Can you limit one-sided debate?

Parliamentary Procedure Q&A

Q: When a debate is taking place concerning a seconded motion, is it legal under Robert's Rules of Order to limit debate to the extent that unless there is another person to speak against the motion, others are not permitted to speak for it, or vice versa? I think this would eliminate haranguing over an issue. If no one wants to speak for it, the question is called. I have seen this used in meetings, and would like to use it as well, but I need to know that it is appropriate. - E.G., May. 12, 1999

A: No, it's not appropriate unless the organization has a special rule of order limiting debate in this manner. Every member has a right to speak in debate, regardless of who was lucky enough to have spoken before him, except when restricted by a two-thirds vote (i.e., Previous Question or Limit or Extend the Limits of Debate.) (RONR p. 380, 382.)

As for "harangueing," RONR pp. 382-384 does limit each speech a member may make to ten minutes, and to no more than two speeches per person. Many societies have their own special rule which supercedes this, limiting debate to, for example, three minutes.

I agree that many times "debate" tends to be a lot of "me-too-ing." I believe a skillful presiding officer can artfully and tactfully suggest that the group could move on to other matters, without violating any member's right to debate. That right is paramount, but the desirability of moving along can be persuasive.

HOME QUESTIONS OTHER SITES