tion is embraced in Resolution No. 9 with
one slight amendment, which is that the
requirements of Rule 27 [28] under which
a hearing is guaranteed shall not be ap-
plicable with respect to delegate proposals
introduced after October 27. Originally as
introduced the cut-off date suggested on
the right of hearing was October 23, but
there was considerable sentiment in the
committee that this was cutting it off a
little too soon and the date chosen by the
committee was October 27.
Turning now to Resolution No. 11—
which would require that all committees
disposing of delegate proposals give a
written memorandum indicating the rea-
sons for the disposition of the proposal and
that that memorandum would be filed with
the Clerk—the Committee is not unsympa-
thetic to the idea that each delegate should
know what disposition is made of his pro-
posal by a committee. We explained to the
sponsor of Resolution No. 1I the practice
that is being observed—and hopefully will
continue to be observed—by the committees
in their report. They will try to mention
either by way of favorable report or un-
favorable report or with the notation or
observation that these numbered proposals
have been considered to the maximum ex-
tent possible. There will be some proposals,
however, that probably will not be noted
formally in a report. The committee chair-
men have indicated, a number of them,
that it is their intention to call the sponsor
of such proposal and to advise him the
committee is not going to take further ac-
tion under the rules and to afford him this
courtesy.
I think at this point in time it might be
well to just review briefly the protections
the delegate has under the rules. A dele-
gate has the right to submit a proposal.
Up to October 27, he has a right to have a
hearing on it if he wants it. However, there
is nothing in the rules that gives him the
right to have a written rejection of his
proposal or indeed to have the committee
take any particular action on it.
However, if a committee attempts to
bottle up a proposal, a delegate has the
right under Rule 30 [32] to one day's no-
tice and if he can convince a majority of
his colleagues to agree with him, to flush
the proposal out.
Finally he has the right, if his proposal
is still in committee when the committee's
report comes out, to have an amendment
prepared, have it distributed to the dele-
gates, and have it debated up and down on
the floor in the Committee of the Whole. |
We think that the rights provided by the
rules are about as far as the Convention
should be asked to go in guaranteeing a
debate the right to have his colleagues
know about his proposal and to have a vote
upon it if he insists upon it at the proper
time.
We think to require the committee to
grind out memoranda in each case where
the total proposals have already reached
or is approaching 400 and may exceed or
approach 800 would be very unreasonable
and for that reason we recommend that
Resolution No. 1I not be adopted although
we have indicated our general sympathy
that the procedures be administered fairly
so that an individual delegate learns at
some time whether the committee intends
to act favorably or unfavorably or to con-
sider his proposal at all.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any
questions of the chairman for the purposes
of clarification? Delegate Boileau.
DELEGATE BOILEAU: Mr. President,
I believe there is one other alternative a
person would have which would be to con-
vince twenty per cent of the committee to
provide a minority report and also result-
ing in the minority report coming on the
floor of the Committee of the Whole.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: That is right.
You are absolutely correct. That is another
protection.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further ques-
tions of the chairman of the committee?
First we will take up Resolution No. 9. As
the Chair understands, Delegate Scanlan
moves the amendment of Resolution No. 9,
as indicated in the committee report.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: That is cor-
rect, substituting date of October 27 for
the original date of October 23 in that
resolution.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there a second
to the motion to amend?
(The motion was duly seconded.)
THE PRESIDENT: The question arises
on the amendment to Resolution No. 9 to
read as follows. Resolved that Rule 27,
Rules of the Convention, be amended by
inserting at the end, therefore, a new sent-
ence reading as follows: "The requirements
imposed by this rule shall not be applicable
with respect to delegate proposals intro-
duced after October 27, 1967." Any dis-
cussion on the motion to amend?
(There was no response.) |
