British

Parliamentary
Debating (BPD)
 WHAT IS BPD?
A competitive sport whereby 4 teams in opposing sides try
to convince an audience that a point of view regarding a
controversial issue is better than the alternative provided.

Discuss
vs.
Debate
 Discuss – Negotiate or compromise conflicting
points of view in order to cooperate.

 Debate – Highlight the opposing opinions surrounding

a topic as a tool for decision making and analysis.
 TERMINOLOGY
 This House
 The British House of Commons
 The EU (UN?... US?)

 Motion

 The given topic or subject being debated.

 Potential Areas Covered
 Social / Moral
 Political

 Entertainment (Sports / Art)

Each speakers is allocated 7 minutes in which to present.

DEBATE STRUCTURE

Points of Information – P.O.I.

 3 TYPES OF DEBATES
Factual Debate – Is it or is it not the case? Did it or did it not happen?
– THBT Germany is to blame for WW2
– THBT the capitalist system is doomed to collapse
– THBT our education system is a failure

Value Debate – What should our values be & why? Is it

Better or Worse – for us (and / or Society as a whole?)
– THBTthesanctityof life oughttobe valuedover thequalityof life
– THBT the economy should be prioritized over the environment
– THBT we should have more freedom

Policy Debate – What is the problem and how do we fix it?

– THW ban smoking
– THW outlaw experimentation on chimpanzees
– THW impose democracy
 3 TYPES OF MOTIONS
 Closed Motion
 THBT there is no such thing as universal human rights
 THBT mandatory drug testing of public officials is justified
 THBT child labour can never be justified

 Semi (Opened / Closed) Motion

 This House supports privatisation
 This House would adopt a green agenda
 This House believes that art is a diversion

 Open Motion
 THBT we have no reverse
 THW gain a burst of knowledge
 THB in the more the Merrier
PRIME MINISTER
 Role:
 Setup the Debate
 Present the Most Important
1 2
Arguments (normally 2)
3 4
 Structure:
 Definition / Introduction
6
 Sign Post
5

7 8
 Present 1st Substantive
 Present 2nd Substantive
 Conclusion
PRIME MINISTER
 Definition:

 Provide Sufficient Background

 Define Contentious Terminology
1 2
 Identify The Problem – (Why is it a problem?)

3 4  Provide Policy (Find a Solution)

 Explain Who does What and When,
 How does it solve the problem,
 Why is this a better situation than before
5 6
 Who is going to be affected by this and
how is that better?
7 8
(Easiest Solution is to Provide an Existing Model)

E.g.: THW use children in the front line during war times
PRIME MINISTER

1 2
• Sign-Posting & Conclusions
• Letting others know what you
3 4
are going to say.
• Explaining & Associating the
5 6 topic.

7 8 • Reminding them of what you

said.
PRIME MINISTER

 Substantive:

1 2  Title
 Premises
3 4
 Inference
 Conclusion
5 6
 Supportive Statistics / Examples

7 8  Link Back
 Example: - Legalise Drugs
 SUPPORTING THE SUBSTANTIVE
Research on bread indicates that:
1. More than 98 percent of convicted felons are
bread users.

2. Fully HALF of all children who grow up in

bread-consuming households score below
average on standardized tests.

3. More than 90 percent of violent crimes are

committed within 24 hours of eating bread.

4. Bread is an addictive substance. Subjects

deprived of bread and given only water to eat
begged for bread after as little as two days.
Source: http://www.eskimo.com/~spban/bread.html
SUPPORTING THE SUBSTANTIVE
5. Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading
the user to "harder" items such as butter, jelly,
peanut butter, and even cold cuts.

6. Primitive tribal societies that have no bread

exhibit a low incidence of cancer, Alzheimer's,
Parkinson's disease, and osteoporosis.

7. Newborn babies can choke on bread.

 In light of these frightening statistics, it
has been proposed that the following
bread restrictions be made:

1. No sale of bread to minors.

2. A nationwide "Just Say No To Toast" campaign,
complete celebrity TV spots and bumper stickers.
3. A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all
the societal ills we might associate with bread.
4. No animal or human images, nor any primary
colours (which may appeal to children) may be
used to promote bread usage.
5. The establishment of "Bread-free" zones around schools.
Source: http://www.eskimo.com/~spban/bread.html
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

1 2  Role:
 Set the tone of the Opposition
3 4

 Following the 1st Speaker:

5 6  Good / Clear / Structured
 Bad / Unclear / Unstructured
7 8  No Debate / Truism / Ridiculous
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
 Following a Good Prime-Minister:

Structure:
1 2
3 4  Sign Post
 Reiterate
5 6  Rebut

7 8
 Present Substantive
 Conclusion
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

• Following a Good Prime-Minister:

1 2 Rebut:
• Time line: Now  Action  Then
3 4 – Won’t work / Impractical / can’t be done
– Won’t solve the problem
– Outcome / Side-Effects worse than
Solution.
5 6
• E.g.: Co-operations Control The Future
7 8
• Big Blue Ball
• E.g.: Child labour can never be justified
• E.g.: Abolish Capital Punishment
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
• Bad / Unclear Prime-Minister:
Clarify:
1 2 • No Problem Exists / Factually
inaccurate
3 4
– Suggest Most Logical Conflict
– Rebut it as before

5 6 Must be logical criteria

• E.g.: Africa in UN Security Council

7 8
• Not Relevant to the Debate
• E.g.: THW Lift the arms embargo off China
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
 Following a Truism / Ridiculous Def:

 E.g.: THBT Multiculturalism has Failed

1 2  E.g.: THBT the poor will always exist

3 4
Definition Debate:

5 6  Challenge the Definition (Prop it)

 2 debates running in tandem
7 8
 The Right Definition wins the
debate (Not Necessarily the best arguments)
THE DEPUTIES
• Role:
– Develop the Case
1 2 – Rebut the Opponents

3 4
• Structure:
– Sign Post
5 6
– Rebut
7 8 – Reinforce
– Add Substantive
– Conclusion
EXTENSIONS
• Role:
– Extension: Shift the focus of the Debate
1 2 • Deeper Analysis
• Different Point of View (Global / Local)
3 4 • Additional (Better) Arguments

Must be the same Motion!

5 6 • Structure:
– Sign Post
7 8 – Rebut
– Extension (normally 2 Substantives)
– Conclusion
EXTENSIONS
• Deeper Analysis:
– Who does it affect?
1 2
– What can / will they do about it?

4 – Who is going against them?

3
– Is this better or worse – Why?

• Different Point of View:

5 6
– Global / National / Local
7 8 – National / Conservative / Labour / Liberal
– Communist / Socialist / Capitalist

Show a deeper understanding of the motion and its issues

EXTENSIONS
• Additional (Better) Arguments:
– PEESTLE:
1 2 • Political
• Economical
3 4
• Environmental
• Social
5 6 • Technological
• Legal
7 8
• Ecological
Why is this point more important?
SUMMATORS

• Role:
1 2 Show Your side (Team) won the debate:

• Speaker by Speaker
3 4
• 3 Main Themes
• Time line: Now  Action  Then
5 6
New Information:
– Answer a rebuttal or P.O.I.
7 8
– Give a new analogy / example (to
an existing issue / argument)
JUDGING CRITERIA
Manner – Matter – Method
Manner – Style:
Confidence, Confidence, Confidence
Tone of Voice: Pace, Pitch & Pause
BodyLanguage: Stand Upright, Eye Contact, Hand Gestures
Energy Level

Method – Strategy: Matter – Content:

Timing Support to Argument
Structure / Signposting Validity of Argument
P.O.I (Taken & Received) Level of Analysis
Teamwork
THE END