Previous page
Table of Contents
|
Previous page
|
Table of Contents
|
Next page
|
In their Notice of 13 May 2002, the Council amended their Notice in Statutes and Ordinances about Discussions and Fly-sheets (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 117). This revised Notice states that remarks which are ruled out of order, or which are otherwise in breach of a procedural ruling by the Vice-Chancellor or other person presiding do not form part of the Discussion and will not be published. At the same time, the Council submitted a Grace to the Regent House (Grace 1 of 15 May 2002) proposing that the regulation about the reporting of Discussions (Regulation 6, Statutes and Ordinances, p. 113) be amended to make clear that remarks may be omitted from the record on this account.
This Grace read:
That the regulations for Discussions be amended as follows:
Regulation 6.
By inserting between the first and second sentences the following:
The Registrary shall not include in the formal record any remarks which are ruled out of order or which are otherwise in breach of a procedural ruling by the Vice-Chancellor or other person presiding.
On 24 May the following members of the Regent House submitted a request for a ballot on this Grace (Reporter, 2001-02, p. 850):
| B. ARGYLE | J. L. DAWSON | DEBORAH FINUCANE | A. KARPAS |
| ANDREW BAINHAM | D. R. DE LACEY | D. W. FLEMING | O. J. PADEL |
| RICHARD BARNES | N. R. M. DE LANGE | ROGER GRIFFIN | JON PEATFIELD |
| D. E. BOWYER | R. J. DOWLING | B. D. JOSEPHSON | M. J. RUTTER |
| M. R. CLARK | D. N. DUMVILLE | GEOFFREY KANTARIS | R. L. TAPP |
| R. M. COLEMAN | G. R. EVANS |
In addition eleven members of the Regent House submitted a proposal for the amendment of the Grace. The proposal also included an amendment to Regulation 5 to strengthen the powers of the person presiding (Reporter, 2001-02, p. 863). The proposed amendment to Grace 1 of 15 May 2002 read as follows:
That the regulations for Discussions be amended as follows:
Regulation 6.
By amending the regulation so as to read:
6. Remarks made at a Discussion shall normally be published in the Reporter, provided that the Registrary, as editor of the Reporter, shall have discretion, subject to the agreement of the author, to omit or amend any remarks which in his or her opinion are likely to be held defamatory. In the event of a disagreement between the Registrary and the author of a speech over any such omissions or amendments, the Registrary shall obtain the agreement of both Proctors or their deputies before making the proposed omissions or amendments to the published report. No remarks which were ruled out of order by the person presiding at a Discussion with the consent of both Proctors or their deputies shall be included in the published report.
And in consequence of this amendment that Regulation 5 for Discussions be additionally amended as follows:
Regulation 5.
By amending the regulation so as to read:
5. The person presiding at a Discussion shall have power to impose a general limit on the length of speeches or to rule out of order particular remarks in a speech on the grounds that they are irrelevant or defamatory or to terminate the discussion of a particular topic, subject in each case to first obtaining the consent of both Proctors. The Proctors or their deputies shall attend all Discussions, provided that the Pro-Proctors nominated by the Colleges shall be qualified to act as deputies for the Proctors.
This amendment was proposed by the following members of the Regent House:
| DAVID J. CHIVERS | M. R. MANNING | OLIVER RACKHAM | M. SPIVACK |
| STEPHEN J. COWLEY | MICHAEL A. MESSAGE | D. L. SMITH | R. J. STIBBS |
| FRANK H. KING | TIMOTHY MILNER | J. R. SPENCER |
The Council have considered the proposed amendment. While they agree that it is appropriate to specify in Regulation 5 the powers of the person presiding at the Discussion, they believe that the proposed amendments to this and to Regulation 6 were not entirely satisfactory. The arrangements set out would be impracticable and would impede the flow of Discussions; the Vice-Chancellor or other person presiding at a Discussion should have reasonable powers with regard to the conduct of the Discussion and should not be subject to rulings by others. By giving new authority to the Proctors, the proposed amendments went beyond the purpose of the original Grace concerning the conduct and recording of Discussions and could not therefore be commended to the Regent House. With regard to Regulation 5, the Council have agreed to submit a further amendment which includes the first part only of that proposed above, so that the regulation reads as follows:
5. The person presiding at a Discussion shall have power to impose a general limit on the length of speeches, to rule out of order particular remarks in a speech on the grounds that they are irrelevant or defamatory, or to terminate the discussion of a particular topic.
Members of the Regent House are now invited to vote on Grace 1 of 15 May 2002 in its original form, the amendments proposed to Regulations 5 and 6, and the Council's alternative amendment to Regulation 5 set out above. In accordance with Regulations 9 and 13 of the regulations for Graces of the Regent House (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 113), the vote will be taken by postal ballot under the Single Transferable Vote regulations.
In connection with this ballot the Registrary will arrange for the printing and circulation of any fly-sheet, signed by ten or more members of the Regent House, which reaches him by 1 p.m. on Thursday, 10 October. Fly-sheets must bear, in addition to the signatures, the names and initials (in block capitals) of the signatories (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 117). Voting papers and fly-sheets will be distributed to all members of the Regent House on or before Monday, 21 October; the last date for the return of voting papers will be Thursday, 31 October.
|
Previous page
|
Table of Contents
|
Next page
|
Cambridge University Reporter, 2 October 2002
Copyright © 2002 The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars
of the University of Cambridge.