Before you adopt Robert's Rules of Order, it's important to know why Australians may actually be better served by something else entirely?

Robert’s Rules of Order is one of the most frequently cited and least understood procedural frameworks you’ll encounter — particularly in Australian meeting rooms.

Here’s the thing about Robert’s Rules: they are a fine, comprehensive procedural system. 816  pages of minute detail, covering virtually every procedural situation a meeting could encounter. In the United States, where they were developed by Brigadier General Henry Martyn Robert in 1876, they serve as the default procedural authority for thousands of organisations.

But if you’re in Australia — particularly if you’re running a community organisation, a club, a not-for-profit, or a local government body — citing Robert’s Rules as your procedural authority is a mistake.

Why Robert’s Rules Don’t Translate to Australia

The rules of order that govern Australian meetings have a different heritage entirely. Our procedural traditions derive from Westminster parliamentary practice, carried through British common law and developed into the specific requirements of Australian legislation.

The terminology is different. The procedures for handling motions, amendments, points of order, and voting are different. The default rules that apply when your constitution is silent on a procedural question are different.

When an Australian organisation tells me they follow Robert’s Rules, what I usually find is that they’re actually following a vague impression of what procedural rules should look like — citing Robert’s Rules as an authority without actually knowing what Robert’s Rules say or whether those rules are appropriate for their context.

What Australians Should Use Instead

For most Australian voluntary organisations, the appropriate procedural framework comes from two sources: their own constitution or rules, and when those are silent, the common law principles that have developed through Australian parliamentary practice and court decisions.

For local government bodies in Western Australia (and other states have equivalent legislation), the Local Government Act and associated regulations specify meeting procedures explicitly. Those requirements take precedence over any other procedural system — including Robert’s Rules, which simply don’t apply.

For incorporated associations, the Associations Incorporation Act in each state typically specifies minimum requirements for meetings and decision-making. Again, these take precedence.

The practical reference material I recommend for Australian community organisations is the books that are written in Australia for Australian meeting procedures.

The Basics That Apply Everywhere

While the specific rules vary by jurisdiction and organisation type, certain fundamental principles of good meeting procedure apply universally. Motions require a proposer and a seconder. Decisions are made by the required majority. The chair has an obligation to ensure all voices are heard and to remain impartial. Members have the right to be heard, to vote, and to understand the procedural basis for decisions being made.

These principles transcend any specific procedural system. They represent the bedrock of democratic decision-making in any group context.

My Practical Recommendation

Know your own rules. Read your constitution. Understand the legislation that applies to your organisation type and jurisdiction. When those documents are silent on a procedural question, seek advice from someone with genuine expertise in Australian meeting procedure — not someone who’s read a lot of Robert’s Rules.

The authority that matters is the one that actually applies to you.

If you need help. Reach out to me – I’v authored 4 books on meeting procedure.