Objection to the consideration of a question: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:24, 20 February 2016

Latest revision as of 14:01, 19 July 2025

(5 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{AboutShort description|aType of motion in parliamentary procedure|other uses of "Objection"|Objection}}

{{About|a motion in parliamentary procedure|other uses of "Objection"|Objection (disambiguation){{!}}Objection}}

__NOTOC__

In [[parliamentary procedure]], an '''objection to the consideration of a question''' is a [[Motion (parliamentary procedure)|motion]] that is adopted to prevent an original [[main motion]] from coming before the [[Deliberative assembly|assembly]]. This motion is different from an objection to a [[unanimous consent]] request.

==Explanation and Use==

{{infobox motion

| name = Objection to the consideration of a question (RONR)

Line 15 ⟶ 11:

| voterequired = Two-thirds against consideration sustains objection

| reconsidered = Negative vote (sustaining objection) only

}}

}}If a member feels that an original main motion should not be considered, an '''objection to the consideration of a question''' could be made.<ref>{{Cite book|title = [[Robert's Rules of Order]] Newly Revised|last = Robert|first = Henry M.|publisher = Da Capo Press|year = 2011|isbn = 978-0-306-82020-5|___location = Philadelphia, PA|pages = 267|edition = 11th|ref = harv|display-authors = et al.}}</ref> It is often used to prevent an embarrassing question from being introduced and debated in the assembly.

In [[parliamentary procedure]], an '''objection to the consideration of a question''' is a [[Motion (parliamentary procedure)|motion]] that is adopted to prevent an original [[main motion]] from coming before the [[Deliberative assembly|assembly]]. This motion is different from an objection to a [[unanimous consent]] request.

==Explanation and Useuse==

}}If a member feels that an original main motion should not be considered, an '''objection to the consideration of a question''' could be made.<ref>{{Cite book|title = [[Robert's Rules of Order]] Newly Revised|last = Robert|first = Henry M.|publisher = Da Capo Press|year = 2011|isbn = 978-0-306-82020-5|___location = Philadelphia, PA|pages = 267|edition = 11th|ref = harv|display-authors = et al.}}</ref> It is often used to prevent an embarrassing question from being introduced and debated in the assembly.

According to ''[[Robert's Rules of Order]] Newly Revised'' (RONR), this motion is not debatable and requires a two-thirds vote against consideration.<ref name=":0">{{Harvard citation no brackets|Robert|2011|p = 268}}</ref> This objection may be applied only to an original main motion, that is, a motion that brings a new substantive issue before the assembly.<ref name=":0" /> The objection may be raised only before debate has begun on the motion, as the purpose is to completely suppress debate on the motion.<ref name=":0" />

According to ''[[Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure]]'', the purpose of the objection to consideration is to bar from discussion or consideration "any matter that is considered irrelevant, contentious or unprofitable, or that, for any reason, is thought not advisable to discuss."<ref>{{cite parl|title=MAS|edition=2000|year=2000|pages=218}}</ref>

Line 26 ⟶ 27:

== Improper use of tabling a motion ==

Using the rules in RONR, a main motion is improperly killed by [[Table (parliamentary procedure)|tabling]] it. In this case, before debate has begun, it would have been proper to make an objection to the consideration of the question.<ref>{{Cite web|url = http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#13|title = Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 13)|date = 2011|access-date = 2016-02-19|website = The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site|publisher = The Robert's Rules Association|last = Robert III|first = Henry M.|archive-date = 2018-12-24|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20181224205021/http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#13|url-status = dead}}</ref>

== See also ==