#fn39] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.15; *Browne v La Trinidad* (1887) 37 Ch D 1; *Wilson v Manna Hill Mining Co Pty Ltd* [2004] FCA 912
.. [#fn15] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.12; :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.30; *Re Railway Sleepers Supply Co* (1885) 29 Ch D 204; *Ex parte McCance; Re Hobbs* (1926) 27 SR (NSW) 35; *Ayres v Chacos* (1972) 19 FLR 468; *Labouchere v Wharncliffe* (1879) 13 Ch D 346
.. [#fn13] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.10; :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.25
.. [#fn19] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶4.19; *Bell Resources Ltd v Turnbridge Pty Ltd* (1988) 13 ACLR 429; *McPherson v Mansell* (1994) 16 ACSR 261; *McKerlie v Drillsearch Energy Ltd* (2009) 74 NSWLR 673
@ -223,11 +224,11 @@ To this end, the Chair should avoid participating in debate (except in occasiona
.. [#fn30] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶5.11
.. [#fn32] This differs to the practice in the Australian Parliament, and in North American meetings under *Robert's Rules*, where a quorum is presumed to be present, and business transacted without a quorum is not invalid until the lack of quorum is noticed by, or brought to the attention of, the Chair. :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶5.13; :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶40:12; :ref:`Elder et al. 2018 <horp>`, p. 272
.. [#fn34] Even in small, informal meetings where procedural control moves fluidly from person to person, there must at all times, unless all are unanimous, be some person responsible for ‘enabl[ing] the wish or decision of the meeting to be ascertained’. :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.1; *Colorado Constructions Pty Ltd v Platus* [1966] 2 NSWR 598
.. [#fn33] The distinction is necessary, for example, in the motion :ref:`‘That the Chair leave the chair’ <vacate-chair>`.
.. [#fn33] The distinction is necessary, for example, in the motion :subref:`LeaveChair <vacate-chair>`.
.. [#fn35] :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶6.10
.. [#fn36] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4; *R v Owens* (1850) 28 LJQB 316; *Fanagan v Kernan* (1881) 8 LR Ir 44; *National Australia Bank Ltd v Market Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq)* (2001) 161 FLR 1
.. [#fn37] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4
.. [#fn38] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.10
.. |CompAct| replace:: *Companies Act 1981* (Cth)
.. _CompAct: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A02466
.. |LeaveChair| replace:: ‘*That the Chair leave the chair*’

6
introduction.rst
View File

@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Introduction
What is this book about?
------------------------
This book is about meeting procedure in Australia, with rough applicability to countries with similar procedures, such as the UK, from where Australian meeting procedure originates, and other Commonwealth countries.
This book is about meeting procedure in Australia, with rough applicability to countries with similar procedures – such as the UK, from where Australian meeting procedure originates, and other Commonwealth countries.
This book takes a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, approach to meeting procedure. We review a wide range of :ref:`authorities on meeting procedure <authorities>`, from both Australia and abroad, and from various different contexts. We combine this with the author's personal experience, presenting a comprehensive *description* of the range of meeting procedures in use, to give this book the widest possible applicability.
@ -17,9 +17,9 @@ However, where the author believes that certain practices attested to by other a
What is this book *not* about?
------------------------------
This book does not exhaustively cover the *law* relating to meetings, nor does it confine itself only to the law, as there exist many books on this topic – such as :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>` – and many more practical aspects of running meetings fall outside the scope of legal regulation.
This book does not exhaustively cover the *law* relating to meetings, nor does it confine itself only to the law, as there exist many books on this topic – such as :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>` – and many practical aspects of running meetings fall outside the scope of legal regulation.
This book does not cover in specific detail requirements specific to company meetings under the *Corporations Act 2001* (Cth) (or other specific types of organisation). Most general principles of meeting procedure apply equally to companies, and there again exist many texts on company meeting specifics – such as :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>` and :ref:`Magner (2012) <joske>`.
This book does not cover in detail requirements specific to company meetings under the *Corporations Act 2001* (Cth) (or other specific types of organisation). Most general principles of meeting procedure apply equally to companies, and there again exist many texts on company meeting specifics – such as :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>` and :ref:`Magner (2012) <joske>`.
This book does not cover matters relating to the administration of organisations outside of the practice of meetings. This book focuses on meetings of existing bodies, and so does not cover topics such as the establishment of organisations and bodies, inaugural meetings, the writing of rules or standing orders, or the conduct of mass meetings (although some of these topics are planned for future editions).

23
meetings.rst
View File

@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ The *Macquarie Dictionary* defines a *meeting* as ‘an assembling … of person
In the sense of meeting procedure and as used in this book, however, *meeting* has a more specific meaning – in North America, *Robert's Rules* introduces the term *deliberative assembly*.\ [#fn2]_ By *meeting* (in the sense of a deliberative assembly), we mean when a body of people meet to deliberate and make decisions in the name of the entire body.
The importance of the words ‘in the name of the entire body’ in the above definition cannot be overstated. When a meeting of a particular body votes to endorse a decision, the authority for that decision does not come from the members who voted in favour, nor does it come from the members who attended the meeting – it comes from the body as a whole.
The importance of the words ‘in the name of the entire body’ cannot be overstated. When a meeting of a particular body votes to endorse a decision, the authority for that decision does not come from the members who voted in favour, nor does it come from the members who attended the meeting – it comes from the body as a whole.
For example, in the case of a body which its not its own legal entity, such as the committee of an unincorporated association, all members of the committee will be liable for the decisions of meetings of the committee – even if they were absent from the meeting.\ [#fn3]_
For example, in the case of a body which its not its own legal entity, such as the committee of an unincorporated association, all members of the committee will be liable for decisions of meetings of the committee – even if they were absent from the meeting.\ [#fn3]_
With this power comes proportionately great responsibility – the necessity of ensuring the proceedings of a meeting are fair to the participants – and this is where meeting procedure steps in. Meeting procedure ensures that participants at the meeting are treated fairly. The right of members to speak and make their voices heard is preserved, while decisions are made democratically according to the principle of majority rule – ‘the minority have their say, the majority their way’.
@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ Defining some terms
For the purposes of this book, we will define a few terms relating to meetings. The terms and definitions we choose carry no particular weight outside of this book, but will be useful in aiding the discussion.
When we say *meeting*, we mean each instance where people meet in the way described above.
When we say *meeting*, we mean each instance where people meet in the way described in the previous section.
.. index:: body, member
@ -40,11 +40,11 @@ Types of organisations and bodies
The most basic type of organisation which may hold meetings is the *unincorporated association*. Most clubs are unincorporated associations.
An unincorporated association is roughly just a fancy way of referring to a group of people acting together.\ [#fn8]_ If Adam, Barbara and Charlie are the 3 members of the XYZ Club (an unincorporated association), then saying ‘The XYZ Club’ did something is simply the same as saying ‘Adam, Barbara and Charlie’ did something.
An unincorporated association is, roughly speaking, merely a dressed-up way of referring to a group of people acting together.\ [#fn8]_ If Adam, Barbara and Charlie are the 3 members of the XYZ Club (an unincorporated association), then saying ‘The XYZ Club’ did something is simply the same as saying ‘Adam, Barbara and Charlie’ did something.
An unincorporated association has no separate legal identity of its own. It cannot – in its own name – sue, be sued, own property, enter into contracts, or so on; rather, it does so in the joint name of its members.\ [#fn8]_
Organisations which do have their own legal identity are *corporations* (or *bodies corporate*\ [#fn9]_), of which there are many types. Before the genesis of modern corporations law, corporations in Britain were created by royal charter or Acts of Parliament (like the infamous British East India Company), and some of these continue to exist, particularly in the government and not-for-profit sectors.
Organisations which do have their own legal identity are *corporations* (or *bodies corporate*\ [#fn9]_), of which there are many types. Before the genesis of modern corporations law, corporations in Britain were created by royal charter or Acts of Parliament (like the infamous British East India Company), and some of these continue to exist, particularly in the government and not-for-profit sectors.\ [#fn10]_
However, most corporations are now created under various, more accessible pieces of legislation. These types of corporations include companies, incorporated associations and co-operatives.
@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ At its heart, meeting procedure is principally governed by *common law* rules, e
Many matters of convention are compiled into texts known as *authorities* on meeting procedure. This includes the previously mentioned *Robert's Rules* (commonly used in North America), Renton's *Guide for Meetings* and Citrine's *ABC of Chairmanship*, as well as a number of other authorities listed below – whose company, the author hopes, this book may join.
The common law of meetings, and the Chair's judgement in applying convention, is subject to any rules adopted by the meeting or which the meeting is subject to. In :ref:`‘Holding meetings’ <meeting-requirements>`, we will see that a meeting must be convened with adequate authority; it follows that whichever instrument grants that authority may condition the authority on certain rules. These rules may include:
The common law of meetings, and the Chair's judgement in applying convention, is subject to any rules adopted by the meeting or which the meeting is subject to. In :mref:`‘Holding meetings’ <meeting-requirements>`, we will see that a meeting must be convened with adequate authority; it follows that whichever instrument grants that authority may condition the authority on certain rules. These rules may include:
* the organisation's *constitution* (sometimes known by other names, such as the *memorandum and articles of association*\ [#fn6]_ or *rules of association*\ [#fn7]_)
* *regulations*, *policies*, *by-laws* or other instruments made under the constitution
@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ Furthermore, recent (comparatively in the history of meeting procedure) developm
.. index:: rules
In this book, when we refer to *rules*, we refer generally to any of the above matters which may override what generally applies under common law or convention.
In this book, when we refer to *rules*, we refer generally to common law and convention, and to any of the preceding matters which may override them.
Authorities on meeting procedure
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ The following :ref:`authorities on meeting procedure <authorities>` are cited wi
.. _renton:
* Renton NE. *Guide for meetings and organisations*. 8th ed. Vol. 2, Guide for meetings. Sydney: Thomson; 2005.\ [#fn4]_
* Renton NE. *Guide for meetings and organisations*. 8th ed. Vol. 2, ‘Guide for meetings’. Sydney: Thomson; 2005.\ [#fn4]_
.. _ronr:
@ -148,9 +148,12 @@ The following authorities, on parliamentary meeting procedure specifically, are
.. [#fn1] *Macquarie dictionary*. Sydney: Macmillan; c2021 [cited 2021 Jan 30]. https://macquariedictionary.com.au
.. [#fn2] :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶1:1
.. [#fn3] *Ward v Eltherington* [1982] Qd R 561
.. [#fn8] See e.g. Sievers AS. *Associations and clubs law in Australia and New Zealand*. 3rd ed. Sydney: Federation; 2010.
.. _sievers:
.. [#fn3] Sievers AS. *Associations and clubs law in Australia and New Zealand*. 3rd ed. Sydney: Federation; 2010. pp. 37–38; *Ward v Eltherington* [1982] Qd R 561
.. [#fn8] :ref:`Sievers 2010 <sievers>`, pp. 6, 44; Stewart N, Campbell N, Baughen S. *The law of unincorporated associations*. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. ¶¶1.09, 9.05
.. [#fn9] Confusingly and unfortunately, the term *body corporate* is also used in housing to refer specifically to owners corporations.
.. [#fn10] :ref:`Sievers 2010 <sievers>`, p. 93
.. [#fn5] Meeting procedure in the USA, which gained independence from the UK much earlier than other colonies, branched off. Its legislative branch became Congress, and the procedures of ordinary meetings, modelled on the UK Parliament, became known as *‘parliamentary’ procedure*: :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ‘Introduction’.
.. [#fn6] See e.g. the former |CompAct|_.
.. [#fn7] See e.g. the |VicAssoc|_.

32
order-of-business.rst
View File

@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ While motions are the principal way of a meeting expressing a decision, between
Opening of meeting
------------------
At the time specified in the :ref:`notice <notice>` of the meeting, provided that a quorum is present, the Chair will formally open the meeting and *call the meeting to order* with words to the effect of ‘The meeting is opened at [time]’, ‘I call the meeting to order’ or ‘Thank you all for coming’. This may be followed by suitable words of welcome, acknowledgement of guest speakers or new members, and so on.
At the time specified in the :ref:`notice <notice>` of the meeting, provided that a quorum is present, the Chair will formally open the meeting and *call the meeting to order* with words to the effect of ‘*The meeting is opened at [time]*’, ‘*I call the meeting to order*’ or ‘*Thank you all for coming*’. This may be followed by suitable words of welcome, acknowledgement of guest speakers or new members, and so on.
In Australia, it is common for an Acknowledgement of Country to be included.\ [#fn35]_
.. That; the notice convening the meeting be taken as read
@ -16,20 +18,22 @@ In the case of important meetings, the Chair may read, or direct the Secretary t
Any challenge to the validity of the meeting should ideally be made at this stage.\ [#fn2]_
Procedural motions may also be moved at this time to alter the order of business, set time limits, etc.\ [#fn36]_ Some bodies also have the custom at this stage of formally moving a motion to adopt the agenda.
Attendance and apologies
------------------------
.. index:: apologies
At the commencement of the meeting, the members in the attendance should be noted. The Chair should also note if any members who have advised they cannot attend (*apologies*), and ask if any other members have sent apologies via those present.
At the commencement of the meeting, the members in attendance should be noted. The Chair should also note if any members who have advised they cannot attend (the *apologies*), and ask if any other members have sent apologies via those present.
.. That; the apologies be accepted (or received)
.. index:: That; the apologies be accepted (or received)
If the meeting desires to formally grant a leave of absence to those named, it may be moved ‘*That the apologies be accepted*’. If the meeting wishes not to grant leave, the traditional approach would be to move (or amend the motion to read) ‘*That the apologies be received*’\ [#fn4]_ – but see :ref:`‘Reports’ <reports>` for the author's view on motions to ‘receive’.
If the meeting desires to formally grant a leave of absence to those named, it may be moved ‘*That the apologies be accepted*’. If the meeting wishes not to grant leave, the traditional approach would be to move (or amend the motion to read) ‘*That the apologies be received*’\ [#fn4]_ – but see :mref:`‘Reports’ <reports>` for the author's view on motions to ‘receive’.
An apology, whether accepted or not, does not prevent that member participating in the meeting if they later arrive.
If :ref:`proxy voting <proxy-voting>` is permitted, and proxies have been appointed, that should also be noted at this point.
If :mref:`proxy voting <proxy-voting>` is permitted, and proxies have been appointed, that should also be noted at this point.
Minutes of previous meetings
----------------------------
@ -42,7 +46,7 @@ Minutes of previous meetings
.. index:: That; the minutes be confirmed
Unless the minutes were previously circulated, the Chair should read, or direct the Secretary to read, the minutes from the previous meeting. A member should then move ‘*That the minutes be confirmed*’).\ [#fn6]_ If the minutes were previously circulated, and it is therefore unnecessary for them to be read again, it could instead be moved ‘*That the minutes, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed*’.
Unless the minutes were previously circulated, the Chair should read, or direct the Secretary to read, the minutes from the previous meeting. A member should then move ‘*That the minutes be confirmed*’.\ [#fn6]_ If the minutes were previously circulated, and it is therefore unnecessary for them to be read again, it could instead be moved ‘*That the minutes, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed*’.
Although the rules of some bodies sometimes provide otherwise, it is not generally necessary for the motion to be moved or seconded by someone who was present at the previous meeting, and all may vote on the motion regardless of whether they were present. Just as with any motion, every member has the right to express a belief on whether the minutes are correct.\ [#fn7]_
@ -67,7 +71,11 @@ If a person abstains on a vote, or votes against a motion which is carried, they
If the rules require that a particular motion must be carried by more than a majority (for example, a two-thirds vote or an absolute majority), the minutes should record the Chair's declaration that the motion was carried by the required majority.\ [#fn10]_
Of course, it is open for a body to include more than this bare minimum in its minutes. Conciseness is to be valued, however, and the minutes should not seek to become so detailed as to serve as an exact transcript of everything said and done.
.. index:: minutes; of resolutions, minutes; of narration
Items in the minutes describing the words of resolutions passed are referred to as *minutes of resolutions*, traditionally beginning with the word ‘Resolved’ underlined, italicised or in all capitals, followed by ‘that’ and the remainder of the resolution. Other items in the minutes are referred to as *minutes of narration*.\ [#fn37]_
Some bodies keep minutes that restrict themselves only to minutes of resolutions, and such minutes of narration as needed to meet the minimum requirements described in the list. Of course, it is open for a body to include more than this bare minimum in its minutes. Conciseness is to be valued, however, and the minutes should not seek to become so detailed as to serve as an exact transcript of everything said and done.\ [#fn38]_
.. index:: minutes; confirmation, confirmation of minutes, motion; to confirm minutes
@ -120,7 +128,7 @@ Reports
At this point in the meeting, reports may be presented from office-bearers (such as the President or Treasurer) or from subcommittees. After each report, if the meeting agrees with the report, it should be moved ‘*That the report be adopted*’. If not, it would be traditional to move ‘*That the report be received*’. The debate on the motion also presents an opportunity for questions to be asked of the person presenting the report.\ [#fn22]_
If the meeting wishes to adopt some, but not all, of the report, :ref:`amendments <amendments>` may be moved to the report. If the desired changes are particularly complex, the report may be :subref:`ConsiderSeriatim <consideration-seriatim>`.\ [#fn23]_
If the meeting wishes to adopt some, but not all, of the report, :ref:`amendments <amendments>` may be moved to the report. If the desired changes are particularly complex, the report may be :msubref:`ConsiderSeriatim <consideration-seriatim>`.\ [#fn23]_
.. |ConsiderSeriatim| replace:: considered *seriatim*
@ -135,7 +143,7 @@ In the case of a subcommittee report with specific recommendations for action, f
A word on ‘receiving’
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
As noted above, it is traditional in various circumstances to move to ‘receive’ a matter. The author begs your indulgence for a moment to break from authority and opine that this practice is superfluous and nonsensical.
As previously noted, it is traditional in various circumstances to move to ‘receive’ a matter. The author begs your indulgence for a moment to break from authority and opine that this practice is superfluous and nonsensical.
To resolve, for example, ‘*That the report be received*’, suggests that it would be possible to negative the question and refuse to receive the report. But the meeting has, as a matter of fact, already received the report by virtue of having just sat through the report being delivered. *Robert's Rules* proscribes this form of motion for the same reason.\ [#fn20]_
@ -148,7 +156,7 @@ Motions on notice
At this point in the meeting, motions of which notice had been given prior to the meeting should be moved. These *motions on notice* will be listed on the :ref:`agenda <agenda>`, typically in the order that notice was given.\ [#fn24]_
One by one, in the order listed on the agenda, the Chair will ask the person who gave notice to move the motion. The motion is then proceeded with as described in :ref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`.
One by one, in the order listed on the agenda, the Chair will ask the person who gave notice to move the motion. The motion is then proceeded with as described in :mref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`.
If the person who gave notice is not present, or chooses not to move the motion, any other member may move the motion instead, unless prohibited by the rules. If no one moves the motion, then the motion will lapse, the notice will be taken to have been dealt with, and the meeting will proceed to the next item of business.\ [#fn25]_
@ -182,8 +190,10 @@ All business of the meeting having concluded, the Chair should formally declare
.. rubric:: Footnotes
.. [#fn35] See e.g. *indigenous.gov.au*. Canberra: Australian Government; [cited 2021 Feb 11]. ‘Welcome to Country or Acknowledgement of Country’. https://www.indigenous.gov.au/contact-us/welcome_acknowledgement-country
.. [#fn1] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.10
.. [#fn2] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.11. Renton goes on to suggest that if no challenge is raised at this point, the right is waived. :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶9.8, disagrees, citing *Henderson v Bank of Australasia* (1890) 45 Ch D 330; as does :ref:`Magner 2012 <joske>`, ¶3.35, citing *Werner v Boehm* (1890) 16 VLR 73.
.. [#fn36] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.12
.. [#fn4] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.13
.. [#fn5] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.3
.. [#fn6] Some bodies prefer to jazz up the wording; for example, ‘*That the minutes be confirmed as a true and accurate record*’.
@ -192,6 +202,8 @@ All business of the meeting having concluded, the Chair should formally declare
.. [#fn8] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.7; *John J Starr (Real Estate) Pty Ltd v Robert R Andrew (Australasia) Pty Ltd* (1991) 6 ACSR 63, 89–90
.. [#fn9] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.7. Some authorities suggest that this right is only available to those who abstain.
.. [#fn10] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.7
.. [#fn37] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.6
.. [#fn38] There is possibly some confusion caused by comparison with the *Hansard* produced by UK and Commonwealth Parliaments (cf. the United States *Congressional Record*), which does serve as an approximately verbatim transcript of debates. Minutes are generally more comparable to the Parliamentary *Votes and Proceedings* or *Journals of the Senate* (cf. the United States *House Journal* and *Senate Journal*).
.. [#fn33] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.19
.. [#fn12] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.20; :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶18.14
.. [#fn13] In North America, *Robert's Rules* takes the opposite view, where a motion is neither necessary nor desirable, and the minutes are automatically confirmed once no more corrections are forthcoming. This is on the basis that the only allowable way to object to the minutes is to offer a correction. :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶41:11

6
preamble.tex.txt
View File

@ -68,13 +68,14 @@
\newcommand{\sphinxbackoftitlepage}{
\begingroup\footnotesize
Edition 0.1 first published 2018 \\
Edition 0.2 first published 2021
Edition 0.2 first published 2021 \\
Edition 0.3 first published 2021
\vspace{1cm}
\sphinxhref{https://yingtongli.me/pointsoforder}{https://yingtongli.me/pointsoforder}
\vspace*{\fill}
\vspace{\fill}
Copyright © 2021 Lee Yingtong Li. You may use this book, at your option, under either of the following licences:
{\parskip=0pt\begin{itemize}
@ -88,6 +89,7 @@
Cover image courtesy of Breather Products Inc., licensed under the \sphinxhref{https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/}{Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication}
Printed by Lulu Press
%Printed in Australia by Finsbury Green for Lulu Press
\fi
\vspace{0.5cm}

96
transacting-business.rst
View File

@ -6,17 +6,17 @@ Motions, generally
.. index:: motion
The heart of transacting business at meetings is the *motion*. A motion is simply a proposal that the meeting take a certain course of action.
The heart of transacting business at meetings is the *motion*. A motion is simply a proposal that the meeting make a certain decision.
Broadly, there are two kinds of motions:
* *substantive motions*\ [#fn6]_ are ones which bring forward proposals to the meeting to achieve substantive outcomes;\ [#fn1]_ for example, to endorse a certain position or exercise a certain power
* *substantive motions*\ [#fn6]_ are ones which bring forward proposals to the meeting to achieve substantive outcomes;\ [#fn1]_ for example, to take a certain action, endorse a certain position or exercise a certain power
..
* *subsidiary motions* are ones which are dependent on, or relate to, an existing item of business;\ [#fn36]_ for example, to postpone consideration of an existing item
In this chapter, we will focus primarily on substantive motions. In :doc:`‘Altering the flow’ <altering-flow>`, we will cover in greater detail other subsidiary motions, including *procedural motions*, which relate to regulating the procedure of the meeting.
In this chapter, we will focus primarily on substantive motions. In :mdoc:`‘Altering the flow’ <altering-flow>`, we will cover in greater detail other subsidiary motions, including *procedural motions*, which relate to regulating the procedure of the meeting.
Traditional form of motions
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
@ -43,12 +43,12 @@ By convention, motions also traditionally observe a number of other principles:
| \(a) a finance committee be established; and
| \(b) the committee consist of 5 members appointed by the President; and
| \(c) the Chair of the committee be elected by and from the committee members.
.. index:: motion; omnibus, omnibus motion, motion; composite, composite motion
.. _omnibus-motion:
A motion like this which contains multiple parts (particularly if they deal with different topics) is referred to as an *omnibus motion* or *composite motion*.\ [#fn15]_
.. index:: motion; omnibus, omnibus motion, motion; composite, composite motion
.. _omnibus-motion:
A motion like this which contains multiple parts (particularly if they deal with different topics) is referred to as an *omnibus motion* or *composite motion*.\ [#fn15]_
.. index:: preamble
@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ Unacceptable motions
However a body chooses to phrase its motions, there are a number of key requirements which arise from the law:
* As follows from the requirement in :ref:`‘Holding meetings’ <meeting-requirements>` that a meeting must be convened with requisite authority, a motion must not conflict with any :ref:`rules <meeting-requirements>` which bind the meeting, or be beyond the scope of the purposes or objects of the body as prescribed in its rules. A motion which is beyond the meeting's authority to agree to is known as being *ultra vires*.
* As follows from the requirement in :mref:`‘Holding meetings’ <meeting-requirements>` that a meeting must be convened with requisite authority, a motion must not conflict with any :ref:`rules <meeting-requirements>` which bind the meeting, or be beyond the scope of the purposes or objects of the body as prescribed in its rules. A motion which is beyond the meeting's authority to agree to is known as being *ultra vires*.
..
@ -94,9 +94,9 @@ However a body chooses to phrase its motions, there are a number of key requirem
..
* A motion which has been ruled out of order by the Chair must not be considered again at the same meeting, unless the ruling is successfully :ref:`dissented from <dissent>`.
* A motion which has been ruled out of order by the Chair must not be considered again at the same meeting, unless the ruling is successfully :mref:`dissented from <dissent>`.
Courts in Australia have held that motions which are carried in violation of the 3 above requirements will be invalid.\ [#fn10]_
Courts in Australia have held that motions which are carried in violation of these 3 requirements will be invalid.\ [#fn10]_
A motion may also be ruled out of order by the Chair if it does not comply with one of a number of other rules:
@ -110,9 +110,9 @@ A motion may also be ruled out of order by the Chair if it does not comply with
..
* A motion should not be inconsistent with a resolution of a previous meeting of the body. The earlier resolution should instead be :ref:`rescinded <rescission>`.
* A motion should not be inconsistent with a resolution of a previous meeting of the body. The earlier resolution should instead be :mref:`rescinded <rescission>`.
In the event that a motion is mistakenly allowed to stand, and is carried, in contravention of the 3 above requirements, ‘its validity would be … in jeopardy’.\ [#fn10]_
In the event that a motion is mistakenly allowed to stand, and is carried, in contravention of these 3 requirements, ‘its validity would be … in jeopardy’.\ [#fn10]_
.. index:: motion; moving of
@ -134,14 +134,14 @@ In order to speak, and therefore to propose the motion, a member must first be r
A member seeks to obtain the call by (in large meetings) standing, or (in smaller meetings) gaining the Chair's attention in some other way, such as by raising their hand. The Chair will then *call on* the member, by stating their name or otherwise indicating who has the call.
If 2 or more members stand (raise their hands, etc.), the Chair will choose whichever person caught their attention first. If the meeting disagrees with the Chair's decision, a procedural motion may be moved :subref:`BeNowHeard <be-now-heard>`. Procedural motions are covered in greater detail in the next chapter.
If 2 or more members stand (raise their hands, etc.), the Chair will choose whichever person caught their attention first. If the meeting disagrees with the Chair's decision, a procedural motion may be moved :msubref:`BeNowHeard <be-now-heard>`. Procedural motions are covered in greater detail in the next chapter.
.. |BeNowHeard| replace:: ‘*That [member not called upon] be now heard*’
Once a member obtains the call, they may not be interrupted except:
* by the chair, to call attention to a breach of meeting procedure (for example, a breach of the :ref:`rules of decorum <rules-of-decorum>`) or for another valid purpose
* by another member, to raise a :ref:`point of order <point-of-order>`
* by the chair, to call attention to a breach of meeting procedure (for example, a breach of the :mref:`rules of decorum <rules-of-decorum>`) or for another valid purpose
* by another member, to raise a :mref:`point of order <point-of-order>`
* by another member, to move one of a limited range of :ref:`procedural motions <procedural-motions>` permitted to interrupt another speaker\ [#fn65]_
Moving the motion
@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ Moving the motion
After obtaining the call, the member says ‘*I move*’, followed by the words of the motion; for example, ‘*I move that the expenditure be approved*’.\ [#fn2]_
As noted above, when one member has the call, they cannot generally be interrupted to move another motion. Additionally, a substantive motion may also only be moved when there is no other question pending before the meeting. If a member has sought to move a motion in violation of these requirements, it should be ruled by the Chair as out of order.
As noted previously, when one member has the call, they cannot generally be interrupted to move another motion. Additionally, a substantive motion may also only be moved when there is no other question pending before the meeting. If a member has sought to move a motion in violation of these requirements, it should be ruled by the Chair as out of order.
If the motion is particularly complex, it should be provided in writing to the Chair. Some rules require this of all motions.
@ -164,20 +164,20 @@ Seconding the motion
Although there is no requirement at common law,\ [#fn37]_ it is customary for (and some rules require) a motion to be *seconded* before it can be proceeded with further.\ [#fn39]_
At the conclusion of the mover's speech, the Chair should, if necessary, remind the meeting of the text of the motion, and ask ‘Is the motion seconded?’
At the conclusion of the mover's speech, the Chair should, if necessary, remind the meeting of the text of the motion, and ask ‘*Is the motion seconded?*’
A member (other than the mover) who wishes to second the motion should :ref:`obtain the call <obtaining-the-call>` in the same way as described above, and say ‘I second the motion’. The seconder may then, if desired, make their own speech on the motion. Again, once the seconder has concluded, they should (if standing) resume their seat.
A member (other than the mover) who wishes to second the motion should :ref:`obtain the call <obtaining-the-call>` in the same way as described previously, and say ‘*I second the motion*’. The seconder may then, if desired, make their own speech on the motion. Again, once the seconder has concluded, they should (if standing) resume their seat.
Alternatively, if the seconder chooses not to make a speech when seconding the motion, they are entitled to speak later as usual during the debate, so long as this is made clear at the time of seconding – this is known as *reserving* the right to speak.\ [#fn49]_
If no one wishes to second the motion, convention would have it that the Chair may decline the accept the motion, and the result will be as if the motion was never moved. The motion is said to have *lapsed* for want of a seconder. However, whether this is legally permissible (in the absence of a specific rule) is considered doubtful.\ [#fn38]_
If no one wishes to second the motion, convention would have it that the Chair may decline to accept the motion, and the result will be as if the motion was never moved. The motion is said to have *lapsed* for want of a seconder. However, as seconders are not required at common law, whether this is legally permissible (in the absence of a specific rule) is considered doubtful.\ [#fn38]_
Alternatively, a member may rise to second the motion *pro forma*, which indicates that the member does not support the motion but would like it motion to be debated.\ [#fn73]_
Alternatively, a member may rise to second the motion *pro forma*, which indicates that the member does not support the motion but would like it to be debated.\ [#fn73]_
Question proposed by the Chair
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Once the motion has been moved and, if necessary, seconded, the Chair will formally *propose the question* to the meeting, by saying ‘The question is that’ (followed by the rest of the motion), or if the text of the motion does not need repeating, ‘*The question is that the motion be agreed to*’.
Once the motion has been moved and, if necessary, seconded, the Chair will formally *propose the question* to the meeting, by saying ‘*The question is that*’ followed by the rest of the motion, or if the text of the motion does not need repeating, ‘*The question is that the motion be agreed to*’.
Note that while it is usual for the Chair not to accept a motion until it is formally moved, this is not a legal requirement. A Chair also has the power to put a motion to the meeting without it being moved or seconded.\ [#fn50]_ Alternatively, the Chair may suggest wording for a motion, and invite another member to move it; for example, by asking ‘*May I have a motion that …*’.\ [#fn51]_
@ -192,13 +192,13 @@ Once the question is proposed by the Chair, the motion is opened to debate by ot
A member who wishes to speak in debate should :ref:`obtain the call <obtaining-the-call>` as previously described, make their speech, then (if standing) resume their seat.
As noted in :ref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, the call is usually allocated to the member who is noticed by the Chair first. However, the Chair may instead consider it beneficial to alternate between those speaking for and against the motion, or to give effect to a prior agreement about speaking order.\ [#fn44]_
As noted in :mref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, the call is usually allocated to the member who is noticed by the Chair first. However, the Chair may instead consider it beneficial to alternate between those speaking for and against the motion, or to give effect to a prior agreement about speaking order.\ [#fn44]_
At meetings of small committees, there is generally no restriction on the number of times a member may speak in a debate. In larger meetings, each member (except for the mover, who has a :ref:`right of reply <right-of-reply>`) is entitled to speak only once during the debate.\ [#fn44]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn40]_
.. _exceptions-one-speech:
Exceptions to the one-speech-per-debate rule may be advanced at the discretion of the Chair – for example, to allow a member to clarify a statement made by them earlier in the debate which appears to have been genuinely misinterpreted.\ [#fn44]_ Alternatively, if it is desired at a large meeting to allow all members to speak an unlimited number of times to each question, see :ref:`‘Committee debate’ <committee-debate>`.
Exceptions to the one-speech-per-debate rule may be advanced at the discretion of the Chair – for example, to allow a member to clarify a statement made by them earlier in the debate which appears to have been genuinely misinterpreted.\ [#fn44]_ Alternatively, if it is desired at a large meeting to allow all members to speak an unlimited number of times to each question, see :mref:`‘Committee debate’ <committee-debate>`.
.. index:: foreshadowing, motion; foreshadowing
@ -252,13 +252,15 @@ As the reply will be the last speech in the debate, and opponents of the motion
The mover of an amendment or procedural motion does not have a right of reply.\ [#fn52]_
If the substantive motion is proposed to be amended (see :ref:`‘Amendments’ <amendments>`), there is some disagreement on when the right of reply may be exercised. The 3 possibilities are:
If the substantive motion is proposed to be amended (see :mref:`‘Amendments’ <amendments>`), there is some disagreement on when the right of reply may be exercised. The 3 possibilities are:
* the right of reply is exercised immediately before the vote on the substantive motion
* the right of reply is exercised immediately before the vote on the first amendment\ [#fn70]_
* the right of reply is exercised immediately before the vote on any amendment, chosen by the mover\ [#fn52]_
Some authorities also suggest that the right of reply is forfeit if the mover speaks in the debate on an amendment.\ [#fn52]_ :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`\ [#fn52]_ and :ref:`Puregger (1998) <puregger>`\ [#fn75]_ recommend, and the author agrees, that the mover may exercise the right of reply at their choice at any of these 3 times. :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`\ [#fn52]_ further recommends that the Chair may rule that the right of reply is forfeit if the mover speaks in the debate on an amendment.
:ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`\ [#fn52]_ and :ref:`Puregger (1998) <puregger>`\ [#fn75]_ recommend, and the author agrees, that the mover may exercise the right of reply at their choice at any of these 3 times.
Some authorities also suggest that the right of reply is forfeit if the mover speaks in the debate on an amendment.\ [#fn52]_ :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`\ [#fn52]_ further recommends that the Chair may, at their discretion, rule this to be the case when appropriate.
.. index:: motion; voting on
@ -269,17 +271,17 @@ Voting on motions
Once the debate has concluded, and the right of reply exercised (if applicable), Chair must *put the question* to a vote.
The Chair again announces ‘*The question is that*’ (followed by the rest of the motion), or ‘*The question is that the motion be agreed to*’, as appropriate.
The Chair again announces ‘*The question is that*’ followed by the rest of the motion, or ‘*The question is that the motion be agreed to*’, as appropriate.
.. index:: vote; by show of hands, show of hands
At common law, voting on motions is by show of hands.\ [#fn53]_ When voting by show of hands, the Chair says words to the effect of ‘*Those in favour, please raise your hand*’ (or ‘please indicate’\ [#fn55]_ or ‘please show’\ [#fn54]_), followed by the same for ‘*Those opposed*’.
At common law, voting on motions is by show of hands.\ [#fn53]_ When voting by show of hands, the Chair says words to the effect of ‘*Those in favour, please raise your hand*’ (or ‘*please indicate*’\ [#fn55]_ or ‘*please show*’\ [#fn54]_), followed by the same for ‘*Those opposed*’.
Unless the rules require it, or the result is close and the Chair wishes to, there is no requirement to actually count the number of hands raised.\ [#fn55]_
The Chair will determine which side, in their opinion, had more votes, and announce the result accordingly; for example, ‘*The question is agreed to and the motion is carried*’ or ‘*The question is negatived and the motion is lost*’.
If members disagree with the Chair's determination, they may request a :ref:`poll <poll>`. More detailed rules for voting by show of hands or poll, and for other forms of voting, are discussed in :doc:`‘Voting and elections’ <voting>`.
If members disagree with the Chair's determination, they may request a :ref:`poll <poll>`. More detailed rules for voting by show of hands or poll, and for other forms of voting, are discussed in :mdoc:`‘Voting and elections’ <voting>`.
.. index:: resolution
@ -325,7 +327,7 @@ However, in such a case, whether the question has been *negatived* (and in the c
On the other hand, :ref:`Renton (2005) <renton>`\ [#fn28]_ and :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`\ [#fn56]_ suggest, and the Australian Constitution explicitly prescribes for the Senate,\ [#fn24]_ that when the votes are tied the question is negatived.
Because of this ambiguity, the author recommends that the rules of the body should explicitly prescribe what should happen in the event of such a tie – for simplicity, the author recommends that the question should negatived.
Because of this ambiguity, the author recommends that the rules of the body should explicitly prescribe what should happen in the event of such a tie – for simplicity, the author recommends that the question should be negatived.
.. index:: amendment
@ -374,7 +376,7 @@ Customarily, a motion may be amended to:\ [#fn19]_
| | | Omit ‘…’, substitute ‘…’ |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
The example motions shown above are non-exhaustive, and many other valid forms will be seen in practice – including forms for more complex types of amendment. All should be regarded as acceptable, so long as the intended effect is clear.
The example motions shown are non-exhaustive, and many other valid forms will be seen in practice – including forms for more complex types of amendment. All should be regarded as acceptable, so long as the intended effect is clear.
Curious readers may be interested in the Office of Parliamentary Counsel's *Amending Forms Manual*, which provides clear examples of wording amendments (in the ‘amended as follows’ form) for a variety of situations, including complex ones.\ [#fn13]_
@ -395,18 +397,18 @@ Like motions, there are a number of rules that amendments must comply with:
Some authorities provide that amendments must be moved in the order they affect the motion, i.e. no amendment may be moved to part of a motion preceding a part previously proposed to be amended.\ [#fn79]_ The author feels this approach to be unnecessarily restrictive, but if it is to be followed, it would be prudent, when an amendment is moved, for the Chair to ask if anyone wishes to propose an amendment to an earlier part of the motion, which would then be considered first.
Additionally, some authorities provide that an amendment may not be itself amended (a *second-degree amendment*), and that alternative amendments should instead be :ref:`foreshadowed <foreshadowing-amendments>`.\ [#fn62]_ This has the advantage of avoiding the potentially confusing conceptual complexity of ‘amending an amendment’, but the author believes that a strict prohibition is too strong. The author recommends that the body's standing orders specify that the Chair *may* decline to accept a second-degree amendment at their discretion, and that an amendment to a second-degree amendment is out of order.
Additionally, some authorities provide that an amendment may not be itself amended (a *second-degree amendment*), and that alternative amendments should instead be mref:`foreshadowed <foreshadowing-amendments>`.\ [#fn62]_ This has the advantage of avoiding the potentially confusing conceptual complexity of ‘amending an amendment’, but the author believes that a strict prohibition is too strong. The author recommends that the body's standing orders specify that the Chair *may* decline to accept a second-degree amendment at their discretion, and that an amendment to a second-degree amendment is out of order.
Moving and proceeding with amendments
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
During debate on the principal motion, while no other member is speaking, a member may move an amendment in the same way as described in :ref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, by obtaining the call and saying ‘*I move*’ followed by the text of the amendment as described above; for example, ‘*I move that the words “…” be omitted*’.
During debate on the principal motion, while no other member is speaking, a member may move an amendment in the same way as described in :mref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, by obtaining the call and saying ‘*I move*’ followed by the text of the amendment as described previously; for example, ‘*I move that the words “…” be omitted*’.
In the same way as a substantive motion, the mover of the amendment may then speak in favour, then a seconder sought to second and (if desired) speak on the amendment.
In the same way as a substantive motion, the mover of the amendment may then speak in favour, then a seconder may be sought to second and (if desired) speak on the amendment.
Since, in order to move or second the amendment, a member will need to obtain the call during the debate on the principal motion, a member (at a large meeting) who has already spoken on the principal motion may not move or second an amendment.\ [#fn57]_ Neither the mover nor seconder of the principal motion may move or second an amendment.\ [#fn58]_ Some authorities extend this to require that no one may move or second more than one amendment (or other subsidiary motion) to the principal motion.\ [#fn59]_
Once moved and (if necessary) seconded, the Chair formally proposes the question on the amendment to the meeting, by saying ‘*The question is that*’ (followed by the rest of the amendment), or ‘*The question is that the amendment be agreed to*’.
Once moved and (if necessary) seconded, the Chair formally proposes the question on the amendment to the meeting, by saying ‘*The question is that*’ followed by the rest of the amendment, or ‘*The question is that the amendment be agreed to*’.
The amendment is then opened to debate by the meeting. The debate, now, is no longer on the principal motion, but is instead on the amendment. As this is a different question, members may speak again on the amendment, even if they have spoken previously in the debate on the principal motion.\ [#fn58]_ The debate, however, must be confined to the appropriateness of the amendment, not to any other aspect of the principal motion.
@ -414,7 +416,7 @@ The amendment is then opened to debate by the meeting. The debate, now, is no lo
Similarly, as the debate is now on the amendment itself, other different amendments to the principal motion may not be moved at this time. However, a member may :ref:`foreshadow <foreshadowing>` another amendment; for example, an alternative amendment in the event that the present amendment is defeated.\ [#fn64]_
Debate proceeds as described in :ref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, with a few exceptions: The mover of an amendment has no right of reply.\ [#fn58]_ Some authorities also maintain that the seconder of an amendment has no right to reserve their speech.\ [#fn60]_
Debate proceeds as described in :mref:`‘Moving a motion’ <moving-motion>`, with a few exceptions: The mover of an amendment has no right of reply.\ [#fn58]_ Some authorities also maintain that the seconder of an amendment has no right to reserve their speech.\ [#fn60]_
Once the debate is concluded, the Chair will put the question on the amendment – the form of doing so varies according to practice, and is described in the next 2 sections.
@ -427,7 +429,7 @@ For an amendment to insert (or add) words, the Chair announces ‘*The question
However, for an amendment to omit words, the Chair announces ‘*The question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question*’.\ [#fn32]_ In order to vote in favour of the amendment, one must then vote *against* the question proposed by the Chair.\ [#fn33]_
For an amendment to omit words and substitute others, the question is put in 2 stages. The Chair first announces ‘*The question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question*’. Then, if and only if that question is negatived, the Chair announces ‘The question is that the words proposed be inserted’.\ [#fn32]_ In order to vote in favour of the amendment, one must then vote against the first question, and in favour of the second.
For an amendment to omit words and substitute others, the question is put in 2 stages. The Chair first announces ‘*The question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question*’. Then, if and only if that question is negatived, the Chair announces ‘*The question is that the words proposed be inserted*’.\ [#fn32]_ In order to vote in favour of the amendment, one must then vote against the first question, and in favour of the second.
In the author's opinion, the traditional method is needlessly confusing. The UK House of Commons rid itself of this procedure in 1967,\ [#fn34]_ and since its adoption by the Australian House of Representatives in 2011, the following simpler form has also become standard.\ [#fn32]_
@ -445,7 +447,7 @@ If the amendment is lost, debate is resumed on the principal motion without any
If the amendment is carried, the wording of the principal motion is altered accordingly, and debate is resumed on the principal motion as amended. The question would eventually be put ‘*That the motion, as amended, be agreed to*’.
The rule (in large meetings) continues to apply that a member (except the mover), who has already spoken in the debate on the principal motion, may not speak again – even if the first speech was before the amendment was moved.
The rule (in large meetings) continues to apply that a member (except the mover in reply), who has already spoken in the debate on the principal motion, may not speak again – even if the first speech was before the amendment was moved.
Points of order, etc.
---------------------
@ -457,28 +459,30 @@ Points of order, etc.
Points of order
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In this chapter, we have introduced a great many rules of meeting procedure. In :ref:`‘Role of the Chair’ <role-of-chair>`, we noted that the Chair has the responsibility for maintaining order and upholding these procedures, and in :ref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, we noted that the Chair may interrupt a member to draw attention to an irregularity.
In this chapter, we have introduced a great many rules of meeting procedure. In :mref:`‘Role of the Chair’ <role-of-chair>`, we noted that the Chair has the responsibility for maintaining order and upholding these procedures, and in :mref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, we noted that the Chair may interrupt a member to draw attention to an irregularity.
Clearly, it would be untenable to expect the Chair to notice every potential irregularity, and so other members of the meeting are permitted to assist the Chair in drawing attention to potential irregularities by raising *points of order*.
A member who wishes to raise a point of order should stand, or raise their hand, as described at :ref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, and announce ‘Chair, I rise to a point of order’, ‘On a point of order’ or simply ‘Point of order’. A point of order should be raised as soon as the perceived irregularity is observed,\ [#fn68]_ and so may interrupt another member while they have the call.
A member who wishes to raise a point of order should stand, or raise their hand, as described at :ref:`‘Obtaining the call’ <obtaining-the-call>`, and announce ‘*Chair, I rise to a point of order*’, ‘*On a point of order*’ or simply ‘*Point of order*’. A point of order should be raised as soon as the perceived irregularity is observed,\ [#fn68]_ and so may interrupt another member while they have the call.
The speaker should then stop speaking and (if standing) resume their seat.\ [#fn66]_
The original speaker should then stop speaking and (if standing) resume their seat.\ [#fn66]_
The interrupter should then briefly state the point of order. It is most polite for the point of order to be phrased as a question; for example, ‘*Is it in order to … ?*’.\ [#fn67]_ The interrupter should then (if standing) resume their seat.\ [#fn66]_
The interrupter should then briefly state the point of order. It is most polite for the point of order to be phrased as a question; for example, ‘*Is it in order to … ?*’\ [#fn67]_ The interrupter should then (if standing) resume their seat.\ [#fn66]_
The point of order may be debated,\ [#fn69]_ but it would be advisable to avoid extended discussion.
The Chair will then make a decision, either upholding the point of order (traditionally by stating ‘*The point is well taken*’) or dismissing the point of order (traditionally by stating ‘*The point is not well taken*’ or ‘*There is no point of order*’). The meeting then continues in accordance with the ruling.
If a member disagrees with the Chair's ruling, they may move :ref:`‘*That the ruling of the Chair be dissented from*’ <dissent>`.
If a member disagrees with the Chair's ruling, they may move :msubref:`DissentMotion <dissent>`.
.. |DissentMotion| replace:: ‘*That the ruling of the Chair be dissented from*’
Other points
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Some authorities also recognise other types of ‘points’ which may be raised. These include:
* *points of explanation*: raised by a member (including to interrupt another who has the call) whose words have been misrepresented or misinterpreted, to give a brief explanation (compare the :ref:`exceptions to the one-speech-per-debate rule <exceptions-one-speech>` in :ref:`‘Debate’ <debate>`)\ [#fn71]_
* *points of explanation*: raised by a member (including to interrupt another who has the call) whose words have been misrepresented or misinterpreted, to give a brief explanation (compare the :ref:`exceptions to the one-speech-per-debate rule <exceptions-one-speech>` in :mref:`‘Debate’ <debate>`)\ [#fn71]_
..
@ -502,7 +506,7 @@ Some authorities also recognise other types of ‘points’ which may be raised.
.. [#fn2] ‘Move’, in this sentence, has the meaning ‘propose’, so if it helps in understanding the grammar, think instead ‘I propose that the expenditure be approved’. This also explains the use of the subjunctive mood: one would not typically say ‘I propose that the expenditure *is* approved’.
.. [#fn48] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶4.17
.. [#fn37] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶10.12; *Re Horbury Bridge Coal, Iron & Waggon Co* (1879) 11 Ch D 109, 117–18; *National Australia Bank Ltd v Market Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq)* (2001) 161 FLR 1
.. [#fn39] Some rules even require a motion to be seconded before the *mover* can speak in favour of it. The author, as well as :ref:`Lang (2015) <horsley>`, ¶10.12, and :ref:`Puregger (1998) <puregger>`, p. 40, believe this to be an undesirable practice ­– how can one know whether to seconding a motion before the mover has a chance to explain it?
.. [#fn39] Some rules even require a motion to be seconded before the *mover* can speak in favour of it. The author, as well as :ref:`Lang (2015, ¶10.12) <horsley>` and :ref:`Puregger (1998, p. 40) <puregger>`, believe this to be an undesirable practice ­– how can one know whether to second a motion before the mover has a chance to explain it?
.. [#fn49] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶10.14; :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶4.22
.. [#fn38] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶10.12
.. [#fn73] :ref:`Puregger 1998 <puregger>`, p. 40; :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶4.23

191
voting.rst
View File

@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Voting and elections
====================
In this chapter, we cover a number of topics relating to voting.
In this chapter, we cover a number of topics relating to voting and elections.
.. index:: vote; by proxy, proxy; voting
@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ A *proxy* is a person authorised to vote on behalf of another person (the *princ
Voting by proxy is only permitted if the rules of the body allow it. In such a case, the rules will generally specify how proxies must be appointed.\ [#fn2]_
If the principal provides instructions on how to vote, the proxy must be cast in accordance with those instructions.\ [#fn19]_
If the principal provides instructions on how to vote, the proxy must vote in accordance with those instructions.\ [#fn19]_
If a principal has appointed a proxy, that does not prevent the principal attending the meeting and voting personally instead of by proxy.\ [#fn18]_
@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Methods of voting
Show of hands
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
As described in :ref:`‘Voting on motions’ <voting-on-motions>`, the common law method of voting at meetings is by show of hands. See that previous section for a description of the general process.
As described in :mref:`‘Voting on motions’ <voting-on-motions>`, the common law method of voting at meetings is by show of hands. See that previous section for a description of the general process.
When voting by show of hands, each person personally present and entitled to vote has one, and only one, vote.\ [#fn1]_
@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ In a *division*, members physically move and separate according to their voting
In a *roll call*, the name of every member is read out, one by one, by the Chair or Secretary, and that member says ‘Yes’ (or ‘Aye’), ‘No’ or ‘Abstain’ (or ‘Present’). The numbers and names are thereby recorded.\ [#fn6]_
As these methods allow for the names of members to be recorded along with their votes, it does not allow for a secret ballot. They may therefore be appropriate for a representative body (whose members are accountable to their constituents), but would generally be inappropriate for most other bodies.
As these methods allow for the names of members to be recorded along with their votes, they do not allow for a secret ballot. They may therefore be appropriate for a representative body (whose members are accountable to their constituents), but would generally be inappropriate for most other bodies.
.. index:: vote; by poll, poll
@ -120,7 +120,164 @@ The term ‘unanimous’ (as in, ‘carried unanimously’) strictly means that
In contrast, the terms ‘carried without dissent’, ‘carried *nem con*’ (*nemine contradicente*, ‘no one saying otherwise’) and ‘carried *nem dis*’ (*nemine dissentiente*, ‘no one dissenting’) are appropriate when no votes were cast against, even though some may have abstained.\ [#fn11]_
.. comment TODO Elections
.. index:: elections
.. _elections:
Conducting elections
--------------------
As noted in :mref:`‘Chair’ <chair>`, if the rules do not specify, the Chair of a meeting is to be elected by the meeting. The rules of organisations also typically create other offices to be filled by election. In this section, we discuss how to conduct such an election.
We focus primarily on elections conducted in person at meetings, but the general principles will be applicable to other forms of election, such as postal or online ballots.
.. index:: returning officer, elections; returning officer
Returning officer
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
An election should be presided over by a *returning officer*, who oversees the election. The returning officer counts the votes, determines the validity of votes cast, rules on disputes, and determines and declares the result.\ [#fn20]_
At a meeting, the returning officer is often the Chair of the meeting.
.. index:: Chair; temporary
If the election is to elect the Chair of the meeting, some other person (e.g. the Secretary) should take the initiative to temporarily take the chair to conduct the election.\ [#fn23]_
A candidate may not preside (as returning officer or temporary Chair) over their own election; if a candidate did so preside and were elected, the election would be invalid.\ [#fn24]_
.. index:: elections; nominations
Call for nominations
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oral nominations
****************
At the time for the election, the returning officer should call for nominations by saying, for example, ‘*I now call for nominations for [position]*’. Members would then seek the call, and propose their nominee.\ [#fn25]_ Seconders are not required at common law, but this is customary, and some rules require it.\ [#fn26]_
A member is permitted to propose or second their own nomination.\ [#fn27]_ The nomination of a person who is absent should not be accepted, unless the returning officer is satisfied the nominee has consented to be nominated.\ [#fn25]_
.. index:: motion; close nominations, That; nominations be now closed
Once the returning officer confirms that no further nominations are forthcoming, they should declare the nominations closed. Members may also move the procedural motion ‘*That nominations be now closed*’ to close nominations early.\ [#fn25]_
Written nominations
*******************
Alternatively, the rules may prescribe that nominations must be made in writing, to reach the returning officer (or Secretary, etc.) a specified time before the election. In this case, the rules could allow candidates to supply documents (for example, a personal statement or CV) to be circulated.\ [#fn29]_
It is preferable that nominations be kept confidential until nominations close.\ [#fn29]_
Nominations committee
*********************
If it is desired to further structure the process of nominations, the rules could provide for the establishment of a nominations committee with the power to nominate candidates – though this method might be seen to be less democratic than accepting direct nominations.\ [#fn30]_
.. index:: elections; by default
Election by default
*******************
.. index:: That; [name] be elected [position]
If the number of nominations is less than or equal to the number of vacancies (e.g. for the election of Chair, if there is only 1 nomination), the returning offer should declare elected all nominees, and the election is complete. Any remaining vacancies should be treated as casual vacancies.\ [#fn28]_ Alternatively, the question may be put to a vote ‘*That [name] be elected [position]*’.\ [#fn26]_
Election required
*****************
If, on the other hand, there are more nominations than the number of vacancies, an election will be required.
If there are only 2 candidates, a show of hands or (preferably) secret ballot should be held to choose between the 2 candidates.\ [#fn31]_
If there are more candidates, a more sophisticated voting system will need to be used. Several of these are detailed in the following section.
.. index:: voting systems
Voting systems
--------------
In this section, we describe a number of voting systems in current use. Of these, both the author and :ref:`Renton (2005b) <renton1>`\ [#fn34]_ recommend IRV and STV as the most preferable.
.. index:: elections; instant runoff voting, elections; preferential voting, elections; majority-preferential voting, elections; alternative vote, elections; ranked choice voting
Instant runoff (preferential) voting
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
*Instant runoff voting (IRV)* is a voting system for a single winner. It is also known as *preferential voting* (though there are other preference-based voting systems), *majority-preferential voting*, the *alternative vote (AV)* or, particularly in America, *ranked choice voting (RCV)*. IRV is the method used to elect members of the Australian House of Representatives.
In IRV, a voter places the number ‘1’ next to their most-preferred candidate, a ‘2’ next to their 2nd preference, and so on until they have numbered as many candidates as they wish.
To count the votes, the first-preference votes are counted initially. If any candidate has a majority (>50%) of the votes, they are declared elected. Otherwise, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and each of their votes transferred to its next available preference. The process is repeated until one candidate has a majority.
IRV ensures that the winning candidate is supported by a majority of the votes. It also means that voters are able to express their genuine preference for an unpopular candidate, while still being able to express further preferences between the other candidates.
.. index:: elections; single transferable vote, elections; quota-preferential voting, elections; proportional representation through the single transferable vote
Single transferable vote
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The *single transferable vote (STV)* is an extension of IRV to multiple-winner elections. It is also known as *quota-preferential voting*, or *proportional representation through the single transferable vote (PR-STV)*. STV is the method used to elect members of the Australian Senate.
.. index:: elections; proportional representation
A description of STV is beyond the scope of this book, but at a high level, it involves also transferring some votes from elected candidates, in order to achieve *proportional representation*.
Proportional representation means that the composition of the winners is roughly proportional to the composition of the votes. If *x*\ % of the votes prefer one faction over the others, then roughly *x*\ % of the winners should be from that faction.\ [#fn39]_ If *x*\ % of the votes prefer the women over the men, then roughly *x*\ % of the winners should be women. The beauty of the STV algorithm ensures this is true for any feature the voters consider important.
Common rules for STV elections to be counted by hand are the `Proportional Representation Society of Australia (PRSA)'s 1977 rules <https://www.prsa.org.au/rule1977.htm>`_ and the `Electoral Reform Society (UK)'s 1997 rules <https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/latest-news-and-research/publications/how-to-conduct-an-election-by-the-single-transferable-vote-3rd-edition/>`_.
In STV elections to be counted by computer, the author and the PRSA's Victoria–Tasmania branch endorse the *Meek method*.\ [#fn21]_:superscript:`,`\ [#fn22]_
More details on the single transferable vote are available from the `PRSA <https://prsa.org.au>`_ and the `Electoral Reform Society <https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk>`_ (UK).
FPTP, cumulative voting, etc.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Despite the clear advantages of IRV and STV, *first past the post* and related systems remain common methods of election used in organisations.
.. index:: elections; first past the post
In *first past the post (FPTP/FPP, plurality voting)*, each voter is able to vote for 1 candidate, and the candidate with the most votes (regardless of how many that is) is declared elected.
.. index:: elections; multiple non-transferable vote, elections; plurality-at-large, elections; block voting
There are a number of ways of extending FPTP to multiple-winner elections. In the *multiple non-transferable vote (MNTV, plurality-at-large voting, block voting)*, each voter is able to vote for as many candidates as there are vacancies, and the candidates with the most votes are declared elected, up to the number of vacancies.
.. index:: elections; limited voting
In *limited voting*, the process is the same as MNTV, except that each voter is able to vote for fewer candidates than there are vacancies. If each voter is able to vote for only 1 candidate, this is called the *single non-transferable vote (SNTV)*.
.. index:: elections; cumulative voting
*Cumulative voting* is a variation where each voter has a certain number of votes, and is able to cast those votes in any combination for any candidates (i.e. can cast multiple votes for the same candidate). This is commonly seen in the company context, where each voter has one vote per share.
An in-depth discussion of the disadvantages of these systems is beyond the scope of this book, but we note that:
* in single-winner elections, a candidate can be elected even if they would have lost in a head-to-head election against every other candidate\ [#fn32]_
..
.. comment * in multiple-winner elections, a group supported by a majority of votes (no matter how slim the majority) can typically win every single seat, even if voters would have been better represented by a more proportional distribution of the seats\ [#fn33]_
* in multiple-winner elections, these systems do not guarantee proportional representation, even if a proportional distribution of the seats would have better represented the voters\ [#fn33]_
Other systems
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Other voting systems attested to in the authorities consulted include:
* *Borda count*: Voters rank each of the candidates. If there are, say, 5 candidates, the most-preferred candidate receives 5 points, the next 4 points, and so on. All the points are tallied, and the candidate(s) with the most points is elected.\ [#fn35]_
..
* *Coombs' method*: As per IRV, except that, in each stage, if no candidate has a majority, the candidate ranked last by the largest number of voters is eliminated.\ [#fn36]_
..
* *preferential block voting*: Similar to block voting, but the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and further preferences examined, until only as many candidates remain as vacancies to fill.\ [#fn37]_ This was the method used in the Australian Senate from 1919 to 1948, before it was replaced by STV out of a desire for proportional representation.\ [#fn38]_
Again, an in-depth discussion of these systems is beyond the scope of this book. These systems suffer from similar faults to those of the FPTP family, and in some cases other, different, faults. The author again recommends the use of IRV and STV.
.. rubric:: Footnotes
@ -131,7 +288,7 @@ In contrast, the terms ‘carried without dissent’, ‘carried *nem con*’ (*
.. [#fn3] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶14.4; :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶8.2
.. [#fn4] The correct terms on a voice vote are ‘Aye’ and ‘No’. In North America, during a roll call, the terms ‘Yea’ and ‘Nay’ are sometimes used. :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶45:47. The combination of ‘Aye’ with ‘Nay’ is not attested to anywhere internationally.
.. [#fn5] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶8.8
.. [#fn6] :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶45:47–54. This procedure is not attested to in any Australian authority (but has been experienced by the author), and is presented here for completeness.
.. [#fn6] :ref:`Robert et al. 2020 <ronr>`, ¶¶45:47–54. The roll call is not attested to in any Australian authority consulted, but has been experienced by the author and is presented here for completeness.
.. [#fn7] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶14.6
.. [#fn12] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶15.3; *Holmes v Keyes* [1958] Ch 570
.. [#fn13] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶15.3; *Anthony v Seger* (1789) 1 Hag Con 13
@ -143,3 +300,25 @@ In contrast, the terms ‘carried without dissent’, ‘carried *nem con*’ (*
.. [#fn9] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶¶14.8–9; :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶8.13
.. [#fn10] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`
.. [#fn11] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶11.7
.. _renton1:
.. [#fn20] Renton NE. *Guide for meetings and organisations*. 8th ed. Vol. 1, ‘Guide for voluntary associations’. Sydney: Thomson; 2005b. ¶11.27
.. [#fn23] :ref:`Renton 2005 <renton>`, ¶2.78; :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4
.. [#fn24] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4; *R v Owens* (1850) 28 LJQB 316; *Fanagan v Kernan* (1881) 8 LR Ir 44; *National Australia Bank Ltd v Market Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq)* (2001) 161 FLR 1
.. [#fn25] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.3
.. [#fn26] :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4
.. [#fn27] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.8; :ref:`Lang 2015 <horsley>`, ¶6.4; *National Australia Bank Ltd v Market Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq)* (2001) 161 FLR 1
.. [#fn29] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.4
.. [#fn30] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.14
.. [#fn28] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.10
.. [#fn31] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.15
.. [#fn34] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶11.73
.. [#fn39] More specifically, STV satisfies the *Droop proportionality criterion*: If there are *V* votes and *S* seats, let the *Droop quota* be *V*/(*S*\ +1). If *k* Droop quotas worth of votes prefer one group of candidates over the others, that group must win at least *k* seats. Woodall DR. ‘Properties of preferential election rules’. *Voting Matters*. 1994 Dec; (3): 8–15. http://www.votingmatters.org.uk/ISSUE3/P5.HTM
.. [#fn21] Hill ID, Wichmann BA, Woodall DR. ‘Algorithm 123: single transferable vote by Meek's method’. *The Computer Journal*. 1987 Jun; **30**: 277–281. https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.NSF/Files/meekm/%24file/meekm.pdf
.. [#fn22] *Proportional Representation Society of Australia*. Canberra: Proportional Representation Society of Australia; 2020 [cited 2021 Feb 11]. ‘Meek system of single transferable vote (STV) counting’. https://www.prsa.org.au/meek_stv.htm
.. [#fn32] More technically, we say that first past the post fails the *Condorcet loser criterion*.
.. [#fn33] Cumulative voting can conditionally provide proportionality *if* the minority allocates their votes optimally, whereas this is cleanly and automatically handled in STV.
.. [#fn35] :ref:`Renton 2005b <renton1>`, ¶¶11.60–63; :ref:`Citrine 1982 <citrine>`, p. 61, which confusingly refers to it as the ‘preferential vote’ system.
.. [#fn36] :ref:`Citrine 1982 <citrine>`, pp. 58–59, referred to in a stepwise process, using show-of-hands, as the ‘exhaustive vote’
.. [#fn37] :ref:`Citrine 1982 <citrine>`, pp. 58–59, described as a variant of the ‘exhaustive vote’
.. [#fn38] Farrell DM, McAllister I. ‘1902 and the origins of preferential electoral systems in Australia’. *Australian Journal of Politics and History*. 2005; **51**\ (2): 155–167. doi: `10.1111/j.1467-8497.2005.00368.x <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2005.00368.x>`_