Select a Category above or submit a question and I’ll post a response.

In a reply to my post about rescission motions, Jason from Victoria has added some really good comments. Thanks Jason.

Jason says: “in some cases, recission motions are not valid for a period of time after the substantive motion has passed (eg for the rest of the same meeting; for the remainder of the day; etc).
also, in some cases, a recission motion is not in order until a motion to reconsider the substantive motion has been proposed and carried.”

Jason is exactly correct, which highlights the need to know the legislation or constitution or by-laws under which you operate.

Jason does add a particularly interesting aspect – the need for a motion to reconsider before you can even think about putting a rescission motion. In this situation, if your rules dictate it, you would need to move that a particular substantive motion be reconsidered. This is put and debated and voted upon. (Your rules may or may not allow debate on this motion.) If the motion to reconsider is carried, then the substantive motion can be either debated again, voted on again, or a rescission motion can be moved – again, depending on your own rules.

The bottom line is – know your rules for your organisation.

Please Note: The author accepts no responsibility for anything which occurs directly or indirectly as a result of using any of the suggestions or procedures detailed in this blog. All suggestions and procedures are provided in good faith as general guidelines only and should be used in conjunction with relevant legislation, constitutions, rules, laws, by-laws, and with reasonable judgement.

2 thoughts on “Rescinding motions – Some tricky things to know

  1. Stop encouraging him! – This week Jason came home with an original reprint of the Standing Orders of Australia’s Federal Parliament from 1914.

  2. Rescission of motion. A motion was passed in 2005 by a local Council. The Actions/requirments of that motion have been complied with every month re documentation to be supplied to Councillors at meetings. In 2012 the CEO decided,alone, that the documents would not be supplied. During a Council meeting a new Councillor, who was not aware of the motion passed in 2005, moved a motion that the documents be be supplied as he was aware they had been for some time. This was defeated. Does this negate the motion passed in 2005

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *