Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate
[Edit]
Government:
Prime Minister (PM)
• Define context and parameters of debate. For example, in an open motion like "This
House Would Support Musicians", the debate could be contextualized into whether music
should be a commodity for trade, or it should be available gratis (i.e. free music
download and transfer)
• Provide concise background or history leading to the issue
• Give framework of government bench's case. I.e. mechanisms (if any), argumentation
flow (what the government's first argument is and what the Deputy Prime Minister will
talk about)
• Introduce 1st argument
• Assert Government stand
Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)
• Rebut first argument from Leader of Opposition

• Rebut rebuttals to PM's argument
• Introduce 2nd and 3rd argument
• Reassert Government stand and case
Government Whip
• Rebut Deputy Leader of Opposition, and Leader of Opposition

• Rebut rebuttals to DPM and PM arguments
• Provide a deeper level of analysis for previous arguments and rebuttals
• No new arguments, but new angles of arguments should be given
• Brief summary of entire case of Government
[Edit]
Opposition:
Leader of Opposition
• Agree or disagree with context/ parameters of debate (any definitional challenges,
accusations of squirreling, or unfair set up should be made from the LO speech and no
later)
• Rebut Prime Minister's argument
• Give framework for Opposition case (if Opp agrees to problem, then their case should
provide solution, or at least effectively highlight how Government proposal will worsen
the situation)
• Introduce first Opposition argument
• Assert Opposition stand
Deputy Leader of Opposition
• Rebut DPM and PM arguments

• Rebut rebuttals to LO arguments
• Introduce 1st and 2nd (if any) argument
• Reassert Opposition stand and case
Opposition Whip

• Rebut rebuttals to LO & DLO arguments
[Edit]
Reply Speech:
• Can only be done by either 1st or 2nd speaker from each bench
• Provide a biased 'oral adjudication' of why the debate should go to own bench
• Highlight issues you think your side won, carefully tiptoe around issues you think you
lost
• New examples to expand on discussed examples is usually allowed and makes the reply
speech sound fresh as opposed to verbal regurgitation
• Reassert stand
---
Most importantly, try to have fun while you're doing all this. ;)
Strategies & Tips for Limited Preparation Debating
[Edit]
Read Widely
Even just skimming a few international news websites, like BBC news, Al Jazeera or The New
York Times will help keep you abreast of international issues. If you have a computer, set one of
these sites as your homepage so that global issues "sink in" each time you open your browser. A
great weekly read for sheer breadth is the The Economist.
[Edit]
Research Timely Issues

If there is an issue that is dominating the news and you have a debate tournament coming up, you
can be sure that there will be a motion on that topic. Split tasks with your partners and teammates
and create briefs on these issues before the tournament so that everyone can be up to speed. Keep
these briefs throughout the year so that you can update them as events change.
[Edit]
Research Key Countries and Organizations

Some countries are global players and will enter nearly any international debate in which you
find yourself. Being even passingly familiar with the political structures and current situations of
these countries - or groups of countries - can help you win debates. Some good places to start
are: China, the US, Russia, the EU and Japan. International organizations, especially the UN,
feature prominently in many debates as well. Knowing the decision-making machinery of these
organizations, their jurisdiction and their activities will help you immensely. In addition to the
UN, you may want to look into NATO, ASEAN, the WTO and the G8.
[Edit]
Use IDEA's Free Resources

Debatepedia (the wiki you are on right now) is a free resource open to anyone with internet
access. It is a great place to get a sense of an issue and begin constructing arguments. You may
want to dig deeper into important events and controversies, but with thousands of articles,
Debatepedia is a good place to start.
Asian Parliamentary Debate
Teams:
There two opposing teams in an Asians format of debate:
1. Government side- proposes and defends the motion;

2. Opposition side- refute and negates the motion.
Each each side is composed of three members.
The Members of the government side are the following:
1. Prime minister (PM)- opens the debate, defines the motion and advances arguments;
2. Deputy prime Minister(DPM)- refute at first instance the case of the opposition, re-establish
the government's claim, and advances arguments;
3. Government whip(GW)- makes an issue-based rebuttal of the opposition's case and
summarizes the case of the government.
The Members of the Opposition side are the following:
1. Leader of the Opposition(LO)- responds directly to the case of the government by giving a
direct clash, and advances arguments. May challenge the motion if the definition is
challengeable;
2. Deputy Leader of the Opposition(DPL)- refutes the case of the DPM, reestablishes the case of
the opposition, and advances an argument;
3. Opposition Whip (OW)- makes an issues-based rebuttal of the government's and summarizes
the case of the opposition.
Time of Speeches:
Each speaker is allocated seven minutes to deliver their constructive speeches. One speaker from
each side (For the Government:PM/DPM, for Opposition:LO/DLO) is given four minutes to
deliver a reply speech. The speakers will be speaking in the following order:
1. Prime Minister
2. Leader of the opposition
3. Deputy Prime Minister
4. Deputy Leader of the Opposition
5. Government Whip
6. Opposition whip
7. Opposition Reply
8. Government Reply
During the constructive speeches, Point of Information (POI) may be raised by the opposing side
after the first minute up to the sixth minute. POI may be refused or accepted by the speaker.
During reply speeches, no POI may be raised.
Reply Speech:
Reply speech is a comparative analysis of the strength and weaknesses of the case of both sides.
The aim of the speech is to give a bias judgment as to why should the people support the team's
claim. The speech is first delivered by the opposition side and followed by the government side
who will close the debate.
Matter, Manner, Method:
Asian Parliamentary Debate is assessed by an Adjudicator Panel composed of an odd number

according to the following criteria:
1. Matter (40)- substance of the debate, the arguments and evidence presented, and the logical
reasoning and presentation of said arguments.
2. Manner (40)- the style of delivery, the persuasion skills, and the conduct of the debaters.
3. Method (20)- the response to the dynamics of the debate, and the observance of the rules of
debate.
Overview of Asian Parliamentary Debate
In Asian Parliamentary Style, there are 2 teams - Government and Opposition. Each team has 3
members and each team gives 4 speeches. The format is a limited preparation format, meaning
that the topic is announced, depending on the tournament, roughly 30 minutes before the debate.
The 3 members of the Government should defend the motion. The 3 members of the team, each
of which gives a 7 minute speech, are:
• 1) Prime Minister
• 2) Deputy Prime Minister
• 3) Government Whip
One speaker from the Government team - either the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister - is
charged with giving a 4 minute reply speech that clarifies the debate from the Government
perspective without bringing forth new arguments.
The 3 members of the Opposition team should negate the motion and refute arguments brought
forth by the Government. The 3 members of the team, each of which gives a 7 minute speech,
are:
• 1) Leader of Opposition
• 2) Deputy Leader of Opposition
• 3) Opposition Whip
Like the Government team, one speaker from the Opposition team - either the Leader of
Opposition or Deputy Leader of Opposition - is charged with giving a 4 minute reply speech that
clarifies the debate from the Opposition perspective without bringing forth new arguments.
In the 7 minute speeches, the opposing team can stand up and ask for Points of Information
(POI) after the first minute and until the sixth minute. A POI should be a brief question or
comment and not a long-winded monologue or back and forth cross examination session.
A complete list of Debatepedia articles related to this topic can be found at

Category:Asian Parliamentary Debate.
Times and Order of Asian Parliamentary Debate Speeches

• Prime Minister - 7 minutes
• Leader of Opposition - 7 minutes
• Deputy Prime Minister - 7 minutes
• Deputy Leader of Opposition - 7 minutes
• Government Whip - 7 minutes
• Opposition Whip - 7 minutes
• Opposition Reply Speech - 4 minutes
• Government Reply Speech - 4 minutes
Asian Parliamentary
Debate format
sreda, 09 januar 2008
# of people in the debate: 6
# of people in a team: 3
# of teams in the debate: 2
Duration of the speeches: Constructive and whip speeches 7 minutes, replies 4 minutes
Questions format: Points of information
This debate format is mainly used in the Asia (news Sherlock :D) and is also the basics of the
World schools debate format.
The speakers speak in the following order:
Prime minister
Leader of opposition
Deputy prime minister
Deputy leader of opposition
Government whip
Opposition whip
All these speeches are seven minutes long. Prime minister presents the case, Leader of opp
presents its own arguments and rebuttals the gov's, Deputy PM has also his own argument(s) and
makes some rebuttal, of course he/she should not forget that she has to speak about the arguments
of the PM and reafirm them. Deputy leader of opp has the same task, meaning new argument(s),
rebuttal, own previous arguments. The government whip is allowed to present "new matter" but is
advised not to, and the opp whip is not allowed to do that.
Now follow two reply speeches, first the oppositional and then the governmental reply. The
speeches are given by the first or the second speaker from each side. The speeches should focus
on the great ideas, arguments, clashes in the debate and present them.
Parliamentary debate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Parliamentary Debate is an academic debate event. Many university level institutions in

English speaking nations sponsor parliamentary debate teams, but the format is currently
spreading to the high school and poo poo poo levels as well. Despite the name, the Parliamentary
style is not related to debates in governmental parliaments.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 British Parliamentary Debate

• 2 Parliamentary Debate Books
• 3 American Parliamentary
Debate
• 4 World Schools Style
• 5 See also
• 6 External links
[edit] British Parliamentary Debate

Main article: British Parliamentary Style
British Parliamentary Debate is very widespread, and has gained major support in the United
Kingdom, Ireland, Europe, Africa, Philippines and United States. It has also been adopted as the
official style of the World Universities Debating Championship and the European Universities
Debating Championship (at which the speakers are given only fifteen minutes' notice of the
motion). Speeches are usually between five and seven minutes in duration. The debate consists
of four teams of two speakers, sometimes called factions, with two teams on either side of the
case.
Because of the style's origins in British parliamentary procedure, the two sides are called the
Government and Opposition, while the speakers take their titles from those of their parliamentary
equivalents (such as the opening Government speaker, called the Prime Minister). Furthermore,
since this style is based on parliamentary debate, each faction is considered to be one of two
parties in a coalition. They must therefore differentiate themselves from the other team on their
side of the case in order to succeed in their own right.
All speakers are expected to offer Points of Information (POIs) to their opponents. POIs are
particularly important in British Parliamentary style, as it allows the first two teams to maintain
their relevance during the course of the debate, and the last two teams to introduce their
arguments early in the debate. The first and last minute of each speech is considered "protected
time", during which no POI may be offered.
Depending on the country, there are variations in speaking time, speaking order, and the number
of speakers. For example, in New Zealand, both the leader of the Opposition and the Prime
Minister offer a short summary as the last two speakers.
[edit] Parliamentary Debate Books

Robertson, Eric- Strategic Argumentation in Parliamentary Debate (available in hard copy, e-
book and in the Apple Ibookstore) http://parlidebatebook.info (direct purchase) or
http://www.amazon.com/Strategic-Argumentation-Parliamentary-Debate-
Robertson/dp/0557135370
The blog of Eric Robertson is http://ericjamesrobertson.com
Meany, John- fArt, Argument, and Advocacy: Mastering Parliamentary Debate

http://www.amazon.com/Art-Argument-Advocacy-Mastering-
Parliamentary/dp/0970213077/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264153788&sr=1-2
Crossman, Mark- Burden of Proof http://www.amazon.com/Burden-Proof-Introduction-

Argumentation-Parliamentary/dp/0759315841/ref=sr_1_1?
ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264153767&sr=1-1
Meany, John- On that point- An introduction to parliamentary debate

http://www.amazon.com/That-Point-Introduction-Parliamentary-
Debate/dp/0972054111/ref=pd_sim_b_2
[edit] American Parliamentary Debate

American Parliamentary Debate is supported by a number of organizations in the United States
at the tertiary and secondary levels. The National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA), the
American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA), the National Parliamentary Tournament of
Excellence (NPTE), the Lincoln Parliamentary League (LPL), and the National Forensic League
(NFL), all offer collegiate parliamentary debate.
This style consists of two teams, with the following speakers:
1. Government
1. Prime Minister (PM)
2. Member of the Government (MG)
2. Opposition
1. Leader of the Opposition (LO)
2. Member of the Opposition (MO)
American Parliamentary style debating includes an additional speech from the Leader of each
team, in which they are allowed additional time to respond to the opposing team's arguments and
sum up their own case, but may not introduce new arguments. Therefore, the speaking order and
timings of each debate is generally:
1. Prime Minister: 7 minutes

2. Leader of the Opposition: 8 minutes
3. Member of the Government: 8 minutes
4. Member of the Opposition: 8 minutes
5. Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal: 4 minutes
6. Prime Minister Rebuttal: 5 minutes
As with any debating style, the individual timings may vary between organizations.
In most variations on the style, Points of Information may be asked of the speaker during the first
four speeches, except during the first and last minute of each speech (this is known as protected
time). Under California High School Speech Association (CHSSA) rules, Points of Information
are permitted in all six speeches.
Depending on the variation of the style, the opposing team may interrupt the speaker during a
Rebuttal Speech in order to offer one of two kinds of point:
• Points of Order, when the speaker is introducing a new argument during a

rebuttal speech, or grossly mischaracterizing arguments.
• Points of Personal Privilege, when the speaker makes offensive claims or
personal attacks.
The spirit of Parliamentary Debate is debate that can be taken to the streets. This means that it is
easy to understand and educational to all at the same time, no matter the audience member's
expertise of the resolution.
The audience is encouraged to show their fervor during Parliamentary Debate. As in British
Parliament, anyone in the room (excluding the judge) may cheer or hiss - alternatively, knock in
approval or "shame" in disapproval - at any point during a round.
[edit] World Schools Style

Main article: World Schools Style Debating
This is a combination of the British Parliamentary and Australian formats, which results in a
debate comprising eight speeches delivered by two three-member teams (the Proposition and the
Opposition). Each speaker delivers an eight-minute speech - the first two are substansive matter
and the third a rebuttal speech; then both teams deliver a "reply speech" lasting four minutes,
with the last word being reserved for the Proposition. In junior debates, these limits are changed
to about 5 minutes, and in some local competitions, speeches are 7 minutes.
Between the end of the first and the beginning of the last minute of an eight-minute speech, the
opposing party may offer "points of information". The speaker may refuse these, but should take
at least one or two points during his or her speech. No points of order or Privilege are used.
Topics can be supplied long in advance, or may be given 45 minutes or an hour before the debate
begins. There is not much room for re-definition, and squirreling is strictly prohibited. The
World Schools Debating Championships is attended by many countries, and is in this format.
A similar format, with 7 minute speeched and Points-of-Information, is known as the Asian
Parliamentary Format and is used by the United Asian Debating Championships
[edit] See also
• Public debate
• International university debating
o World Universities Debating Championship
o American Parliamentary Debate Association
o Canadian University Society for Intercollegiate Debate
o North American Debating Championship
o North American Public Speaking Championship
o National Parliamentary Debate Association
o National Parliamentary Tournament of Excellence
• International high school debating

o World Schools Debating Championships
o World Individual Debating and Public Speaking Championship
•
o Debate#Australia-Asia debateDebate
• Other
o Spin room
Debat
Dari Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia, ensiklopedia bebas
Belum Diperiksa
Langsung ke: navigasi, cari
Debat adalah kegiatan adu argumentasi antara dua pihak atau lebih, baik secara perorangan
maupun kelompok, dalam mendiskusikan dan memutuskan masalah dan perbedaan. Secara
formal, debat banyak dilakukan dalam institusi legislatif seperti parlemen, terutama di negara-
negara yang menggunakan sistem oposisi. Dalam hal ini, debat dilakukan menuruti aturan-aturan
yang jelas dan hasil dari debat dapat dihasilkan melalui voting atau keputusan juri.
Contoh lain debat yang diselenggarakan secara formal adalah debat antar kandidat legislatif dan
debat antar calon presiden/wakil presiden yang umum dilakukan menjelang pemilihan umum.
Debat kompetitif adalah debat dalam bentuk permainan yang biasa dilakukan di tingkat sekolah
dan universitas. Dalam hal ini, debat dilakukan sebagai pertandingan dengan aturan ("format")
yang jelas dan ketat antara dua pihak yang masing-masing mendukung dan menentang sebuah
pernyataan. Debat disaksikan oleh satu atau beberapa orang juri yang ditunjuk untuk menentukan
pemenang dari sebuah debat. Pemenang dari debat kompetitif adalah tim yang berhasil
menunjukkan pengetahuan dan kemampuan debat yang lebih baik.
Daftar isi
[sembunyikan]
• 1 Debat kompetitif dalam pendidikan

o 1.1 Debat kompetitif di Indonesia
o 1.2 Berbagai gaya debat parlementer
 1.2.1 Australian Parliamentary/Australasian Parliamentary
("Australs")
 1.2.2 Asian Parliamentary ("Asians")
 1.2.3 British Parliamentary ("BP")
 1.2.4 Format World Schools
 1.2.5 American Parliamentary
o 1.3 Debat kompetitif selain debat parlementer
 1.3.1 Debat Proposal
 1.3.2 Lincoln-Douglas Debate
• 2 Kegiatan lain yang serupa
o 2.1 Model United Nations
o 2.2 Moot court
• 3 Lihat pula
[sunting] Debat kompetitif dalam pendidikan

Tidak seperti debat sebenarnya di parlemen, debat kompetitif tidak bertujuan untuk
menghasilkan keputusan namun lebih diarahkan untuk mengembangkan kemampuan-
kemampuan tertentu di kalangan pesertanya, seperti kemampuan untuk mengutarakan pendapat
secara logis, jelas dan terstruktur, mendengarkan pendapat yang berbeda, dan kemampuan
berbahasa asing (bila debat dilakukan dalam bahasa asing).
Namun demikian, beberapa format yang digunakan dalam debat kompetitif didasarkan atas debat
formal yang dilakukan di parlemen. Dari sinilah muncul istilah "debat parlementer" sebagai salah
satu gaya debat kompetitif yang populer. Ada berbagai format debat parlementer yang masing-
masing memiliki aturan dan organisasinya sendiri.
Kejuaraan debat kompetitif parlementer tingkat dunia yang paling diakui adalah World
Universities Debating Championship (WUDC) dengan gaya British Parliamentary di tingkat
universitas dan World Schools Debating Championship (WSDC) untuk tingkat sekolah
menengah atas.
Kompetisi debat bertaraf internasional umumnya menggunakan bahasa Inggris sebagai

pengantar. Tidak ada bantuan penerjemah bagi peserta manapun. Namun demikian, beberapa
kompetisi memberikan penghargaan khusus kepada tim yang berasal dari negara-negara yang
hanya menggunakan bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa kedua (English as Second Language - ESL).
Negara-negara yang terkenal dengan tim debatnya antara lain Inggris, Australia, Irlandia, dan
Amerika Serikat. Di Asia, negara yang dianggap relatif kuat antara lain Filipina dan Singapura.
[sunting] Debat kompetitif di Indonesia
Artikel Utama: Debat kompetitif di Indonesia
Di Indonesia, debat kompetitif sudah mulai berkembang, walaupun masih didominasi oleh
kompetisi debat berbahasa Inggris. Kejuaraan debat parlementar pertama di tingkat universitas
adalah Java Overland Varsities English Debate (JOVED) yang diselenggarakan tahun 1997 di
Universitas Katolik Parahyangan, Bandung, dan diikuti oleh tim-tim dari berbagai wilayah di P.
Jawa. Kejuaraan debat se-Indonesia yang pertama adalah Indonesian Varsity English Debate
(IVED) 1998 di Universitas Indonesia. Hingga kini (2006), kedua kompetisi tersebut
diselenggarakan setiap tahun secara bergilir di universitas yang berbeda.
Sejak 2001, Indonesia telah mengirimkan delegasi ke WSDC. Delegasi tersebut dipilih setiap
tahunnya melalui Indonesian Schools Debating Championship (ISDC) yang diselenggarakan
oleh Departemen Pendidikan Nasional bekerjasama dengan Association for Critical Thinking
(ACT).
[sunting] Berbagai gaya debat parlementer
Dalam debat kompetitif, sebuah format mengatur hal-hal antara lain:
• jumlah tim dalam satu debat

• jumlah pembicara dalam satu tim
• giliran berbicara
• lama waktu yang disediakan untuk masing-masing pembicara
• tatacara interupsi
• mosi dan batasan-batasan pendefinisian mosi
• tugas yang diharapkan dari masing-masing pembicara
• hal-hal yang tidak boleh dilakukan oleh pembicara
• jumlah juri dalam satu debat
• kisaran penilaian
Selain itu, berbagai kompetisi juga memiliki aturan yang berbeda mengenai:
• penentuan topik debat (mosi) - apakah diberikan jauh hari sebelumnya atau
hanya beberapa saat sebelum debat dimulai (impromptu)
• lama waktu persiapan - untuk debat impromptu, waktu persiapan berkisar
antara 15 menit (WUDC) hingga 1 jam (WSDC)
• perhitungan hasil pertandingan - beberapa debat hanya menggunakan
victory point (VP) untuk menentukan peringkat, namun ada juga yang
menghitung selisih (margin) nilai yang diraih kedua tim atau jumlah vote juri
(mis. untuk panel beranggotakan 3 juri, sebuah tim bisa menang 3-0 atau 2-
1)
• sistem kompetisi - sistem gugur biasanya hanya digunakan dalam babak
elimiasi (perdelapan final, perempat final, semifinal dan final); dalam babak
penyisihan, sistem yang biasa digunakan adalah power matching
Format debat parlementer sering menggunakan peristilahan yang biasa dipakai di debat parlemen
sebenarnya:
• topik debat disebut mosi (motion)

• tim Afirmatif (yang setuju terhadap mosi) sering disebut juga Pemerintah
(Government), tim Negatif (yang menentang mosi) disebut Oposisi
(Opposition)
• pembicara pertama dipanggil sebagai Perdana Menteri (Prime Minister), dan
sebagainya
• pemimpin/wasit debat (chairperson) dipanggil Speaker of The House
• penonton/juri dipanggil Members of the House (Sidang Dewan yang
Terhormat)
• interupsi disebut Points of Information (POI)
[sunting] Australian Parliamentary/Australasian Parliamentary ("Australs")
Gaya debat ini digunakan di Australia, namun pengaruhnya menyebar hingga ke kompetisi-
kompetisi yang diselenggarakan di Asia, sehingga akhirnya disebut sebagai format Australasian
Parliamentary. Dalam format ini, dua tim beranggotakan masing-masing tiga orang berhadapan
dalam satu debat, satu tim mewakili Pemerintah (Government) dan satu tim mewakili Oposisi
(Opposition), dengan urutan sebagai berikut:
1. Pembicara pertama pihak Pemerintah - 7 menit

2. Pembicara pertama pihak Oposisi - 7 menit
3. Pembicara kedua pihak Pemerintah - 7 menit
4. Pembicara kedua pihak Oposisi - 7 menit
5. Pembicara ketiga pihak Pemerintah - 7 menit
6. Pembicara ketiga pihak Oposisi - 7 menit
7. Pidato penutup pihak Oposisi - 5 menit
8. Pidato penutup pihak Pemerintah - 5 menit
Pidato penutup (Reply speech) menjadi ciri dari format ini. Pidato penutup dibawakan oleh
pembicara pertama atau kedua dari masing-masing tim (tidak boleh pembicara ketiga). Pidato
penutup dimulai oleh Oposisi terlebih dahulu, baru Pemerintah.
Mosi dalam format ini diberikan dalam bentuk pernyataan yang harus didukung oleh pihak
Pemerintah dan ditentang oleh Pihak Oposisi, contoh:
(This House believes that) Globalization marginalizes the poor.
(Sidang Dewan percaya bahwa) Globalisasi meminggirkan masyarakat

miskin.
Mosi tersebut dapat didefinisikan oleh pihak Pemerintah dalam batasan-batasan tertentu dengan
tujuan untuk memperjelas debat yang akan dilakukan. Ada aturan-aturan yang cukup jelas dalam
hal apa yang boleh dilakukan sebagai bagian dari definisi dan apa yang tidak boleh dilakukan.
Tidak ada interupsi dalam format ini.
Juri (adjudicator) dalam format Australs terdiri atas satu orang atau satu panel berjumlah ganjil.
Dalam panel, setiap juri memberikan voting-nya tanpa melalui musyawarah. Dengan demikian,
keputusan panel dapat bersifat unanimous ataupun split decision.
Di Indonesia, format ini termasuk yang pertama kali dikenal sehingga cukup populer terutama di
kalangan universitas. Kompetisi debat di Indonesia yang menggunakan format ini adalah Java
Overland Varsities English Debate (JOVED) dan Indonesian Varsity English Debate (IVED).
[sunting] Asian Parliamentary ("Asians")
Format ini merupakan pengembangan dari format Australs dan digunakan dalam kejuaraan
tingkat Asia. Perbedaannya dengan format Australs adalah adanya interupsi (Points of
Information) yang boleh diajukan antara menit ke-1 dan ke-6 (hanya untuk pidato utama, tidak
pada pidato penutup). Format ini juga mirip dengan World Schools Style yang digunakan di
WSDC.
Di Indonesia, format ini digunakan dalam ALSA English Competition (e-Comp) yang
diselenggarakan (hampir) setiap tahun oleh ALSA LC [[Universitas Indonesia].
[sunting] British Parliamentary ("BP")
Gaya debat parlementer ini banyak dipakai di Inggris namun juga populer di banyak negara,
sebab format inilah yang digunakan di kejuaraan dunia WUDC. Dalam format ini, empat tim
beranggotakan masing-masing dua orang bertarung dalam satu debat, dua tim mewakili
Pemerintah (Government) dan dua lainnya Oposisi (Opposition), dengan susunan sebagai
berikut:
Opening Government: Opening Opposition:

- Prime Minister - Leader of the Opposition
- Deputy Prime Minister - Deputy Leader of the Opposition
Closing Government: Closing Opposition:
- Member of the Government - Member of the Opposition
- Government Whip - Opposition Whip
Urutan berbicara adalah sebagai berikut:
1. Prime Minister - 7 menit

2. Leader of the Opposition - 7 menit
3. Deputy Prome Minister - 7 menit
4. Deputy Leader of the Opposition - 7 menit
5. Member of the Government - 7 menit
6. Member of the Opposition - 7 menit
7. Government Whip - 7 menit
8. Opposition Whip - 7 menit
Setiap pembicara diberi waktu 7 menit untuk menyampaikan pidatonya. Di antara menit ke-1 dan
ke-6, pembicara dari pihak lawan dapat mengajukan interupsi (Points of Information). Bila
diterima, pembicara yang mengajukan permintaan interupsi tadi diberikan waktu maksimal 15
detik untuk menyampaikan sebuah pertanyaan yang kemudian harus dijawab oleh pembicara tadi
sebelum melanjutkan pidatonya.
Juri dalam debat BP bisa satu orang atau satu panel berjumlah ganjil. Di akhir debat, juri
menentukan urutan kemenangan dari peringkat 1 sampai 4 untuk debat tersebut. Dalam panel,
keputusan sebisanya diambil berdasarkan mufakat. Bila mufakat tidak tercapai, Ketua Panel akan
membuat keputusan terakhir.
Di Indonesia, format ini digunakan dalam kompetisi Founder's Trophy yang diselenggarakan
oleh Komunitas Debat Bahasa Inggris Universitas Indonesia setiap tahun.
[sunting] Format World Schools
Format yang digunakan dalam turnamen World Schools Debating Championship (WSDC) dapat
dianggap sebagai kombinasi BP dan Australs. Setiap debat terdiri atas dua tim, Proposisi dan
Oposisi, beranggotakan masing-masing tiga orang. Urutan pidato adalah sebagai berikut:
1. Pembicara pertama Proposisi - 8 menit

2. Pembicara pertama Oposisi - 8 menit
3. Pembicara kedua Proposisi - 8 menit
4. Pembicara kedua Oposisi - 8 menit
5. Pembicara ketiga Proposisi - 8 menit
6. Pembicara ketiga Oposisi - 8 menit
7. Pidato penutup Oposisi - 4 menit
8. Pidato penutup Proposisi - 4 menit
Pidato penutup (reply speech) dibawakan oleh pembicara pertama atau kedua masing-masing tim
(tidak boleh pembicara ketiga) dan didahului oleh pihak Oposisi dan ditutup oleh pihak
Proposisi.
Aturan untuk interupsi (Points of Information - POI) mirip dengan format BP. POI hanya dapat
diberikan antara menit ke-1 dan ke-7 pidato utama dan tidak ada POI dalam pidato penutup.
Di Indonesia, format ini digunakan dalam kejuaraan Indonesian Schools Debating Championship
(ISDC). Beberapa SMU di Indonesia yang pernah mengadakan kompetisi debat juga
menggunakan format ini.
[sunting] American Parliamentary
Debat parlementer di Amerika Serikat diikuti oleh dua tim untuk setiap debatnya dengan susunan
sebagai berikut:
• Government
o Prime Minister (PM)
o Member of the Government (MG)
• Opposition
o Leader of the Opposition (LO)
o Member of the Opposition (MO)
Debat parlementer diadakan oleh beberapa organisasi berbeda di Amerika Serikat di tingkat
pendidikan menengah dan tinggi. National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA),
American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA), dan National Parliamentary Tournament
of Excellence (NPTE) menyelenggarakan debat parlementer tingkat universitas dengan susunan
pidato sebagai berikut:
• Prime Minister - 7 menit

• Leader of the Opposition - 8 menit
• Member of the Government - 8 min
• Member of the Opposition - 8 min
• Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal - 4 min
• Prime Minister Rebuttal - 5 min
California High School Speech Association (CHSSA) dan National Parliamentary Debate
League (NPDL) menyelenggarakan debat parlementer tingkat sekolah menengah dengan
susunan pidato sebagai berikut:
• Prime Minister - 7 menit

• Leader of the Opposition - 7 menit
• Member of the Government - 7 menit
• Member of the Opposition - 7 menit
• Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal - 5 menit
• Prime Minister Rebuttal - 5 menit
Dalam semua format tersebut kecuali CHSSA, interupsi berupa pertanyaan dapat ditanyakan
kepada pembicara keempat pidato pertama, kecuali pada menit pertama dan terakhir pidato.
Dalam format CHSSA, keenam pidato semuanya dapat diinterupsi.
Di Indonesia, format debat ini belum populer dan belum ada kompetisi reguler yang
menggunakannya.
[sunting] Debat kompetitif selain debat parlementer
[sunting] Debat Proposal
Dalam gaya Debat Proposal (Policy Debate), dua tim menjadi penganjur dan penentang sebuah
rencana yang berhubungan dengan topik debat yang diberikan. Topik yang diberikan umumnya
mengenai perubahan kebijakan yang diinginkan dari pemerintah. Kedua tim biasanya
memainkan peran Afirmatif (mendukung proposal) dan Negatif (menentang proposal). Pada
prakteknya, kebanyakan acara debat tipe ini hanya memiliki satu topik yang sama yang berlaku
selama setahun penuh atau selama jangka waktu lainnya yang sudah ditetapkan.
Bila dibandingkan dengan debat parlementer, debat proposal lebih mengandalkan pada hasil riset
atas fakta-fakta pendukung (evidence). Debat ini juga memiliki persepsi yang lebih luas
mengenai argumen. Misalnya, sebuah proposal alternatif (counterplan) yang membuat proposal
utama menjadi tidak diperlukan dapat menjadi sebuah argumen dalam debat ini. Walaupun
retorika juga penting dan ikut mempengaruhi nilai setiap pembicara, pemenang tiap babak
umumnya didasari atas siapa yang telah "memenangkan" argumen sesuai dengan fakta
pendukung dan logika yang diberikan. Sebagai konsekuensinya, juri kadang-kadang
membutuhkan waktu yang lama untuk mengambil keputusan karena semua fakta pendukung
harus diperiksa terlebih dahulu.
Di Amerika Serikat, Debat Proposal adalah tipe debat yang lebih populer dibandingkan debat
parlementer. Kegiatan ini juga telah dicoba dikembangkan di Eropa dan Jepang dan gaya debat
ini ikut mempengaruhi bentuk-bentuk debat lain. Di AS, Debat Proposal tingkat SMU
diselenggarakan oleh NFL dan NCFL. Di tingkat universitas, debat ini diselenggarakan oleh
National Debate Tournament (NDT), Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA), National
Educational Debate Association, dan Great Plains Forensic Conference.
Debat Proposal terdiri atas dua tim beranggotakan masing-masing dua orang dalam tiap
debatnya. Setiap pembicara membawakan dua pidato, satu pidato konstruktif (8 atau 9 menit)
yang berisi argumen-argumen baru dan satu pidato sanggahan (4, 5, atau 6 menit) yang tidak
boleh berisi argumen baru namun dapat berisi fakta pendukung baru untuk membantu
sanggahan. Biasanya, sehabis setiap pidato konstruktif, pihak lawan diberikan kesempatan untuk
melakukan pemeriksaan silang (cross-examination) atas pidato tersebut. Setiap isu yang tidak
ditanggapi oleh pihak lawan dianggap sudah diterima dalam debat. Dewan juri secara seksama
mencatat semua pernyataan yang dibuat dalam suatu babak (sering disebut flow).
menggunakannya.
[sunting] Lincoln-Douglas Debate
Nama gaya debat ini diambil dari debat-debat terkenal yang pernah dilakukan di Senat Amerika
Serikat antara kedua kandidat Lincoln dan Douglas. Setiap debat gaya ini diikuti oleh dua
pedebat yang bertarung satu sama lain.
Argumen dalam debat ini terpusat pada filosofi dan nilai-nilai abstrak, sehingga sering disebut
sebagai debat nilai (value debate). Debat LD kurang menekankan pada fakta pendukung
(evidence) dan lebih mengutamakan logika dan penjelasan.
menggunakannya.
[sunting] Kegiatan lain yang serupa

[sunting] Model United Nations
Model United Nations adalah kegiatan yang banyak dilakukan di tingkat sekolah dan universitas
di dunia. Dalam kegiatan ini, peserta memainkan peran sebagai delegasi Perserikatan Bangsa-
bangsa (PBB) yang mewakili negara tertentu (dalam kompetisi internasional, negara yang
diwakili umumnya bukan negara asal sebenarnya dari tim tersebut).
Di Indonesia, kegiatan ini relatif belum berkembang. Namun, Jakarta International School (JIS),
sebuah sekolah internasional di ibukota, memiliki kegiatan ekstrakurikuler ini.
[sunting] Moot court
Kompetisi Moot court biasa dilakukan oleh mahasiswa hukum di tingkat universitas.
[sunting] Lihat pula

• Debat kompetitif di Indonesia
o Indonesian Varsity English Debate
o Java Overland Varsities English Debate
o Indonesian Schools Debating Championship
o Parahyangan English Debate Society
o Homepage English Debating Society - Universitas Gadjah Mada (EDS-
UGM)
• Kompetisi internasional tingkat universitas

o World Universities Debating Council
• Kompetisi internasional tingkat sekolah menengah

o World Schools Debating Championships
• Organisasi Debat Internasional

o International Debate Education Association
o International Public Debate Association
o Australasian Intervarsity Debating Association
o Australasian Intervarsity Debating Association (2002-3)
• Lain-lain
o 'Debating': A free online 'how-to' guide (A free 200-page debating book
written by a former winner of the World Schools Debating
Championhip)
o Debate Network (Arguments for and against a wide variety of debate
topics)
o Associated Leaders of Urban Debate (A national organization
promoting debate to the general public) (US, K-12, collegiate)
o World Debate Website Information about university debating events
around the globe
o Oxford Union (Oxford University)
o American Parliamentary Debating Association (U.S., collegiate)
o National Parliamentary Debate Association (U.S., collegiate)
o Cross Examination Debate Association (U.S., collegiate)
o National Debate Tournament Home Page (U.S., collegiate)
o British Debate Information about school and university debating in
Britain
o Debating SA Helpful resources for Primary and Secondary School
debaters in Australia
o Debate Central Wide ranging debate training website. Includes several
online videos
o National Association of Urban Debate Leagues (U.S., secondary and
middle school)
o National Forensic League (U.S., secondary school)
o National Christian Forensics and Communications Association (U.S.,
secondary school)
o National Parliamentary Debate League (U.S., secondary school)
o Planet Debate An online store for debate resources run by Harvard
Debate.
o National Debate Coaches Association (U.S., secondary school)
o eDebate Mailing list for high school and college debate coaches.
o Debate Outreach Network A resource for starting a debate team.
Includes video from the Dartmouth Debate Institute
o Debatepoint dot com Web-based debate software
o New Zealand Schools Debating Council Website of the New Zealand
Schools Debating Council, who organise schools debating in New
Zealand
o Slovak Debate Associaton
o ARDOR - Romanian National Debate Association
o ASDV Bonaparte is the academic debating society in Amsterdam
o Parliamentary Debate League - Parli Grand Nationals (U.S., secondary
school)
o Cross-X.com Website for high school and college debaters run by
former debater Phil Kerpen.
o DebateRoom.com Debate forums for a variety of issues.
United Asian Debating Championships

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these
issues on the talk page.
• It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged

since April 2010.
• It needs sources or references that appear in third-party publications.
Tagged since April 2010.
• The notability of this article's subject is in question. If notability cannot
be established, it may be listed for deletion or removed. Tagged since
April 2010.
University Parliamentary Debating
World Universities Debating Championship
Regional & National Championships
Australasia · Canada · Europe · Ireland · John Smith

Memorial Mace · North America · United Asian
Debating Championships
Organizations
APDA · CUSID · English-Speaking Union · NPDA ·

CEDA · NDT · NCFCA
Styles
Australasian · British Parliamentary
Societies
Aberystwyth · Alberta · Auckland · Brown ·

Cambridge · UCC Law · UCC Philosoph · Durham ·
Galway · Glasgow · Limerick · Manchester · Otago
· Ottawa · Oxford · Pitt · Princeton · St Andrews ·
Sydney · TCD-Hist · TCD-Phil · Tilbury · Toronto ·
UBC · UCD-L&H · UCD-LawSoc · Victoria · Virginia-
Jeff · Virginia-Wash · Western Ontario · Yale
This box: view • talk • edit
The United Asian Debating Championship (UADC) is an annual debating tournament for
teams from universities in Asia. It will be the largest inter-varsity Parliamentary Debate
tournament in Asia, with over 600 participants. The UADC holds debates in the Asian 3-on-3
format Parliamentary Debating. The 1st UADC will be hosted by Assumption University,
Thailand in Bangkok from 12–19 May 2010.
The UADC was created after a decision to merge the two separate championships that were held
after the Asian Debating community split in 2005 - The Asian Universities Debating
Championship (AUDC) and the All-Asian Intervarsity Debating Championships (AIDC or "All-
Asians"). The decision to unite the two competing tournaments, and thus, create a single debate
championship for Asia was taken at the last Asian Universities Debating Championships hosted
by East West University in Dhaka, Bangladesh in 2009.
The first edition of this tournament is slated to be held in Assumption University in Bangkok,
Thailand from 12 to 19 May.[1] Assumption won the right to host the tournament against a rival
bid made by De La Salle University, in Manila, Philippines.[2]
[edit] Origin
Arising out of a unification of the Asian Universities Debating Championship as well as the All-
Asian Intervarsity Debating Championships, UADC represents the results of efforts to bridge the
schism that emerged in Asian debating.
Institutions who were unhappy about aspects of the organisation of the All-Asian Intervarsity
Debating Championships established the Asian Universities Debating Championship in 2005 as
an alternative to the All-Asians Championship.[3] Since then, many universities in Asia with
strong debating traditions – most notably universities from the Philippines and Singapore,
including all except one of the institutions who won the All-Asian championships up to 2004 –
had chosen not to participate in the All-Asian Intervarsity Championships and have instead
entered teams in the Asian Universities Debating Championship.
While not necessarily intended to be a rival tournament, the last three AUDCs coincided with the
schedule of the All-Asian Championship, which made it impractical for teams to attend both
tournaments.
After many overtures, including a proposal to have an Asian Unity Tournament in Multimedia
University, Malaysia,[4] which was not accepted by the AUDC Council, it was agreed that the
All-Asian Universities would attend the AUDC Championships held in 2009 in Dhaka hosted by
East West University. It was decided here in Council that the two tournaments would unite in the
next edition, and the name of this new tournament would be the United Asian Debating
Championships. Assumption University won the right to host after bidding, and the tournament
took place from the 12th to the 19th of May, 2010. The next edition of the tournament will be
hosted by the University of Macau, 2011.
[edit] Format of the event

The UADC, like the AUDC and the All-Asians, is held annually in May. The competition
involves eight preliminary rounds, which become power-paired as the tournament progresses,
matching the strongest-performing teams against each other.
The debates follow the Asian 3-on-3 format, which is a variation of the Australs format. One
team (of 3 speakers each) forms the government and the other as the opposition. The process of
scoring and pairing these teams is known as tabbing. The scoring of teams is done by judges,
most of whom are students or former students from the competing institutions, who return ballots
with their scores to the adjudication team, led by a Chief Adjudicator (CA) who is assisted by
one or more deputies (DCAs).
The preliminary rounds are followed by a "Break Nite Party", at which the teams proceeding to
elimination rounds are announced. Separate breaks are announced for English-as-a-foreign
language (EFL) team competition. 32 teams proceed to octo-finals. While preliminary rounds are
usually judged by up to three judges, break rounds are judged by panels of five, and the finals by
a panel of nine.
[edit] References
1. ^ UADC 2010 website
2. ^ 2009 EWU AUDC Union Meeting Minutes, [1].
3. ^ "Invitation to the First AUDC".
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AUDC/message/1. Retrieved 2007-06-05.
4. ^ MMU Unity Bid Document
5.
6. Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument.
7. Asian Parliamentary Debate
8. Teams:
There two opposing teams in an Asians format of debate:
1. Government side- proposes and defends the motion;

2. Opposition side- refute and negates the motion.
Each each side is composed of three members.
The Members of the government side are the following:
1. Prime minister (PM)- opens the debate, defines the motion and advances arguments;
2. Deputy prime Minister (DPM) - refute at first instance the case of the opposition, re-
establish the government's claim, and advances arguments;
3. Governments whip (GW) - makes an issue-based rebuttal of the opposition's case and
summarizes the case of the government.
The Members of the Opposition side are the following:
1. Leader of the Opposition(LO)- responds directly to the case of the government by

giving a direct clash, and advances arguments. May challenge the motion if the definition
is challengeable;
2. Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DPL) - refutes the case of the DPM, reestablishes
the case of the opposition, and advances an argument;
3. Opposition Whip (OW) - makes an issues-based rebuttal of the government's and
summarizes the case of the opposition.
Time of Speeches:
Each speaker is allocated seven minutes to deliver their constructive speeches. One
speaker from each side (For the Government: PM/DPM, for Opposition: LO/DLO) is
given four minutes to deliver a reply speech. The speakers will be speaking in the
following order:
1. Prime Minister (7 minutes)

2. Leader of the opposition (7minutes)
3. Deputy Prime Minister (7 minutes)
4. Deputy Leader of the Opposition (7 minutes)
5. Government Whip (7 minutes)
6. Opposition whip (7 minutes)
7. Opposition Reply (4 minutes)
8. Government Reply(4 minutes)
During the constructive speeches, Point of Information (POI) may be raised by the
opposing side after the first minute up to the sixth minute. POI may be refused or
accepted by the speaker. During reply speeches, no POI may be raised.
Reply Speech:
Reply speech is a comparative analysis of the strength and weaknesses of the case of both
sides. The aim of the speech is to give a bias judgment as to why should the people
support the team's claim. The speech is first delivered by the opposition side and
followed by the government side that will close the debate.
Matter, Manner, Method:
Asian Parliamentary Debate is assessed by an Adjudicator Panel composed of an odd

number according to the following criteria:
1. Matter (40)- substance of the debate, the arguments and evidence presented, and the
logical reasoning and presentation of said arguments.
2. Manner (40) - the style of delivery, the persuasion skills, and the conduct of the
debaters.
3. Method (20) - the response to the dynamics of the debate, and the observance of the
rules of debate.
Debate
"Discussion" redirects here. For a related article, see Discourse.

For discussion in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Talk page.
This article needs additional citations for verification.

Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material
may be challenged and removed. (January 2009)
University Parliamentary Debating
World Universities Debating Championship
Regional & National Championships
Australasia · Canada · Europe · Ireland · John Smith

Memorial Mace · North America · United Asian
Debating Championships
Organizations
APDA · CUSID · English-Speaking Union · NPDA ·

CEDA · NDT · NCFCA
Styles
Australasian · British Parliamentary
Societies
Aberystwyth · Alberta · Auckland · Brown ·

Cambridge · UCC Law · UCC Philosoph · Durham ·
Galway · Glasgow · Limerick · Manchester · Otago
· Ottawa · Oxford · Pitt · Princeton · St Andrews ·
Sydney · TCD-Hist · TCD-Phil · Tilbury · Toronto ·
UBC · UCD-L&H · UCD-LawSoc · Victoria · Virginia-
Jeff · Virginia-Wash · Western Ontario · Yale
This box: view • talk • edit
Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a

broader form of argument than logical argument, which only examines consistency from axiom,
and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is a
technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of
emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion; in debating, one
side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior "context" and/or framework of the
issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
In a formal debating contest, there are rules for people to discuss and decide on differences,
within a framework defining how they will interact. Informal debate is a common occurrence,
the quality and depth of a debate improves with knowledge and skill of its participants as
debaters. Deliberative bodies such as parliaments, legislative assemblies, and meetings of all
sorts engage in debates. The outcome of a debate may be decided by audience vote, by judges, or
by some combination of the two. Although this implies that facts are based on consensus, which
is not factual. Formal debates between candidates for elected office, such as the leaders debates
and the U.S. presidential election debates, are common in democracies.
The major goal of the study of debate as a method or art is to develop one's ability to play from
either position with equal ease. To inexperienced debaters, some propositions appear easier to
defend or to attack; to experienced debaters, any proposition can be defended or attacked after
the same amount of preparation time, usually quite short.[citation needed] Lawyers argue forcefully on
behalf of their client, even if the facts appear against them. However one large misconception
about debate is that it is all about strong beliefs; it is not.
Debates are sometime organized for purely competitive purposes, particularly at the US high-
school level, but also in other English-speaking countries.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Competitive debate
• 2 Forms of debate
o 2.1 Parliamentary (Parli) debate
o 2.2 Mace Debate
o 2.3 Jes Debate
o 2.4 Public Debate
o 2.5 Australasia debate
o 2.6 World Universities Peace Invitational Debate
(WUPID)
o 2.7 Asian Universities Debating Championship
o 2.8 Policy debate
o 2.9 Classical debate
o 2.10 Extemporaneous debate
o 2.11 Lincoln-Douglas debate
o 2.12 Karl Popper debate
o 2.13 Simulated legislature
o 2.14 Impromptu debate
o 2.15 Moot court and mock trial
o 2.16 Public Forum (Po Fo) Debate
o 2.17 Paris Style Debating
• 3 Other forms of debate
o 3.1 Online debating
o 3.2 U.S. presidential debates
o 3.3 Comedy debate
• 4 Debate Strategies
o 4.1 Moral High Ground
o 4.2 Model Construction / Destruction
• 5 See also
• 6 References
• 7 External links
[edit] Competitive debate

Competitive debate, also known as a debate contest, is an organized to argue with other teams,
competing at the local, national, and international level.[1] It is popular in English-speaking
universities and high schools around the world, most notably in South Africa, Canada, the United
States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. Many different styles of
debate occur under a variety of organizations and rules.
In schools and colleges, often, it takes the form of a contest with explicit rules. It may be
presided over by one or more judges. Each side seeks to win, by following the rules, and even by
using some rules to break other rules, within limits. Each side is either in favor ("for,
'Affirmative' "), or opposed to ("against, 'Negative' "), a statement (proposition, moot or
Resolution) which if adopted would change something with the exception allowed to define the
scope of the proposition; i.e. they choose what it will mean if adopted. To further illustrate the
importance of rules, those opposed must destroy these arguments sufficiently to warrant not
adopting the proposition, and are not required to propose any alternative solutions.
[edit] Forms of debate

[edit] Parliamentary (Parli) debate
Main article: Parliamentary debate
Parliamentary Debate (sometimes referred to as "parli" in the United States) is conducted under
rules derived from British parliamentary procedure. It features the competition of individuals in a
multi-person setting. It borrows terms such as "government" and "opposition" from the British
parliament (although the term "proposition" is sometimes used rather than "government" when
debating in the United Kingdom). This is usually very formal.
Throughout the world, parliamentary debate is what most countries know as "debating", and is
the primary style practiced in the United Kingdom, India, Greece and most other nations. The
premier event in the world of parliamentary debate, the World Universities Debating
Championship, is conducted in the British Parliamentary style.Not formal.
Even within the United Kingdom, however, British Parliamentary style is not used exclusively;
the English-Speaking Union runs the national championships for schools in a unique format,
known as the 'Mace' format after the name of the competition, while simultaneously using British
Parliamentary format for the national universities championships.Sort of formal.
In the United States the American Parliamentary Debate Association is the oldest national
parliamentary debating organization, based on the East Coast and including all of the Ivy
League, although the more recently founded National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA)
is now the largest collegiate sponsor. The National Parliamentary Debate League (NPDL) is the
umbrella organization for all parliamentary debating at the secondary school level in the United
States. And in Canada, the Canadian Universities Society for Intercollegiate Debating (CUSID)
is the umbrella organization for all university-level debating; at the secondary school level, the
Canadian Student Debating Federation (CSDF) has the same function.
Topics in parliamentary debate can either be set by the tournament or determined by the debaters
as the "Government" side begins. For example, if the topic was "This House Would Bomb
Cultural Sites", the Government could define it in any way which it feel suitable, for example,
only during wartime, and excluding religious cultural sites. The Government must be sure the
definitions does not give them an unfair advantage, and the Opposition may dispute the
definition if it feels it violates fair play. In many forms of the activity rhetoric and style, as well
as the more traditional knowledge and research, can play a significant role in determining the
victor with marks shared equally between matter and manner. It has been widely labeled as the
most democratic form of debate.
[edit] Mace Debate
This style of debate is prominent in Britain at schools level. Two teams of two debate an
affirmative motion (e.g. "This house would give prisoners the right to vote,") which one team
will propose and the other will oppose. Each speaker will make a seven minute speech in the
order; 1st Proposition, 1st Opposition, 2nd Proposition, 2nd Opposition. After the first minute of
each speech, members of the opposing team may request a 'point of information' (POI). If the
speaker accepts they are permitted to ask a question. POI's are used to pull the speaker up on a
weak point, or to argue against something the speaker has said. However after 6 minutes, no
more POI's are permitted. After all four have spoken the debate will be opened to the floor, in
which members of the audience will put questions to the teams. After the floor debate, one
speaker from each team (traditionally the first speaker), will speak for 4 minutes. In these
summary speeches it is typical for the speaker to answer the questions posed by the floor, answer
any questions the opposition may have put forward, before summarising his or her own key
points. In the Mace format, emphasis is typically on analytical skills, entertainment, style and
strength of argument. The winning team will typically have excelled in all of these areas. THIS
IS A FORMAL EVENT.
[edit] Jes Debate
This style of debate is particularly popular in Ireland at Secondary School level. Developed in
Coláiste Iognáid (Galway) over the last ten years, the format has five speakers: two teams and a
single 'sweep speaker' on each side. Speeches last 4:30 minutes with 30 seconds protected from
POIs at either end of the debate. Adjudication will depend on BP marking, but with particular
recognition of principled debating.A ten minute open house will also be adjudicated.
Traditionally, the motion is always opposed in the final vote.[citation needed]
[edit] Public Debate
Main article: Public debate
The International Public Debate Association (IPDA), inaugurated on February 15, 1997 at St.
Mary's University (Texas) in San Antonio, Texas, is a national debate league currently active in
the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Washington,
Oregon, Idaho, Florida, and Oklahoma. Among universities, IPDA is the fastest growing debate
association within the United States. Although evidence is used, the central focus of IPDA is to
promote a debate format that emphasizes public speaking and real-world persuasion skills over
the predominate use of evidence and speed. To further this goal, IPDA predominantly uses lay
judges in order to encourage an audience-centered debate style. Furthermore, although the main
goal of the debater is to persuade the judge, IPDA also awards the best speakers within each
tournament.
IPDA offers both team debate where two teams of two debate and individual debate. In both
team and individual debate a list of topics are given to the two sides thirty minutes before the
start of the round. A striking negotiation ensues to pick a topic. The sides, one affirming the
resolution and one negating the resolution, then prepare an opening speech, a cross-examination
of the other side, and closing remarks for the round.
While most member programs the International Public Debate Association are associated with
colleges or universities, participation in IPDA tournaments is open to anyone whose education
level is equivalent to seventh-grade or higher.
[edit] Australasia debate
Main article: Australia-Asia debate
Australasia style debates consist of two teams who debate over an issue, more commonly called
a topic or proposition. The issue, by convention, is presented in the form of an affirmative
statement beginning with "That", for example, "That cats are better than dogs," or "This House",
for example, "This House would establish a world government." The subject of topics varies
from region to region. Most topics however, are usually region specific to facilitate interest by
both the participants and their audiences.
Each team has three members, each of whom is named according to their team and speaking
position within his/her team. For instance the second speaker of the affirmative team to speak is
called the "Second Affirmative Speaker" or "Second Proposition Speaker", depending on the
terminology used. Each of the speakers' positions is based around a specific role, the third
speaker for example has the opportunity to make a rebuttal towards the opposing teams argument
introducing new evidence to add to their position. The last speaker is called the "Team
Advisor/Captain". Using this style, the debate is finished with a closing argument by each of the
first speakers from each team and new evidence may not be introduced. Each of the six speakers
(three affirmative and three negative) speak in succession to each other beginning with the
Affirmative Team. The speaking order is as follows: First Affirmative, First Negative, Second
Affirmative, Second Negative, Third Affirmative, and finally Third Negative.
The context in which the Australasia style of debate is used varies, but in Australia and New
Zealand is mostly used at the Primary and Secondary school level, ranging from small informal
one-off intra-school debates to larger more formal inter-school competitions with several rounds
and a finals series which occur over a year.
[edit] World Universities Peace Invitational Debate (WUPID)
WUPID is an invitational tournament that employs the BP or Worlds format of debating. It

invites the top 30 debating institutions in accordance to the list provided by the World Debate
Website administered by Colm Flynn. If any or some of the teams cannot participate than
replacements would be called in from the top 60 teams or based on strong recommendations
from senior members of the University Debating community.
WUPID was first held in December 2007 with Sydney University being crowned champion. The
second installation in 2008 saw Monash taking the trophy home. The third WUPID will be held
in University Putra Malaysia (UPM) in December 2009. The first two tournaments were co-
hosted by Univerisiti Kuala Lumpur (UNIKL).
WUPID was the brainchild of Daniel Hasni Mustaffa, Saiful Amin Jalun and Muhammad Yunus
Zakariah. They were all former debaters for UPM who took part at all possible levels of debating
from the Malaysian nationals to the World Championship.
[edit] Asian Universities Debating Championship
This is the biggest debating tournament in Asia, where teams from the Middle East to Japan
come to debate. It is traditionally hosted in southeast Asia where participation is usually highest
compared to other parts of Asia.
Asian debates are largely an adaptation of the Australasian format. The only difference is that
each speaker is given 7 minutes of speech time and there will be points of information (POI)
offered by the opposing team between the 2nd to 6th minutes of the speech. This means that the
1st and 7th minute is considered the 'protected' period where no POIs can be offered to the
speaker.
The debate will commence with the Prime Minister's speech (first proposition) and will be
continued by the first opposition. This alternating speech will go on until the third opposition.
Following this, the opposition bench will give the reply speech.
In the reply speech, the opposition goes first and then the proposition. The debate ends when the
proposition ends the reply speech. 4 minutes is allocated for the reply speech and no POI's can be
offered during this time.
[edit] Policy debate

Main article: Policy Debate
Policy Debate is a style of debating where two teams of two debaters advocate or oppose a plan
derived from a resolution that usually calls for a change in policy by a government. Teams
normally alternate, and compete in rounds as either "affirmative" or "negative". In most forms of
the activity, there is a fixed topic for an entire year or another set period. In comparison to
parliamentary debate, policy debate relies more on researched evidence and tends to have a
larger sphere of what is considered legitimate argument, including counterplans, critical theory,
and debate about the theoretical standards of the activity itself. While rhetoric is important and
reflected in the "speaker points" given to each debater, each round is usually decided based on
who has "won" the argument according to the evidence and logic presented. Additionally, in
certain segments of the activity, debaters may "speed" (speak very rapidly), in order to present as
much evidence and information as possible and counter the other side. People speed read in the
attempt to "spread" the opponent out of a speech. In effect, the debater presents so much
information, spread out over many topics, that the opponent does not have time to cover
everything and must ignore arguments that the original team then focuses on.
Policy Debate is mostly practiced in the United States (where it is sometimes referred to as
Cross-Examination, or CX debate), although it has been attempted in Europe, Venezuela,
Colombia, and Japan and has certainly influenced other forms of debate. Successful high school
policy debaters are frequently recruited for and offered college scholarships for their policy
debate experience. Former policy debaters have also credit their success in virtually every field,
including politics, law, academia, business, entertainment, and more. The National Association
for Urban Debate Leagues, and the various individual debate leagues, are set up in order to
provide students of all economic backgrounds an opportunity to experience and succeed in this
life-changing activity.
[edit] Classical debate
Classical debate is a relatively new debate format, first created and primarily practiced in the
state of Minnesota. It was formed as an alternative to Policy debating. Certain judges and
coaches felt that the development of Policy had led it to become an extremely specialized form
of debate with heavy reliance on near-incomprehensible speed in speaking and less emphasis on
real-world arguments in favor of "strategic" arguments that often bordered on the near-absurd.
With a structure similar to that of Policy, Classical debate emphasizes logic and real-world
discussion. For this reason, it is often nicknamed "Policy Lite".
As opposed to Policy, where each Affirmative proposes a new plan, classical debate is simpler:
one resolution is chosen at the beginning of the season, which the Affirmative affirms and
Negative negates. The emphasis on depth instead of breadth provided by the restriction can make
for interesting rounds that often come down to arguments that might otherwise pale in other
formats.
[edit] Extemporaneous debate

Extemporaneous debate is a style that involves no planning in advance, and two teams with a
first and second speaker. While a majority of judges will allow debaters to cite current events
and various statistics (of which opponents may question the credibility) the only research
permitted are one or more articles given to the debaters along with the resolution shortly before
the debate. It begins with an affirmative first-speaker constructive speech, followed by a
negative; then an affirmative and negative second-speaker constructive speech respectively. Each
of these speeches are six minutes in length, and are followed by two minutes of cross
examination. There is then an affirmative and negative first-speaker rebuttal, and a negative and
affirmative second-speaker rebuttal, respectively. These speeches are each four minutes long. No
new points can be brought into the debate during the rebuttals.
This style of debate generally centers around three main contentions, although a team can
occasionally use two or four. In order for the affirmative side to win, all of the negative
contentions must be defeated, and all of the affirmative contentions must be left standing. Most
of the information presented in the debate must be tied in to support one of these contentions, or
"sign posted". Much of extemporaneous debate is similar to policy debate; one main difference,
however, is that extemporaneous debate focuses less on the implementation of the resolution.
[edit] Lincoln-Douglas debate
Main article: Lincoln-Douglas debate
Lincoln-Douglas debate is primarily a form of United States high school debate (though it also
has a college form called NFA LD) named after the Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858, it is a
one-on-one event focused mainly on applying philosophical theories to real world issues.
Debaters normally alternate sides from round to round as either the "affirmative", which upholds
the resolution, or "negative", which attacks it. The resolution, which changes bimonthly, asks
whether a certain policy or action conforms to a specific value.
Though established as an alternative to policy debate, there has been a strong movement to
embrace certain techniques that originated in policy debate (and, correspondingly, a strong
backlash movement). Plans, counterplans, critical theory, postmodern theory, debate about the
theoretical basis and rules of the activity itself, and kritiks have all reached more than occasional,
if not yet universal, usage. Traditional L-D debate attempts to be free of policy debate "jargon".
Lincoln-Douglas speeches can range from a conversational pace to well over 300 wpm (when
trying to maximize the number of arguments and depth of each argument's development). This
technique is known as speed. There is also a growing emphasis on carded evidence, though still
much less than in policy debate. These trends have created a serious rift within the activity
between the debaters, judges, and coaches who advocate or accept these changes, and those who
vehemently oppose them.
Policy and Lincoln-Douglas debate tournaments are often held concurrently at the same school.
[edit] Karl Popper debate

Karl Popper debate, named after the famed philosopher, is a widely used debate format in
Eastern European and Central Asian high schools. Originally created by the Open Society
Institute as a more flexible team debate format, Karl Popper debate has risen greatly in
popularity as the first format that many high school students learn. It focuses on relevant and
often deeply divisive propositions, emphasizing the development of critical thinking skills, and
tolerance for differing viewpoints. To facilitate these goals, debaters work together in teams of
three, and must research both sides of each issue. Constructed similarly to the Lincoln-Douglas
debate format, each side is given the opportunity to offer arguments and direct questions to the
opposing side. The first speakers of each side have 6 minutes to present their constructive cases,
or in the negative's case a rebuttal. The other 4 speakers each have 5 minutes to deliver a speech
supporting their team's main arguments. There is also an allotted 3 minutes after each of the first
4 speeches for cross-examination, during which the opposing team has a chance to clarify what
was stated in the preceding speech.
Each year, the International Debate Education Association hosts an annual Youth Forum, during
which the Karl Popper World Championships are held. Nations from all around the world attend
this Forum for the tournament, as well as the 2 week debate training camp.
[edit] Simulated legislature
High school debate events such as Student Congress, Model United Nations, European Youth
Parliament, Junior State of America and the American Legion's Boys State and Girls State events
are activities which are based on the premise of simulating a mock legislature environment.
[edit] Impromptu debate
Main article: Impromptu debate
Impromptu debate is a relatively informal style of debate, when compared to other highly
structured formats. The topic for the debate is given to the participants between fifteen and
twenty minutes before the debate starts. The debate format is relatively simple; each team
member of each side speaks for five minutes, alternating sides. A ten-minute discussion period,
similar to other formats' "open cross-examination" time follows, and then a five-minute break
(comparable to other formats' preparation time). Following the break, each team gives a 4-minute
rebuttal.
[edit] Moot court and mock trial
In the United Kingdom the national mooting championships are run by the English-Speaking
Union.
[edit] Public Forum (Po Fo) Debate
Public Forum combines aspects of both Policy debate and Lincoln-Douglas debate, with shorter
speech lengths, but longer periods, called "cross-fires", of interaction between the debaters. Since
its introduction by the National Forensic League into high school debate in the United States, it
has exploded in popularity in some parts of the country due to its accessibility to both debaters
and audiences through its simplistic emphasis on logical persuasion (supported by evidence as
appropriate) and due to its ability to help develop real-world argumentation and speaking skills.
[edit] Paris Style Debating
This is a new, specifically French format. Two teams of five debate on a given motion. One side
is supposed to defend the motion while the other must defeat it. The debate is judged on the
quality of the arguments, the strength of the rhetoric, the charisma of the speaker, the quality of
the humor, the ability to think on one's feet and, of course, the teamwork.
The first speaker of the Proposition (Prime Minister) opens the debate, followed by the first
speaker of the Opposition (Shadow Prime Minister), then the second speaker of the Proposition
and so on.
Every speaker speaks for 6 minutes. After the first minute and before the last minute, debaters
from the opposite team may ask Points of Information, which the speaker may accept or reject as
he wishes (although he is supposed to accept at least 2).
The French Debating Association[2] organizes its National Debating Championship upon this
style.
[edit] Other forms of debate

[edit] Online debating
With the increasing popularity and availability of the Internet, differing opinions arise frequently.
Though they are often expressed via flaming and other forms of argumentation, which consist
primarily of assertions, there do exist formalized debating websites, typically in the form of
online forums or bulletin boards. The debate style is interesting, as research and well thought out
points and counterpoints are possible because of the obvious lack of time restraints (although
practical time restraints usually are in effect, e.g., no more than 5 days between posts,
etc.).Forums are Moderated and welcome online debaters in a friendly format so all may speak
their pros and cons. Many people use this to strengthen their points, or drop their weaker
opinions on things, many times for debate in formal debates (such as the ones listed above) or for
fun arguments with friends. The ease-of-use and friendly environments make new debaters
welcome to share their opinions in many communities.
[edit] U.S. presidential debates
Main article: United States presidential election debates
Since the 1976 general election, debates between presidential candidates have been a part of U.S.
presidential campaigns. Unlike debates sponsored at the high school or collegiate level, the
participants, format, and rules are not independently defined. Nevertheless, in a campaign season
heavily dominated by television advertisements, talk radio, sound bites, and spin, they still offer
a rare opportunity for citizens to see and hear the major candidates side-by-side. The format of
the presidential debates, though defined differently in every election, is typically more restrictive
than many traditional formats, forbidding participants to ask each other questions and restricting
discussion of particular topics to short time frames.
The presidential debates were initially moderated in 1976, 1980, 1984 by the League of Women
Voters, but The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was established in 1987 by the
Republican and Democratic parties. Its primary purpose is to sponsor and produce debates for
the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and to undertake research and
educational activities relating to the debates. The organization, which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan
corporation, sponsored all the presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004.
However, in announcing its withdrawal from sponsoring the debates, the League of Women
Voters stated that it was withdrawing "because the demands of the two campaign organizations
would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter." In 2004, the Citizens' Debate Commission was
formed in the hope of establishing an independent sponsor for presidential debates, with a more
voter-centric role in the definition of the participants, format, and rules.
See also: Leaders debate
[edit] Comedy debate
Main article: Comedy debate
With the growing popularity of debate among the general public, comedy debates have
developed as a form of entertainment with an often educational twist. While comedy debates are
not generally mainstream events, they have gained significant popular support at occasions such
as the Melbourne International Comedy Festival, and are often popular fixtures among
experienced debaters.
All forms of debate, whether consciously or not, make certain assumptions about argumentation
theory. The core concept of argumentation theory is the notion of advocacy. In most cases, at
least one side in a debate needs to maintain the truth of some proposition or advocate some sort
of personal or political change or action. A debate could also potentially be between two or more
competing propositions or actions. Or debate could also be a purely performative exercise of
charisma and emotion with no assumption of fixed advocacy, but it would possibly lose much of
its coherence.
[edit] Debate Strategies

While debating is an art, involving aspects from showmanship to critical thinking, there are
certain strategies that are commonly used to shape the direction of a debate.
[edit] Moral High Ground

One such strategy is to adopt the Moral High Ground, consigning the other parties to appear
weak, unethical. In this strategy, the party will try to illustrate the moral benefits that their side of
the debates bring to the table. i.e. more environmentally aware, pro-human rights etc.
[edit] Model Construction / Destruction
Often, in the process of debates, each party will need to build a conceptual model of the topic on
which to base the debate. Thus merits will be given to the team with the better model.
The model can be assessed on the following count.
• completeness
• timeliness
• feasibility
A model can be attacked as well by highlighting undesirable effects. e.g. Floodgate effect that
can follow a policy, the social backlash that could happen.
[edit] See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related
to: Debate
• CreateDebate
• Debates
• Dialectics
International high-school debating
• Harvard Model United Nations

• World Individual Debating and Public Speaking Championships
• World Schools Debating Championships
International university debating

• Debate camp#Popular • National Association of Urban
camps/institutes Debate Leagues
• Australasian Intervarsity Debating • North American Debating
Championships Championship
• American Parliamentary Debate • North American Public Speaking
Association Championship
• Canadian University Society for
Intercollegiate Debate • World Universities Debating
• Harvard World Model United Nations Championship
• International Public Debate

Association
Lecture: Parliamentary Debate - Motions You are Unprepared For
Famous debater for Ateneo de Manilla, Philippines, Eleanor Uy gives this talk at the 2005 Asian
Debate Institute in Seoul, Korea.
There are three ways to watch this video, in the order we suggest you use:
1. Right click on the link to download, drag it into your iTunes application, watch it in full screen
mode. Once it is downloaded you can watch it now, save it for later, or put it on another
computer.
2. Right click on the link to download and then watch it using your QuickTime application.
3. Click on the link and watch it in a small browser window while it downloads.
Click to view or right click to save to your hard drive:

http://bankskripsi.com/archive/http://debatevideoblog.blo
gspot.com/2007/07/lecture-parliamentary-debate-
motions.html
Parliamentary Debate Rules

By Shane Hall, eHow Contributor
updated: August 18, 2009
Parliamentary Debate is an academic debate event that is popular in English-speaking

universities as well as some high schools. Although the event pits two teams, known as the
government and the opposition, Parliamentary Debate is not connected to debates that occur in
government houses of Parliament. Parliamentary Debate features two teams, plus a person who
serves as judge.
Identification
1. Each team in a Parliamentary Debate event has two debaters. The
Government team consists of a prime minister and a member of government.
The second team, known as the Opposition, consists of the Opposition Leader
and Opposition Member. The judge of the debate is known as the Speaker.
Types
2. According to the National Parliamentary Debate Association, the resolution or
topic of a debate centers on current affairs or a question of philosophy.
Structure of Debate
3. A debate round involves a series of speeches presented by the debaters. The
Government team begins the debate by presenting a specific statement or
resolution, which it must demonstrate to be correct. The Opposition, by its
arguments and speeches, must show the Government team's position to be
incorrect.
The debate round begins with a speech by the Prime Minister. The Leader of
the Opposition then replies with an opening speech. Following the Opposition
Leader, the Government member speaks, then the Opposition member.
Rebuttal speeches then follow, beginning with the Opposition leader and
ending with the Prime Minister.
Timing
4. According to the American Parliamentary Debate Association, the Prime
Minister's opening speech is limited to seven minutes, and the Opposition
Leader has a limit of eight minutes. The two team members--Government
and Opposition--have eight minutes each for their speeches. The rebuttals
are four minutes for the Opposition Leader and five minutes for the Prime
Minister.
Point of Information
5. During the speeches by the Prime Minister, Member of Government,
Opposition Leader or Opposition Member, other debaters may rise to ask a
question of the person speaking or to make a point. This is known as a point
of information. To raise a point of information, the debater must stand, place
a hand on top of her head and raise her other arm to signal. The debater who
is speaking may recognize the point by saying "on that point," then allow the
questioner to speak. If the debater does not wish to recognize the point of
information, he says "no thank you," at which point the questioner sits.
Points of Order and Personal Privilege
6. When a debater believes a rule of debate has been broken, she can stand
and say, "Point of order." The debater who is speaking must then stop and
allow the debater who rose to state what rule has been violated. The judge of
the debate round, known as the Speaker, then rules on the point of order,
deciding if it is "well taken" or "not well taken." A "well taken" point means
the debater must conclude his speech. The debater can continue if the
Speaker rules the point to be "not well taken."
Although rarely used, a debater can raise a "point of personal privilege" if she
has been personally insulted during a debate. As with points of order, the
speaker rules whether the point is well taken or not well taken.
Read more: Parliamentary Debate Rules | eHow.com

http://www.ehow.com/about_5315301_parliamentary-debate-
rules.html#ixzz153Cyn9hI
Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

November 13, 2009 abinadakhairiyah Leave a comment Go to comments
(taken from http://wiki.idebate.org)
Government:
Prime Minister (PM)
• Define context and parameters of debate. For example, in an open motion like “This
House Would Support Musicians”, the debate could be contextualized into whether music
should be a commodity for trade, or it should be available gratis (i.e. free music
download and transfer)
• Provide concise background or history leading to the issue
• Give framework of government bench’s case. I.e. mechanisms (if any), argumentation
flow (what the government’s first argument is and what the Deputy Prime Minister will
talk about)
• Introduce 1st argument
• Assert Government stand
Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)
• Rebut first argument from Leader of Opposition

• Rebut rebuttals to PM’s argument
• Introduce 2nd and 3rd argument
Government Whip
• Rebut Deputy Leader of Opposition, and Leader of Opposition

• Rebut rebuttals to DPM and PM arguments
• Brief summary of entire case of Government
Opposition:
Leader of Opposition
• Agree or disagree with context/ parameters of debate (any definitional challenges,

accusations of squirreling, or unfair set up should be made from the LO speech and no
later)
• Rebut Prime Minister’s argument
• Give framework for Opposition case (if Opp agrees to problem, then their case should
provide solution, or at least effectively highlight how Government proposal will worsen
the situation)
• Introduce first Opposition argument
• Assert Opposition stand
Deputy Leader of Opposition

• Rebut rebuttals to LO arguments
• Introduce 1st and 2nd (if any) argument
Opposition Whip

• Rebut rebuttals to LO & DLO arguments
Reply Speech:
• Can only be done by either 1st or 2nd speaker from each bench
• Provide a biased ‘oral adjudication’ of why the debate should go to own bench
• Highlight issues you think your side won, carefully tiptoe around issues you think you
lost
• New examples to expand on discussed examples is usually allowed and makes the reply
speech sound fresh as opposed to verbal regurgitation
• Reassert stand
Most importantly, try to have fun while you’re doing all this. ;)
Motion
A motion is the term used as a referral of the topic about to be debated in the Asian
Parliamentary system. Most motions in the system begin with the phrase “This House…,” with
the ‘House’ referring to a governing body debating the particular motion.
Teams and Speaker Responsibilities
Similar to any forms of debates, the Asian Parliamentary has two opposing sides; the
government, to propose and defend the motion and the opposition, to oppose and negate the
motion. Each of these two teams comprise of three speakers with distinct roles and
responsibilities.
The speakers of the government side are:
- Prime Minister, whose role is to provide the interpretation of the motion and setup a ground for
the debate, as well as open the case for the government
- Deputy Prime Minister, whose role is to effectively rebut the case delivered by the opposition,
amplify the arguments initiated by the previous speaker of the team and later advances the
government’s case by delivering a new argument
- Member of The Government, whose role is to refute the opposition’s whole case by
summarizing the entire debate from the government’s perspective and give final analysis on why
the government should win
The speakers of the opposition side are:
- Leader of The Opposition, whose role is to state where the opposition’s position in the
particular debate, respond to the initial case brought by the government and open the case for the
opposition
- Deputy Leader of The Opposition, whose role is quite similar to the Deputy Prime Minister,
taking the opposition’s perspective
- Member of The Opposition, whose role is similar to the Member of The Government, taking
the opposition’s perspective
Each speaker is 7 (seven) minutes to deliver a speech.
After all speakers have spoken, each team will be given the chance to give a reply speech. A
reply speech is a speech that concludes the debate and state why a particular team’s case is better
than the opposing one. The speakers allowed to deliver a reply speech would be either the first or
the second speaker of each team. A time constrain of 4 (four) minutes is given for reply
speeches.
The order of speeches would go as follows:
1. 1st government, Prime Minister
2. 1st opposition, Leader of Opposition
3. 2nd government, Deputy Prime Minister
4. 2nd opposition, Deputy Leader of Opposition
5. 3rd government, Member of Government
6. 3rd opposition, Member of Opposition
7. Government reply
8. Opposition reply
Point of Information
During the speeches (except for the reply), the opposing team may offer Point of Informations. A
Point of Information, usually shortened POI, is a form of interruption delivered to challenge a
case brought by the speaker delivering a speech. A POI is most commonly, but not always,
question directed to a point brought by the speaker. It can also be a quick rebuttal.
A POI cannot exceed 15 (fifteen) seconds, meaning that the point brought has to be concise and
sharp to ensure maximum effectively. A speaker has the right to refuse a POI, although it is
highly recommended for a speaker to accept one or two during a speech to create a good
dynamic in the debate.
POIs can only be raised between the first and the sixth minute of the speech. Earlier than one and
later than six are called the protected time and POIs cannot be raised.
Adjudication
The victor of an Asian Parliamentary debating system will be determined by adjudicators. The
adjudicator may comprise of a single person or an odd number of persons, with the number
usually increasing as the tournament progresses into more advanced and crucial rounds.
The decision made by adjudicators is based on three criteria:
- Matter, which is the quality of the arguments brought and the logic behind them
- Manner, which is how the points are delivered, usually looking at how clear and convincing a
speech is
- Method, which looks at speaker role and responsibility fulfillment

Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

Prime Minister (PM)

Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)

• Rebut first argument from Leader of Opposition

• Rebut Deputy Leader of Opposition, and Leader of Opposition

Deputy Leader of Opposition

• Rebut DPM and PM arguments

• Rebut DPM and PM arguments

Research Timely Issues

Research Key Countries and Organizations

Use IDEA's Free Resources

There two opposing teams in an Asians format of debate:

1. Government side- proposes and defends the motion;

Each each side is composed of three members.

The Members of the government side are the following:

The Members of the Opposition side are the following:

Matter, Manner, Method:

Asian Parliamentary Debate is assessed by an Adjudicator Panel composed of an odd number

Overview of Asian Parliamentary Debate

A complete list of Debatepedia articles related to this topic can be found at

Times and Order of Asian Parliamentary Debate Speeches

• Leader of Opposition - 7 minutes

• Deputy Prime Minister - 7 minutes

• Deputy Leader of Opposition - 7 minutes

• Government Whip - 7 minutes

• Opposition Whip - 7 minutes

• Opposition Reply Speech - 4 minutes

• Government Reply Speech - 4 minutes

# of people in the debate: 6

Questions format: Points of information

The speakers speak in the following order:

Deputy prime minister

Deputy leader of opposition

Jump to: navigation, search

Parliamentary Debate is an academic debate event. Many university level institutions in

• 1 British Parliamentary Debate

[edit] British Parliamentary Debate

[edit] Parliamentary Debate Books

The blog of Eric Robertson is http://ericjamesrobertson.com

Meany, John- fArt, Argument, and Advocacy: Mastering Parliamentary Debate

Crossman, Mark- Burden of Proof http://www.amazon.com/Burden-Proof-Introduction-

Meany, John- On that point- An introduction to parliamentary debate

[edit] American Parliamentary Debate

This style consists of two teams, with the following speakers:

1. Prime Minister: 7 minutes

• Points of Order, when the speaker is introducing a new argument during a

[edit] World Schools Style

• International high school debating

Langsung ke: navigasi, cari

• 1 Debat kompetitif dalam pendidikan

[sunting] Debat kompetitif dalam pendidikan

Kompetisi debat bertaraf internasional umumnya menggunakan bahasa Inggris sebagai

[sunting] Debat kompetitif di Indonesia

Artikel Utama: Debat kompetitif di Indonesia

[sunting] Berbagai gaya debat parlementer

Dalam debat kompetitif, sebuah format mengatur hal-hal antara lain:

• jumlah tim dalam satu debat

• topik debat disebut mosi (motion)

[sunting] Australian Parliamentary/Australasian Parliamentary ("Australs")

1. Pembicara pertama pihak Pemerintah - 7 menit

(This House believes that) Globalization marginalizes the poor.

(Sidang Dewan percaya bahwa) Globalisasi meminggirkan masyarakat

Tidak ada interupsi dalam format ini.