RULES OF DEBATE.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VII, Issue 2030, 17 August 1920, Page 2

RULES OF DEBATE.

A CITY COUNCIL PUZZLE. The Christchurch City Council got itself into an extraordinary tangle last night over a question of procedure, tiie result being a prolonged debate, in which views on the merits of the question at issue and on the interpretation of the rules governing meetings followed one another in happy confusion. The trouble arose over a motion jby Councillor H. Hunter, urging the Gove'iiment, while the Christchurch. Tramways Bill was before the House, to make the franchise for the Tramway Board's elections the same as that for the election of members of city and borough councils. Cr J. A. Fleshcr said that he would second the motion provided an addition were made that persons claiming a residential qualification must reside in the particular district concerned. Cr> Hunter agreed to this".

After Cr H. T. A™ s trong had spoken against the motion, as altered, Cr Hunter said that he would like Cr Flesher's suggestion to be embodied in a separate motion.

"In that case I withdraw from seconding the motion,'' said Cr Flesher. It was pointed out that Cr Hunter could not delete the clause suggested by Cr Flesher, he having previously accepted it. Cr E. E. Langley therefore moved Cr Hunter's original motion by way of amendment.

Cr Hunter raised a point of order. The council had not consented to the motion being amended. The council, by nine votes to five, gave the necessary permission, although Cr Hunter voted against it. Then, after a long discussion, it was ruled that Cr Hunter need not accept the proviso made by Cr Flesher, and Cr Langley dropped his amendment. Cr Flesher then moved his suggestion by way of an amendment. The amendment was lost by 10 votes to seven, and the motion was carried.