BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY STYLE DEBATE

British Parliamentary Style Debate is a common form of academic debate. It has gained support in the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, Europe, Africa, Philippines and United States. Speeches are usually between five and seven minutes in duration.

Terminology

• Because of the style's origins in British parliamentary procedure, the two sides are called the Government (more commonly called "Proposition“ in the United Kingdom) and Opposition.

The Speakers are Similarly Titled:• Opening Government (First Faction)

• Prime Minister• Deputy Prime Minister

• Opening Opposition (Second Faction)• Leader of the Opposition• Deputy Leader of the Opposition

• Closing Government (Third Faction)• Member of the Government • Government Whip

• Closing Opposition (Fourth Faction)• Member of the Opposition• Opposition Whip

Speakers alternate between the two sides and the order of the debate is therefore:• Prime Minister• Leader of the Opposition• Deputy Prime Minister• Deputy Leader of the Opposition• Member for the Government• Member for the Opposition• Government Whip• Opposition Whip

Points of Information

• The style demands that all speakers offers POINTS OF INFORMATION (POIs) to their opposition. POIs are important in British Parliamentary Style, as it allows the first two factions to maintain their relevance during the course of the debate, and the last two factions to introduce their arguments early in the debate. The first and the last minute of each speech is considered “protected time”, during which no points of information may be offered.

SPEAKER ROLES

•Defining• The first speakers define for their sides and delivers

arguments for their teams. They also point to (“flag”) the points their partner will deliver. The roles of the first speakers differ somewhat so they shall be dealt with in turn.

• First Proposition• The first proposition team speaker (the Prime Minister)

has a particular job to do: he defines the debate. He sets out what the “line” of the proposition in the debate will be. Whilst in doing so, there is no obligation to propose a policy by which that “line” would be implemented.

• First Opposition• The first opposition speaker sets out the opposition to the

proposal. A frequent question is, should I challenge the proposition’s definition?

• Only the first speaker of the first opposition team is allowed to challenge the motion. If they do not, the rest of the opposition bench is bound by that decision.

Seconding

• Speakers in the second position on the table will have (should have) been allotted points by the first speaker. These points must be delivered: it is a serious teamwork flaw if a point to come is promised by one member of the team and not delivered by the other.

Extending

• Speakers in the third position on the table have an interesting job. In essence, their task is to show what their team has to offer that is new.

• 3rd speaker approaches can take two forms:• New arguments/examples• New analysis of arguments and examples that have

already been delivered

Summating

• Last speakers give a different kind of speech. Their job is to offer a summation of the debate.

SUMMARY of ROLES

• First Speaker, First Proposition Team (1st Prop/Prime Minister)

• Defines the grounds of the debate• Delivers own substantive material• Flags the arguments to be delivered by his partner

• First Speaker, First Opposition Team (1st Opp/Leader of the Opposition)

• Defines the opposition’s grounds• Rebuts 1st Prop• Delivers own substantive material• Flags the arguments to be delivered by his partner

• Doesn’t challenge the definition if he’s got his head screwed on

• Second Speaker, First Proposition Team (2nd Prop/Deputy Prime Minister)

• Rebuts 1st Opp• Delivers own substantive material, using the labels his partner gave for it, and makes reference back to partner’s material

• Second Speaker, First Opposition Team (2nd Opp/Deputy Leader of the Opposition)

• Rebuts the arguments of the 1st Prop team, with particular responsibility for rebutting 2nd Prop.

• Delivers own substantive material, using the labels his partner gave for it, and makes reference back to partner’s material.

• First Speaker, Second Proposition Team (3rd Prop/Member of Government)

• Delivers own substantive material• Does not have to say the word ‘extension’• Rebuts the arguments of the speakers before him, with

particular responsibility to rebut 2nd Opp

• First Speaker, Second Opposition Team (3rd Opp/Member of the Opposition)

• Rebuts the arguments of the speakers before him, with particular responsibility to deal with the extension from 3rd Prop.

• Delivers own substantive material• May deliver an ‘extension’

• Second Speaker, Second Proposition Team (4th Prop/Government Whip)

• Summates for his side• Shouldn’t offer new material (subject to discussion above)

• Second Speaker, Second Opposition Team (4th Opp/Opposition Whip)

• Summates for his side.• Definitely, definitely offers no new material.

To win a debate, you must do two things:

•1. Give good reasons why your side of the topic is true, and

•2. Show why your opposition’s reasons are wrong (rebuttal).

To prepare a case, you really need to do three things:• 1. You need to decide what the words of the topic mean

for the purposes of this debate. This is known as your ‘definition’.

• 2. You need to think of some reasons why your side of the topic is true. These reasons are known as your ‘arguments’. As debaters, we try to join our arguments together into a single ‘case approach’.

• 3. You then need to divide your arguments between your first and second speakers, so that each speaker knows what he or she has to present. This process is known as the ‘split’.

FINDING THE ISSUE- where there is a clear issue, debate that issue!

- find the issue that is most obvious, most relevant, or most debatable.

•“THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BAN SMOKING”.

THE DEFINITIONWHAT IS THE DEFINITION?what they think the topic means for the purposes of the debate.

• The proposition team must present a definition of the topic; a clear statement of what the team understands the topic to mean.

How To Define A Topic

• Define terms in the topic, not every single word.

• Do not define metaphorical terms literally.

• Do not make definitions too complicated.

• Be prepared to give examples to explain your definition.

THE ‘THEME’ OR ‘ CASELINE’A theme is a single, concise sentence that explains the main idea behind your case.

A theme will explain two things:

•WHY you say the topic is (or is not) true, and

•HOW this comes about.

• “THAT GLOBALISATION IS DOING MORE HARM THAN GOOD”.

• “Globalisation’s emphasis on economic competition advantages a few developed nations at the expense of the majority of the world’s population.”

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY AN ‘ARGUMENT’?a distinct point supporting your side of the topic.

•“THAT SCHOOLS GIVE TOO MUCH HOMEWORK”• ‘Students have so much homework to do that they do not have enough time for sport or other activities.’

LABEL• This is a short and simple statement of what your

argument is about. It need not explain why the argument is true – it is really just a simple ‘reference’ for you, your adjudicator and your opposition to use in referring to this argument.

EXPLANATION• This is the ‘theoretical’ or ‘abstract’ explanation of how

and why your argument is generally true.

EXAMPLES• convincing your audience and adjudicator that your

argument is actually true in the ‘real world’.

TIE-BACK• showing exactly how this argument supports your case

approach. • It is never enough to merely say, “This supports our

theme, which is [X]”, or “This supports our first criterion, which is [Y]”. It is impossible to state exactly how long the tie-back should be.

Universal Responsibilities:

•rebuttal•structure • timing•points of information • teamwork

Model Discussion:• THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THAT Automobiles should be

banned.

BACKGROUND (Why you are writing this Argument)- Do you like the smell of car exhausts? Millions of cars

are polluting our cities. And people are saying we need to solve the problem that cars create.

THESIS (ARGUMENT) - To solve this problem, I believe people should be banned from owning automobiles. I believe this for safety, economic, and environmental reasons.

First Reason- First, Cars are not safe. This weekend five people were

slaughtered on our roads, not to mention countless number of people maimed in nonfatal accidents. People die because they drive.

SECOND REASON AND ALTERNATIVE- Cars should be banned because they cost too much.

Money spent on buying cars would be better spent on schools and hospitals. In addition, buying gas for a car costs a lot of money. Going by bus may not be as convenient, but it is cheap.

THIRD REASON AND ALTERNATIVE- Cars should be banned for environmental reasons. Buses running on COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) give off less pollution. In fact, one CNG bus gives off less pollution than one gas fuelled by car and can carry fifty people.

COUNTERARGUMANT- Some people might argue that people need cars.

Okay, some people might need a car from time to time, but many people could and should walk to road, and many others could and should take the bus.

RESTATEMENT- We do not need cars. It makes sense on safety, environmental and economic grounds to ban cars on our roads.