The selection of speakers at #lab18 is somewhat opaque. Basically the chair points at people. In previous years delegates have tried to attract attention by standing and waving distinctive items such as an inflatable dragon and in one case a baby. This year such behavior was prohibited but the view from the platform is not good. Many people wanted to speak yesterday and the lack of transparency began to frustrate delegates and a number of spurious points of order were raised.
Points of order must be taken immediately, unless a count is in progress it seems.
No one has a right to either speak or expect to speak. To use a point of order to jump the queue is disrespectful of everyone else in the room. Points of order should be about the rules, and should be scarce. They can be timed as well; some do not need to be moved in the middle of debates. However as people get frustrated they will look at means of jumping the queue. Points of Order are one way of doing this and moving reference back on the NPF report is another such trick although you only get a minute.
Some delegates seem to think that there’s a technology solution. How sweet!
If elected to return, I shall be bringing my keffiyeh as selected speakers are usually identified by an item of clothing; it seems blue hoodies are not distinctive enough.
How apposite in timing. Greene & Sajuria publish a blog article on the LSE Blog Site with a statistical treatment on who gets called to speak. They focus on the brexit debate, and I am unclear if they stopped at lunch time or when the field work/survey’s were conducted.
Pingback:More on Points of Order – davelevy.info