About The Rules

Last night's agenda for the  Council-in-Committee meeting was completed and ended exactly at the hour of  adjournment. 
First  in months.
Councillor Ballard was in the chair. There was no rancour. Which is not to say the meeting was entirely smooth..
At one point, I had the floor. Rules state a member who is recognised by the chair and  has the floor "shall speak without interruption".
The rule is essential. Interruptions throw a speaker off stride. 
Councillor Gallo interrupted.  He said' "on a point of order". But it wasn't. 
Councillor Gallo disagreed with the point I was making or how I was making it and simply decided to interrupt.
The problem was exacerbated by the Ruling of the Chair.  
The  non-point of order was upheld.
Well, you know, rules of order are at one and the same time, simple and  complex .
Everyone  is responsible for  respecting and  maintaining  the rules.  Or no-one is bound by them. 
Mutual agreement and unanimous commitment is essential for the Rules to prevail.
They can't be imposed. They must be observed. 
Microphones can be shut off. Voices can rise. Tempers can be explode and objects can fly though the air as if by their own volition.
Mayhem can ensue if  a council fails  to uphold the same set of rules.   
I used to have a clear and distinct impression  of  a particular Councillor zoom in an  upward trajectory  on  a broom , swoosh  three times around the vaulted ceiling like a hot air missile before coming back to rest  at the table.
Whereupon the  presiding member  would direct myself to apologize to the Councillor for her behavior
Like that was going to happen.
But it ended up in a phoney- baloney code of conduct and  hundreds of thousands of  taxpayer dollars  being spent on legal fees 
Cutting-off  a Councillor, with a mission to speak,  in mid-sentence
on a point of order that is no more than  disagreement  with what the councillor is saying, is an act  fraught with potential risk.
I know the rules. I respect them. I believe they are the essence of orderly conduct.
They are not tools  to disrupt a speaker's thought process. To quell a particular perspective. To undermine an argument. To create disorder  where  intended.
Rules abused are impediments to order and good will.