I had a dream last night. I dreamt that we were at our First Oakville Toastmaster meeting. The new business session had just started and as the chair banged the gavel a new member raised their hand.
The chair recognized the new member who rose and said: “I move we end the use of Parliamentary Procedure and Robert’s Rules of Order at First Oakville Club 2245.”
Surprised not to hear an objection to consider the chairperson asked if there was a seconder to the motion. A hand went up.
“Seeing that there is a seconder,” said the chair, “would the member who moved the motion like to speak on it?”
“Yes I would,” said the new member rising to speak. “I find Parliamentary Procedure to be confusing and Robert’s Rules only serves those who know them inside out. This is not why I came to Toastmasters. I want to speak and I want to hear others speak. I don’t enjoy these business meetings and in fact would like to see them ended all together.”
At that instant another member stood and interrupted the speaker by saying: “Madame Chair, I rise to a point of parliamentary inquiry.”
The Chair turned to the first speaker and asked them to please be seated and said to the second speaker: “State your parliamentary inquiry.”
“Thank you Madame Chair. Is the mover of the motion now making a new motion?”
With that the speaker sat down and the Chair addressed the first speaker by asking: “Are you making a new motion?”
Sensing there might be a Parliamentary trap about to be sprung the mover of the motion rose and said “No Madame Chair.”
And with that, the Chair indicated that the mover still had the floor and should continue.
“Well that’s about all I have to say.” said the mover somewhat unsure of what to say now. “I guess I want to conclude by asking for everyone’s support.”
With that the mover sat down.
For a moment there was a silence in the room as if the members didn’t know what to do next. The Chair looked about and asked if there was anyone wishing to speak for or against the motion.
From her place at the lectern, the Chair could see a hand rise up. The chair recognized the member before her indicating an older memeber at the back of the room.
“Thank you Madame Chair. I rise to speak against the motion before us.
“While I appreciate the mover of the motion’s confusion surrounding Parliamentary Procedure and Robert’s Rules, I offer to him that he has already learned how to ask for what it he desires to see happen. Whether he realizes it or not, he has begun to learn the fundamentals of debate.
“Nevertheless, I do sympathize with the member for I do remember when I first joined Toastmasters I too found the business sessions confusing and tedious. I really just wished the executive would meet during executive meetings and leave the rest of us alone. I wanted it that way because that was the way decisions were made in my workplace and it seemed to work out there.
“Anyway, unlike the mover of the motion, I didn’t do anything but suffered for many months during our business sessions. To amuse myself, I often silently practiced my speeches until the break was called.
“As I said, this club has been using Parliamentary Procedure and Robert’s Rules for as long as I can remember. It has been using them for as long as my mentor, who has now past away, could remember. Over those many years I have determined that they have served us well.
“How so, you might ask? Our club over the 50 years of its existence has been blessed with a membership comprised of some of the finest speakers and debaters ever seen in District 60 and dare I say any other Toastmaster district.
“This ability to speak and debate isn’t the natural manner of ordinary people. It is a learned skill and even the most timid and shy among us can learn it. And, over the years I have witnessed this to be true.
“These forceful debaters often came equipped with equally forceful personalities and ways of getting things done that often used the ways of business, that is to say command and control tactics which didn’t serve them here. Some of these people, and I have been accused of being one of them, could quite frankly be grand pains in the butt.”
“Some of us, and I again recognize myself here, were unhappy with some aspects of the program and we wanted someone to fix it. Of course, at the time I didn’t understand that there wasn’t anyone to fix anything. We the members were responsible for making changes.”
At that point another member rose and yelled at the chair: “Madame Chair. Does the member have a point he’s making?”
The Chair indicated that the older member should sit as she turned to the interrupter and said “You are out of order. Sit down.”
The interrupter did not sit but continued his appeal by saying “Oh please Madame Chair, I’ve heard enough. Let’s vote.”
“Sit down,” said the Chair.
“No I want this to end,” said the member.
And with that the Chair turned to the Sergeant-At-Arms and said: “Sergeant-At-Arms. You are to form a committee of a sufficient number of volunteers to assist you in escorting the member, indicating the interrupter, out of the room.”
“I appeal the decision of the chair,” said the interrupter.
“An appeal of the Chair’s decision as been launched,” said the Chair giving the interrupter much more latitude than some would. ”Is there a seconder?”
A hand went up.
“Seeing there is a seconder, those in favour of sustaining the decision of the Chair say ‘aye’. Those opposed say “no’”.
“The ayes have it,” declared the Chair as another member yelled out “division.”
“Division has been called,” said the Chair. The Sergeant-At-Arms will count the vote. All in favour raise their hand. All opposed now raise their hand.”
The Sergeant-At-Arms reported 15 in favour of supporting the chair and 5 against indicating a simple majority win.
“The decision of the Chair stands and the member will cease. I will now ask the speaker to continue,” said the Chair looking somewhat sternly at the offending member who wisely remained in their seat.
“Thank you Madame Chair. The member’s point while lost is still well taken by me. I do go on.
“Here’s my point and to some extent it was well demonstrated here.
“Parliamentary Procedure and even Robert’s Rules of Order can trace their existence back to the earliest days when our historic ancestors gathered together to make decisions.
“But it wasn’t until the year 1215 that a document was written called Magna Carta which is Latin for Great Charter. It was also called Magna Carta Libertatum or the Great Charter of Freedoms and it was forced upon King John following disagreements among Pope Innocent III, John and his barons.
“The Charter came about because the Barons were fed up with paying for the king’s military adventures. They were also unhappy with the king’s unpredictable and capricious ways.
“The Charter, among many other things, required the king to renounce certain rights, respect certain legal procedures and accept that his will could be bound by law. It protected the rights of all citizens whether free or not and was especially clear on a concept called habeas corpus which allowed appeal against unlawful imprisonment – a clause the American government is struggling with today around the detainment of capture terrorists including a teenage Canadian boy they are illegally holding in Guantanamo Bay Cuba.
“Nevertheless the king was reluctant to see his powers reduced so some of his most important barons having had enough entered London on June 10 in force.
“The city showed its support by opening its gates to the assembly and the king was forced to meet with the barons in a meadow outside London at Runnymede where, in exchange for their oaths of fealty, the king signed his name to the formal document and his Great Seal was attached to it.
“Of course, this was not the end of it. As soon as the barons left town King John renounced the Charter and England fell into a period of civil war which did not end until John’s death from dysentery the next year.
“John’s son Henry was quickly crowned Henry III and he quickly reissued Magna Carta. Henry reigned for 57 years, the longest of any monarch.
“The influences of Magna Carta can be found in the laws and constitutions of many countries but none more so than those countries of the Commonwealth and the United States of America.
“So what has all of this to do with us here today? It would seem to me that if we allowed this motion to pass, our ability to control our own destiny would revert back to the days of the King.
“We would be subject and compelled to follow whatever clique had the most members or which ever member held the reigns of power by force of character or even by threat of physicality.
“Our ability to debate each other would be lost. The voice of the minority would not be heard and it must be heard or else we may disenfranchise a member or a group of members and this is not the Toastmaster way.
“Our chairperson would be empowered to make rulings, not decisions, which we would have to live with. And, if we didn’t like the rulings of this day our only recourse would be revolt.
“Sounds far fetched? Not at all. Over the years our members have had issue with our executive in whole and in part. They have been moments in our history when some members have had to be reminded that they do not rule but serve and they serve the will of the assembly which is expressed during our business meetings. We have had individual members who attempted to get their way without seeking consensus. And there have been disputes among individual members. One would expect nothing else from an assembly of strangers which sees an expected turnover of 30 per cent annually.
“There have been some members who, over the years and in their frustration with how things got done, had advocated for a more powerful executive. They wanted an executive which made rules for the good of us all at private meetings held away from the club. In this manner they argued, we could get on with the business of being Toastmasters.
“Well I put it to you that the business of Toastmasters is so much more than merely learning how to get up on our feet and make noise. Here we learn priceless lessons around working together. Of creating consensus. Of making decisions for the good of Toastmasters. And of mentoring those who have yet to understand all that is here for them.
“The three principles of Toastmasters are speaking, listening and leadership and what we do here during our business meeting is of equal importance to all else that follows.”
With that the member sat down. A vote was taken and counted and to everyone’s surprise the motion was lost unanimously.
Had our chair been on top of the conversation it would have been her job to call for order but often chairs have a lot on their mind and may miss a breech of parliamentary procedure. If they do, then it’s up to the rest of us to help the offending member understand the impropriety of their statements.