Sense of the Cosă: Rules of Procedure for In-Person Events

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

WHEREAS the Senäts has its own standing orders, and

WHEREAS the Cosă also needs them in the events of Living Cosăs and their informal counterparts, and

WHEREAS there are already draft rules informally adopted during the last informal sessions, and

WHEREAS it would be a good idea to add them to the books, even if non-binding then at least for continuity's sake, and

THEREFORE be it resolved that the Cosă wishes to adopt the following rules of procedure for Living Cosăs and Informal Sessions:

1. On the issue of the presiding officer.
   a. The presiding officer is the Túischac'h. The Mençei acts as their deputy, e.g. when the Túischac'h is absent, speaking on a bill or making a Terpelaziun.
   b. Further deputies may be appointed for the duration of both the Túischac'h and Mençei's absence, speaking on a bill or Terpelaziun whenever necessary.
   c. The presiding officer shall enforce proper decorum during the proceedings.
   
2. On the issue of agenda.
   a. The agenda by default consists of Terpelaziuns, bill debates, and voting, in that order.
   b. Members may move to have other items added to the agenda at an appropriate time. Such items are to be added if this motion is micked by another member and passes a majority vote.
   c. If there are no more items on the agenda, and no member wishes to add another item, the session is to be adjourned by the presiding officer.
   
3. On the issue of Terpelaziuns.
   a. Terpelaziuns are addressed to the presiding officer and to be answered by a present Government minister of the questioner's choosing.
   b. The Tanaischteu has the first opportunity to make a Terpelaziun. The Tanaischteu may appoint a deputy to make use of this first opportunity in their absence ahead of time.
   c. The questioned minister must make an honest attempt to answer the Terpelaziun truthfully and completely, as far as the circumstances allow. Exceptions to this follow from existing Law.
   d. The questioner may ask one follow-up question.
   
4. On the issue of debates on bills.
   a. Bills are debated on in order of the Clark, followed by individual bills in the Hopper as moved by the main sponsor and micked by another member. In a Living Cosă, only Clarked bills may be debated.
   b. The bill's main sponsor has the first opportunity to speak. If the bill's main sponsor is absent, a co-sponsor may speak first. After that, members from Government and Opposition parties may speak alternatingly if possible.
   c. Members may signal to the presiding officer that they wish to ask a question or make a brief statement during a speaker's turn. The speaker may then choose whether or not to give way.
   d. Bills may not be amended, tabled, referred to committee or indefinitely postponed.
   e. Debate on a bill ends when either no more members either wish or are eligible to speak.
   
5. On the issue of Points of Order.
   a. At any time, members may raise a Point of Order by raising both hands. Points of Order have precedence over the regular agenda and must be resolved immediately, and may interrupt a member on the floor in the process.
   b. Points of Order may be raised for the following reasons:
      i. Appeal. This must be raised immediately after a decision by the presiding officer. It takes precedence over all other motions and must be micked by another member to be considered. In the event of an appeal, the decision in question may be overturned by majority vote. If the vote is tied, the decision stands.
      ii. Breach of rules. This is to draw attention to a breach of rules, improper procedure, breaching of established practices, and so on.
      iii. Recess. Recess of no more than 30 minutes is taken if this motion is micked by another member and passed a majority vote.
      iv. Closure of debate. The debate is closed if this motion is micked by another member and passes a majority vote.
      v. Limiting of debate. The debate is limited to a certain amount of additional time or number of additional speakers if this motion is micked by another member and passes a majority vote.
      vi. Personal privilege. This is to address issues pertaining to the comfort of the meeting, such as volume, muting, connection quality, or so on. Members may also use it to address the accuracy of published reports or the accuracy of a member's conduct.
   
6. On the issue of voting.
   a. Clarked bills are voted on by each House separately, according to Law.
   b. Procedural motions are voted on by both Houses together. Members of the Cosă each have as many votes as they have seats assigned to them. Senators each have 25 votes.
   c. A "majority vote" is successful if there are more votes in favour than against.
   d. A "vote by unanimous consent" is successful automatically unless at least one member audibly objects, at which point a majority vote is conducted instead. It can be requested by any member instead of a majority vote on matters that are of minor importance or for which opposition is not expected.

Uréu q'estadra så,
Marcel Tafial (MC-URL)

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Usually, one of the first things a newly elected Bundestag (= German parliament) does is vote to adopt rules of procedure, and they usually agree to adopt the same ones that the previous Bundestag, maybe with small changes. I would like to establish this practice in Talossa as well, even if because of the Clark system the adopted rules would only ever enter into force from the 2nd Clark onwards and not cover the State Opening... maybe we can fix this at some point in the future.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Moinul Moin As the likely incoming Speaker what are your thoughts on the outgoing Speaker's proposal? Seems like it might be good to know this.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Moinul Moin As the likely incoming Speaker what are your thoughts on the outgoing Speaker's proposal? Seems like it might be good to know this.

@Moinul Moin This was a genuine question not intended to put you on the spot. You've been nominated for the position of Speaker and it would be good to get your thoughts on the outgoing Speaker's proposal.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

These rules were in use during the last two Informal Sessions so I would hope they are uncontroversial. If there are any objections to them not just from S:reu Moin but from other Members of the Cosă, I'd be happy to hear them.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

These rules were in use during the last two Informal Sessions so I would hope they are uncontroversial. If there are any objections to them not just from S:reu Moin but from other Members of the Cosă, I'd be happy to hear them.

To be clear, I too would welcome any comment from others but most especially your successor. They don't appear problematic to me but I won't be enforcing them during informal sessions. If Crement were the likely successor he would be getting the same question.

[Sir Lüc]

Various random minor/major points and questions.

1) If this is intended to be binding (rules generally are understood to be, I think), then calling this Sense of the Cosă would be misleading. I think "Resolution" rather than "Sense" would be more accurate, because it would be binding while not seeking to make or repeal legislation.

2) But also, if this is intended to be binding, it includes some provisions that bind the Senäts without its consent. It might not be an issue - I think the Senäts could just pass a RS to add a provision to their own rules, stating they concur with the Cosă rules in the event of a Joint Sitting - but it's not something that should be taken for granted.

3) In 5b., you list four permissible motions (i. and iii.-v.), but these aren't points of order, nor is it normally a thing to "raise a point of order to make a motion". Maybe the hand sign could be modified to mean the MZ is seeking immediate recognition, rather than to raise a point of order, and the MZ could then clarify which one he intends to offer after the chair has recognised them.

4) Additionally, if 5b. intends to list all permissible motions, I think it would be good to have a motion to adjourn listed in there. Partly because I like the British way of using it as a way to have a short closing debate, but also simply because it seems wise to allow someone to move to adjourn rather than having the chair awkwardly shut things down.

5) And on the topic of "allowing someone to move", it would be nice if MZs agreed, even pretty informally, to have someone act as a sort of floor leader - again, to spare the chair the awkwardness of stuff like "can we pretend the Mençei is subbing in for five seconds while I move that we take a 5 minutes recess because someone is late and nobody else will".

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

[...]

1/2) As I understand it, the Lexhatx doesn't allow the Cosă to set its own rules like it does the Senäts (Lexh.H.3.1), so these rules would not be strictly binding. I hesitate to add these rules to the Lexhatx directly because internal processes really shouldn't be a matter of national legislation in the first place. Concerning Senäts participation, judging from how Living Cosăs are described in the Lexhatx, it is my understanding that they are run by and for the Cosă primarily, and that Senators are merely invited to participate, rather than ordinary members. In light of this, the rights reserved in these rules of procedure are privileges extended to the Upper House, more than anything -- though of course I would certainly hope that the Mençei doesn't mind being in charge when they are present, or that Senators wouldn't mind having a say in procedural motions, etc.

3/4) To the surprise of perhaps no one, these rules I worked out together with AD last term are heavily based on how associations in Germany usually govern themselves, and under this framework, all the points I mentioned are in fact points of order. The idea is that an agenda is set beforehand, and everything that interrupts or distracts from the agenda is a point of order, and the chair adjourns the session once the agenda has run its course. My choice of inspiration doesn't imply that German associations have a better internal structure than the House of Commons, it was moreso a framework that was already familiar to me and easy to adapt to our circumstances here, and I wouldn't mind changing them in the direction of the Commons if there's enthusiasm for it.

5) That would be nice, but you can't really force MCs to be more proactive than they have to be. That's something I've been struggling with during my two terms as Túischac'h at all times.