"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Thursday, 13 February 2014

The Point is to mintain order

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Rules have a purpose":

The rules do get confusing. I had gotten the impression that when you made a point of order, the rest of Council got to vote. I didn't realize that the
Chair could dismiss it.

****************

The situation was  not that straightforward. 

The normal process is for the presiding member to maintain order. 

A Councillor   recognisedy the chair ,addresses  his/her remarks to the chair. 

To maintain order,  the chair calls a member to order if comments are out of order. 

If members know and respect the rules, there should be no need for the chair to call a member to order.

The Mayor is normally the presiding member. 

If the Mayor decides to participate in debate, the gavel is handed over to the deputy-mayor.  who then becomes the presiding member.

On this occasion , there was no question on the table.

The delegate's comment  had been  disallowed. His microphone was shut off.

Later in the meeting, the Mayor decided to  re-introduce the matter   to repudiate the
comment.

My point of order  was against the Mayor's re-introduction of  comment that was disallowed ,so that he could  issue a rebuttal.

There is no provision in the rules for doing that.

But  the Mayor dismissed  the point anyway and claimed authority

His rebuttal could have  triggered  a rebuttal of  the rebuttal.

Thereby creating disorder  out of order.

I chaired the previous  meeting  of Council in Committee.

Two delegations were on hand to present on the Hillary-McIntyre real estate scheme.

Extended time  was  allowed.

Lots of opportunity for political posturing , loss of control and ensuing mayhem.

I did what I perceived was  necessary to maintain control of the meeting.

No challenges  emanated from Council.

Next morning an e-mail was received , circulated to all Councillors on a first name basis, other than myself.

The writer observed I was rude, crass,  and hostile to the delegate . My conduct was unacceptable  and the writer was embarrassed to be in the Council Chamber.

I offered his comments wider circulation with name attached.

He didn't want that.

Said his comments were respectful and intended to be confidential.



10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I would really like to have read that letter. And known who wrote it.

Anonymous said...

Would that be the GC that went so smoothly that everything was finished & people got to go home early ? I'm pretty sure you didn't even participate because you were chairing the meeting.

Anonymous said...

The Liberal did not do too well in the by-elections. Does that mean we are looking at a spring election ?

Anonymous said...

Our Auroran this week had a whole section or 2 on advertising. We don't get the Banner but I would suspect it has become smaller. As Martha would say,
' And that's a good thing ".

Anonymous said...


Enough of rules already.

Let us have a post with some raw meat on the bone.

Anonymous said...


In honour of Valentine's Day can we have a love story?

Anonymous said...

The HAC would appear to have bitten off more than they can chew again. I won't mention where I acquired that info.

Anonymous said...

I really hope you had a good day off without us & without bronchitis.

Anonymous said...

To 13:44 I think that is one point Mr.Heard was trying to make.

Anonymous said...

23:08
Fortunately there are other voices joining his chorus. Check out c.w.