The Guide

WUDC World/British Parliamentary Debating Rules
(taken from Roy D’Cruz & IIUM Spice Unit)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Guide is prepared by the IIUM English Debating Association with the view to help those who are interested in the British Parliamentary format of debate. They have tried to make this guideline as simple and straight forward as possible keeping in view the fact that many participants of the championship will not have prior experience in debating.

It highlights some of the qualities and methods which make an effective debater while providing you with an introduction to the format of the British Parliamentary format of debate. The suggestions outlined serve only as a general guideline, and not as the official rule of any championship using the British Parliamentary format.

Part 1 - Introduction

Debating is an acquired skill. It is a fine art which combines two roles; the presentation of the debater's case in a reasonable, attractive and persuasive manner, coupled with the effective response to the opposition's case and counter arguments. As such, a debate works very much in favour of developing objective, critical thinking and the structured presentation of ideas. These two qualities summarize the important characteristics of a dynamic leader who is well equipped to face contemporary and future challenges.

In the British Parliamentary format of debate, four teams, the Opening Government, the Closing Government, the Opening Opposition and the Closing Opposition, of two debaters each, debate a resolution proposed to the House. A different motion is proposed for each round. The result of the round is decided by a panel of adjudicators. No evidence or other outside written or printed material may be consulted during the round.


1.1 The format of the debate

1.1.1 The debate will consist of four teams of two persons (persons will be known as "members"), a chairperson (known as the "Speaker of the House" or "Mister/Madame Speaker" and an adjudicator or panel of adjudicators.

1.1.2 Teams will consist of the following members:

1.1.3 Members will deliver substantive speeches in the following order:
(1) Prime Minister (7 minutes);
(2) Opposition Leader (7 minutes);
(3) Deputy Prime Minister (7 minutes);
(4) Deputy Opposition Leader (7 minutes);
(5) Member for the Government (7 minutes);
(6) Member for the Opposition (7 minutes);
(7) Government Whip (7 minutes);
(8) Opposition Whip (7 minutes).
Opening Government "Prime Minister" & "Deputy Prime Minister"
Opening Opposition "Leader of the Opposition" & "Deputy Leader of the Opposition"
Closing Government "Member for the Government" & "Government Whip"
Closing Opposition "Member for the Opposition" & "Opposition Whip"

1.1.4 Members will deliver a substantive speech of seven minutes duration and should offer points of information while members of the opposing teams are speaking.

ROLES OF TEAMS


Government (Proposition) Teams in General: The role of the Government teams shall be to support the motion (topic). This involves defining the motion, constructing a positive case in favour of the motion, providing substantive material and arguments in support of their case and responding to any challenges made to that case by the Opposition.

Opposition Teams in General: The role of the Opening Opposition team is to negate the motion. This involves responding to the Government's definition, constructing a case in opposition to the motion, providing substantive material and arguments in support of the case and responding to the arguments delivered by the Government.

The Opposition should also provide "value-clash" in the debate. In other words, the argumentation they forward must constitute a clash or disagreement with the case presented by the Government. From experience, when the Government presents a case which is not similar to the expectation of the Opposition, some Opposition teams refuse to respond appropriately by forwarding a case in direct disagreement. They instead simply deliver prepared speeches based on their speculation of what the Government's case would have been. This would result in there being two separate "speech presentations" instead of a debate. Needless to say, any Opposition team that does not provide value-clash while not explicitly challenging the definition proposed by the Government shall not be marked favourably (please refer to the rules on Definitions below).


Role of Opening Government: The role of the Opening Government is to define the topic and build a case in support of the topic. Building a case involves providing a case line or theme and arguments that proves the topic. The team also has to respond to the case built by the Opening Opposition Team.


Role of the Opening Opposition: The Opening Opposition has to respond to the definition, build a positive case to negate the topic. The team must also respond to the arguments introduced by the Opening Government.


Role of the Closing Government: The Closing Government is generally expected to follow and support the line of argumentation introduced by the first team on their side i.e. Opening Government. They must introduce new positive matter e.g. new arguments, new dimension or new analysis into the debate which were not introduced by the first team. The Closing Government may dump the Opening Government in an extreme case. However, if possible, they should not sound like opposing their own first team. Besides introducing new positive matter in support of the topic, they must also address the arguments introduced by both the Opposition Teams (Opening and Closing Opposition).


Role of Closing Opposition: The role of the Closing Opposition is somewhat similar to that of the Closing Government the only material difference by the fact that they build the case in opposition to the topic. The Closing Opposition is generally expected to follow and support the line of argumentation introduced by the first team on their side i.e. Opening Opposition. They must introduce new positive matter e.g. new arguments, new dimension or new analysis into the debate which were not introduced by the first team. The Closing Opposition may dump the Opening Opposition in an extreme case. Again, if possible, they should not sound like opposing their own first team. Besides introducing new positive matter in support of the topic, they must also address the arguments introduced by both the Government Teams (Opening and Closing Government).

Part 1.2 - The Motion

1.2 The motion

1.2.1 The motion should be unambiguously worded.

1.2.2 The members should debate the motion in the spirit of the motion and the tournament.

1.3 Points of Information

1.3.1 Points of Information (questions directed to the member speaking) may be asked between first minute mark and the six-minute mark of the members’ speeches (speeches are of seven minutes duration).

1.3.2 To ask a Point of Information, a member should stand, place one hand on his or her head and extend the other towards the member speaking. The member may announce that they would like to ask a "Point of Information" or use other words to this effect.

1.3.3 The member who is speaking may accept or decline to answer the Point of Information.


1.3.4 Points of Information should not exceed 15 seconds in length.


1.3.5 The member who is speaking may ask the person offering the Point of Information to sit down where the offeror has had a reasonable opportunity to be heard and understood.

1.3.6 Members should attempt to answer at least two Points of Information during their speech. Members should also offer Points of Information.

1.4 Timing of the speeches

1.4.1 Speeches should be seven minutes in duration (this should be signaled by two strikes of the gavel). Speeches over seven minutes and 15 seconds may be penalized.

1.4.2 Points of Information may only be offered between the first minute mark and the six minute mark of the speech (this period should be signaled by one strike of the gavel at the first minute and one strike at the sixth minute).

1.4.3 It is the duty of the Speaker of the House to time speeches.

1.4.4 In the absence of the Speaker of the House, it is the duty of the Chair of the Adjudication panel to ensure that speeches are timed.

Part 2 - Definitions

Part 2 - Definitions

2.1 The definition

2.1.1 The definition should state the issue (or issues) for debate arising out of the motion and state the meaning of any terms in the motion which require interpretation.

2.1.2 The Prime Minister should provide the definition at the beginning of his or her speech.

2.1.3 The definition must:
(a) have a clear and logical link to the motion - this means that an average reasonable person would accept the link made by the member between the motion and the definition (where there is no such link the definition is sometimes referred to as a "squirrel");
(b) not be self-proving - a definition is self-proving when the case is that something should or should not be done and there is no reasonable rebuttal. A definition is may also be self-proving when the case is that a certain state of affairs exists or does not exist and there is no reasonable rebuttal (these definitions are sometimes referred to as "truisms").
(c) not be time set - this means that the debate must take place in the present and that the definition cannot set the debate in the past or the future; and
(d) not be place set unfairly - this means that the definition cannot restrict the debate so narrowly to a particular geographical or political location that a participant of the tournament could not reasonably be expected to have knowledge of the place.

2.2 Challenging the definition

2.2.1 The Leader of the Opposition may challenge the definition if it violates clause 2.1.3 of these rules. The Leader of the Opposition should clearly state that he or she is challenging the definition.

2.2.2 The Leader of the Opposition should substitute an alternative definition after challenging the definition of the Prime Minister.

Part 3 - Matter

Part 3 - Matter

3.1 The definition of matter


3.1.1 Matter is the content of the speech. It is the arguments a debater uses to further his or her case and persuade the audience.

3.1.2 Matter includes arguments and reasoning, examples, case studies, facts and any other material that attempts to further the case.


3.1.3 Matter includes positive (or substantive) material and rebuttal (arguments specifically aimed to refute the arguments of the opposing team(s)). Matter includes Points of Information.


3.2 The elements of matter

3.2.1 Matter should be relevant, logical and consistent.

3.2.2 Matter should be relevant. It should relate to the issues of the debate: positive material should support the case being presented and rebuttal should refute the material being presented by the opposing team(s). The Member should appropriately prioritize and apportion time to the dynamic issues of the debate.

3.2.3 Matter should be logical. Arguments should be developed logically in order to be clear and well reasoned and therefore plausible. The conclusion of all arguments should support the member’s case.

3.2.4 Matter should be consistent. Members should ensure that the matter they present is consistent within their speech, their team and the remainder of the members on their side of the debate (subject to clauses 2.3.4, 2.3.5 or 2.3.6 of these rules).

3.2.5 All Members should present positive matter (except the final two members in the debate) and all members should present rebuttal (except the first member in the debate). The Government Whip may choose to present positive matter.

3.2.6 All Members should attempt to answer at least two points of information during their own speech and offer points of information during opposing speeches.

Part 4 - Manner

Part 4 — Manner


4.1 The definition of manner


4.1.1 Manner is the presentation of the speech. It is the style and structure a member uses to further his or her case and persuade the audience.

4.1.2 Manner is comprised of many separate elements. Some, but not all, of these elements are listed below.

4.2 The elements of style

4.2.1 The elements of style include eye contact, voice modulation, hand gestures, language, the use of notes and any other element which may affect the effectiveness of the presentation of the member.

4.2.2 Eye contact will generally assist a member to persuade an audience as it allows the member to appear more sincere.

4.2.3 Voice modulation will generally assist a member to persuade an audience as the debater may emphasize important arguments and keep the attention of the audience. This includes the pitch, tone, and volume of the member’s voice and the use of pauses.

4.2.4 Hand gestures will generally assist a member to emphasize important arguments. Excessive hand movements may however be distracting and reduce the attentiveness of the audience to the arguments.

4.2.5 Language should be clear and simple. Members who use language which is too verbose or confusing may detract from the argument if they lose the attention of the audience.

4.2.6 The use of notes is permitted, but members should be careful that they do not rely on their notes too much and detract from the other elements of manner.


4.3 The elements of structure

4.3.1 The elements of structure include the structure of the speech of the member and the structure of the speech of the team.


4.3.2 The matter of the speech of each member must be structured. The member should organize his or her matter to improve the effectiveness of their presentation. The substantive speech of each member should:

4.3.3 The matter of the team must be structured. The team should organize their matter to improve the effectiveness of their presentation. The team should:
(a) contain a consistent approach to the issues being debated; and
(b) allocate positive matter to each member where both members of the team are introducing positive matter; and
(a) include: an introduction, conclusion and a series of arguments; and
(b) be well-timed in accordance with the time limitations and the need to prioritize and apportion time to matter.
The use of foul, offensive or insulting language and gestures ARE PROBIHITED.
Having said all this, we wish everybody a safe, healthy, caffeine-laden longggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg debate…

~The Organizing Committee~
Faculty of Education 50 hours non-stop debate feat – The Malaysia’s Longest Debate 2006
http://facedu50hoursdebate06.blogspot.com OR 03-55227425