CHAPTER 4.1. British Parliamentary (BP) debate format

What is British Parliamentary?

This is a popular format in the UK and is used by many university-run competitions. There are eight speakers in this format: two teams of two people on each side. Each speaker gives a speech of up to five minutes (sometimes, longer seven minute speeches might be requested). The first and last minute are protected, but between these times points of information may be offered.

The debate consists of four teams: two government teams (referred to as «Opening Government» and «Closing Government») and two opposition teams (referred to as «Opening Opposition » and «Closing Opposition»). Each team consists of two speakers.Z

The speeches are given alternating between proposition and opposition, beginning with the first proposition team. The second teams on each side (the final four speakers) must take care to ensure that they offer new ideas to the debate -they cannot simply repeat what the team before them has already said. The final speaker on each side is the summary speaker: they cannot introduce completely new arguments (although they may give some new responses) and should summarise the debate so far.

Each team should prepare, and is judged, separately. This means at the end, they will be ranked from 1-4. It is entirely possible, for example, for one proposition team to come first whilst the other comes fourth.

Roles´ description:

OPENING GOVERNMENT (OG)	OPENING OPPOSITION (OO)
Prime Minister (PM) The job of the PM is to present a debatable, persuasive case in support of the motion. To this end, a speaker should: -Define the motion. This might include: defining specific terms in the motion, advocating specific policy change(s), and/or articulating the roles of relevant stakeholders. -Provide a complete case. Establish that a problem exists, and provide reasons why your team’s advocacy resolves it. If necessary, signpost the new material your partner will add. -Avoid being too clever. Aim to set up a debatable case that supports the most obvious interpretation of the motion.	Leader of Opposition (LO) The Leader should oppose the motion and the case presented by the PM. -Refute the PM’s case. Be specific. Criticize the case you’ve just heard. -Oppose. Why is the motion itself problematic? State your team’s position and provide reasoning to support it. As you prepare for this speech, consider that the motion might possibly do more harm than good, foreclose better alternatives, or be tethered to a destructive worldview. -Recognize that the first two tasks on this list are not always separate. A good PM speech will allow you to oppose both at the same time.
Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) The DPM closes for the Opening Government, and should: -Rebuild. Defend your team’s case by answering the LO’s refutation. Reiterate the key elements of your team’s position. –Refute the LO’s case. Be specific. Criticize what you’ve just heard. Compare it to your team’s position. -Follow through on promises. If your partner declared that you would present new material in support of your team’s position, do so. At the very least, add depth to the original case by providing additional details, examples, or explanation.	Deputy Leader of Opposition (DLO) The DLO concludes the first half of the debate for the Opposition, and should: -Rebuild. Defend your partner’s case from the DPM’s refutation. Reiterate the key elements of your team’s position. -Refute. Address new, relevant material presented by the DPM. Illustrate any important tension(s) between the PM & DPM speeches. Highlight LO refutation that was ignored or insufficiently covered by the DPM. -Add depth. Add something to your team’s case. You can provide additional examples, explanation, or analysis to support a previous claim. You can present a new argument.

CLOSING GOVERNMENT (OG)	CLOSING OPPOSITION (OO)
Member of Government or extension speaker (MG) The Member of Government opens the second half of the debate, and should: -Refute. Address any new contribution(s) from the DLO. Consider engaging in holistic refutation of the OO, or even preempting what the CO is likely to claim. -Offer an “extension.” Add something new. You might choose to present an entirely new argument, or you might opt to develop an important argument that the OG underdeveloped. -Explain how the CG’s position fits into the debate. Avoid contradictingthe OG case. Explain why what you’readding is important in relation to theOG case.	Member of Opposition or extension speaker (MO) The Member of Opposition should: -Refute. Answer the new material presented by the Member of Government. Consider engaging in holistic refutation of the entire Proposition bench. Look for and exploit contradictions/tensions between the OG & CG. -Make a contribution. Add something new. You might choose to present a new argument or to further develop an OO argument. -Explain how the CO’s contribution fits into the debate. Illustrate why your position is important in relation to the OO case. Avoid contradicting the OO if you can.
Government Whip The Government Whip should: -Identify the 2-3 most relevant concepts in the debate. These concepts should serve as the main points of your speech. At some point, explain why your conceptual breakdown is the best way to view the debate. -Sell the “extension.” Demonstrate how your team’s material relates to other important content in the debate. Articulate why your position defeats the most important arguments presented by the Opposition. -Refute. Answer the contribution made by the Member of Opposition. Engage in holistic refutation of the Opposition. -Avoid making new arguments. You may, however, add details or examples in support of previous claims.	Opposition Whip The Opposition Whip closes the debate, and should: -Identify the 2-3 most relevant concepts in the debate. The CG will have just done this. Identify different concepts. Argue why your concepts are more relevant than the CG’s concepts in understanding the competing claims. The concepts you identify should then serve as the main points of your speech. -Sell your contribution. Explain how your team’s position relates to other important arguments in the debate. -Avoid making new arguments. You may, however, add details or examples in support of previous claims.

Speaking time:

Each speaker is typically allocated a specific time to deliver their speech. The speaking times may vary, but common time allocations are:

Constructive Speeches:

Prime Minister (PM) – 7 minutes: The PM presents the opening arguments and defines the motion.
Leader of the Opposition (LO) – 7 minutes: The LO presents the opening arguments from the opposing side.

First Opposition Speeches:

Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) – 7 minutes: The DPM responds to the LO’s arguments and further develops the government’s case.
Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DLO) – 7 minutes: The DLO counters the government’s case and presents alternative perspectives.

Member’s Speeches:

Member of the Government (MG) – 7 minutes: The MG provides new arguments, responds to the opposition, and strengthens the government’s position.
Member of the Opposition (MO) – 7 minutes: The MO provides new arguments, responds to the government, and strengthens the opposition’s position.

Reply Speeches:

Government Whip – 4 minutes: The Government Whip summarizes the government’s case, rebuts the opposition’s arguments, and delivers a persuasive closing statement.
Opposition Whip – 4 minutes: The Opposition Whip summarizes the opposition’s case, rebuts the government’s arguments, and delivers a persuasive closing statement.

Points of Information (POIs)

During the speeches, members of the opposing teams may offer Points of Information to the speaker. The speaker has the choice to accept or reject these interruptions, which are typically brief and allow for interjections, questions, or challenges to the arguments being presented.

A. PRIME MINISTER (PM) SPEECH

The Prime Minister (PM) is the first speaker for the Government in the British Parliamentary (BP) debate format. Here are some preparation strategies for their speech:

The Prime Minister (PM) is the Government’s first speaker in the British parliamentary debate (BP) format. In preparing the speech, the following steps can be followed:

Define the motion: The PM explains the motion and introduces his or her arguments. He or she should also introduce the team and set the tone for the debate.
Anticipate the opposition’s arguments: Predict what arguments the opposition will use to defend its position (the goal is to cover as much disagreement as possible with the government’s position).
Line of argument: The government team should present the strongest line of argument it can think of to defend its position in the debate.
Presentation of the position in the debate: The PM presents his/her argumentation in favor of the motion presented (2 to 3 arguments) in a single sentence. Once the position is presented, the PM develops in more detail each of the arguments.
Evidence: The PM should support his/her arguments with examples, quotations, references, …
Summary: The PM ends his speech by summarizing his arguments and closing in a striking manner.

B. LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION (LO) SPEECH

The Leader of the Opposition (LO) is the first Opposition speaker. In preparing and organizing his speech, the LO may follow the following steps:

Present the opposition to the motion: The LO should show his opposition to the debate motion and the arguments presented by the PM. The objective of his speech is to clearly express the Opposition’s position in the debate.
Rebuttal: LO must refute the arguments presented by the PM in his intervention.
Constructive Argumentation: LO should present his arguments to demonstrate the falsity of the motion being debated.
Anticipate the responses that the government may give: the Opposition should be able to anticipate how the government will respond and anticipate by covering as many counter-arguments as possible.
Have a solid line of argument: the Opposition must defend its position in the debate with the best arguments it can muster.
State the position in the debate: LO presents 2-3 arguments that demonstrate the soundness of their position. Once presented in summary form, LO will develop its line of argument.
Evidence: LO shall present evidence that gives solvency to its line of argument.

D. DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER (DPM) SPEECH

To prepare the speech of the Deputy Prime Minister (DPM), we can follow the following steps:

Analyze the LO’s speech: DPM should understand the points presented by the LO and further develop the arguments presented by the PM.
Reconstruct arguments: DPM must reconstruct the government team’s position by responding to the LO’s rebuttals and expanding on the arguments presented by the PM.I
ntroduce new arguments: DPM must introduce new arguments to further justify and reinforce the government’s position.
Respond to the opposition: DPM should respond to the arguments presented by the Opposition team by questioning their validity.
Closing the intervention: DPM shall make a strong conclusion summarizing the position defended by the Government team, demonstrating why its position is the most successful in this debate.

E. DEPUTY PRIME LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION (DLO)

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DLO) is the second Opposition speaker. In preparing the speech, the following steps can be taken:

Recapitulate the opposition’s arguments: DLO should summarise the line of argument defended by the opposition team that started by presenting the LO.
Respond to the government team: DLO should continue to refute the arguments presented by the government team after the intervention of the DPM.
Reconstruct the opposition’s arguments: DLO must respond to the rebuttals launched by the DPM in its intervention by providing additional evidence.
Introduce new arguments: DLO should introduce new arguments to further strengthen the position presented by the opposition.
Closing the intervention: DLO should conclude its intervention by summarising the arguments presented by the opposition team and closing in a strong way to receive the strong support by providing two main forms of support, such as examples, philosophical points or quotations.

F. MEMBER OF THE GOVERNMENT (MG)

These are the steps we can follow to prepare the Government Member’s (GM) speech:

Summarize the Government’s arguments: MG should recapitulate the arguments presented by the PM and DPM in their interventions.
Reconstruct: MG should reconstruct the government’s position after the interventions of the LO and DLO, providing new information.
Contribute new arguments: MG must introduce new arguments that reinforce the position defended by the government.
Challenging the opposition: MG must refute the arguments presented by the opposition team throughout the debate.
Conclude convincingly: MG must close his intervention by summarizing the government’s line of argument and demonstrating why his position is the most appropriate.

G. MEMBER OF THE OPPOSITION (MO)

Steps to prepare an opposition member’s speech (MO):

Recapitulate the opposition’s arguments: MO summarizes the arguments presented by the opposition team throughout the debate.
Reconstruction: MO responds to the rebuttals launched by the GM and the government team throughout the debate, providing new data that reinforce the opposition’s line of argument.
Argumentation: introducing new arguments to reinforce the opposition’s proposal.
Rebuttal: MO questions the arguments presented by the GM and the government team throughout their interventions.
Closing: Conclude the intervention by summarizing the line of argument and asking for support for the position defended by the opposition.

An example of a MO speech:

«Thank you very much to the GM for his intervention. Next, I will summarize the line of argument defended by the opposition team throughout this debate, where it has been clear that (summary line of argument). Responding to the comments made by the government team to the line of argument defended by the opposition in this debate, (mention arguments and our reconstruction). To strengthen the position of the opposition in this debate (introduce new arguments and their evidence). Let me now question some of the points mentioned by the government in its interventions (rebuttals). To conclude, we mention how we have demonstrated the solvency of the opposition’s line of argument (summary of the line of argument) and ask for support for the position defended by the opposition team.»

H. GOVERNMENT WHIP (GW)

Steps to prepare the GW speech:

Recap the government’s arguments: GW summarizes the arguments presented by the government team throughout the debate.
Refute the opposition: GW challenges the arguments presented by the opposition throughout the debate.
Summarize the debate: GW makes a detailed summary of what happened during the debate, highlighting the key points made by both sides, emphasizing the strength of their arguments and the flaws in the Opposition’s case.
Close the debate: GW is responsible for closing the debate on behalf of the government team. It must therefore offer a strong conclusion that reinforces the Government’s position and highlights why the Government has won the debate.

Please note that the GW is not allowed to introduce new arguments in their speech

I. OPPOSITION WHIP (OW)

Steps to prepare the Opposition Whip (OW) speech, last speaker of the opposition:

Recap: summarize the arguments presented by the opposition team throughout the debate 2. Summarize by highlighting the key points and evidence presented.
Refute: Refute the arguments presented by the government team throughout the debate, identifying the weak points and providing solid counterarguments.
Summarize: In detail the main arguments presented by both teams, highlighting the strengths of the Opposition’s line of argument and the weaknesses of the Government’s line of argument.
Conclusion: End the speech with a strong conclusion highlighting the opposition’s position and highlighting why it is stronger. Ask for support for the position defended by the opposition throughout the debate.

Examples of the different speeches along the debate:

GOVERNMENT		OPPOSITION
PM	«We consider the motion before us today to be of great importance. Our team will argue that [idea we are advocating]. We think the opposition will argue [arguments/ideas we believe the opposition will use to defend their position]. However, we will demonstrate that we have the best arguments to defend our position. First, [argument 1 + evidence]. Second, [argument 2+ evidence]. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that [summary of arguments presented in the intervention]. We ask the jury and the audience to support our position in the debate.»	LO	«We believe that the motion before us today is of the utmost importance. Our team will challenge the arguments presented by the Government and show an alternative scenario. First, I will show my opposition to the motion proposed in this debate and the arguments presented by the PM. Second, I will rebut the arguments presented by the PM. For example, (rebuttal 1). Third, I will present the arguments defending our position in the debate. First, (argument 1+evidence). Second, (argument 2+evidence). As a conclusion to my intervention, to say that we have demonstrated that (summary of the arguments presented). So we ask that you support our position and put to the motion. presented by the government.»
DPM	«I would like to thank the LO for his intervention. We in the government consider that, contrary to the position defended by this government, the arguments just presented to us by the LO are not entirely correct. First of all, I am going to respond to the issues presented by the opposition for which I will summarize the arguments presented by the PM and expand on them. For example, (argument 1: reconstruction). Secondly, I will present new arguments that contribute to further strengthen the position defended by this government (new argument with evidence). Third, I will provide a response (rebuttal) to the arguments presented by the VPM. In conclusion, the government team has demonstrated (summary of the arguments presented by the government bench). Therefore, we invite you to support the proposal presented by this government team. «	DLO	«I would like to thank the DPM for his intervention. First of all, I will recapitulate the arguments put forward by the opposition group in this debate. We have shown that (summary of the arguments presented by the LO). Secondly, I will proceed to refute the arguments presented by the government team following the intervention of the DPM. The government team has commented that (argument presented by the government), sine [insert rebuttal 1]. I will then develop the opposition’s arguments by providing additional arguments and evidence. For example, [insert argument 1]. We predict that the government will argue [insert expected arguments]. However, we have the best possible arguments to support our position. Second, [insert argument 2]. We will provide support for our arguments by [insert support 1] and [insert support 2]. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that [insert summary of arguments]. Therefore, we urge you to support our position and vote against the motion.»
MG	«After the intervention of the government and opposition opening teams, I am going to recapitulate the arguments presented by this government team. Throughout the debate we have demonstrated that (summary of the line of argument put forward by the government team). Responding to the comments launched by the opposition team, comment that (argument and its response to the comments of the opposition. We provide additional information). To reinforce the position of this government (introduce new argument with its evidence). In relation to the arguments presented by the opposition team (rebuttal to the opposition’s line of argument). To close my intervention, to comment that we have demonstrated that (summary of the government’s line of argument). Therefore, we ask for support in favor of the proposal presented by this government. «	MO	«Thank you very much to the GM for his intervention. Next, I will summarize the line of argument defended by the opposition team throughout this debate, where it has been clear that (summary line of argument). Responding to the comments made by the government team to the line of argument defended by the opposition in this debate, (mention arguments and our reconstruction). To strengthen the position of the opposition in this debate (introduce new arguments and their evidence). Let me now question some of the points mentioned by the government in its interventions (rebuttals). To conclude, we mention how we have demonstrated the solvency of the opposition’s line of argument (summary of the line of argument) and ask for support for the position defended by the opposition team.»
GW	» Good morning. I would like to begin my intervention by summarizing the arguments presented by this government. First of all, the government’s opening team argued that (summary of the arguments presented by the government’s opening team, and how the rebuttals launched by the opposition have been answered in order to demonstrate their soundness). The government extensionist contributed valuable ideas that further strengthened the government’s position. For example, (mention the arguments presented by the extensionist) This argument adds an additional layer of support to the case defended by the government team in this debate (justify how the argument presented by the extensionist contributes to reform the government’s position). Regarding the arguments presented by the opposition team in the debate, LO mentioned in his intervention that (argument). However, this argument does not take into account (rebuttal). On the other hand, DLO claimed that (mention argument). But this argument does not take into account that (rebuttal). MO argued that (mention argument), but did not take into account (rebuttal). As you can see, it is clear why the government’s arguments are still valid and why the opposition’s position is invalid. Therefore, we ask you to support our proposal.”	OW	» Good morning. I would like to begin my intervention by summarizing the arguments presented by the opposition. First of all, the opposition’s opening team argued that (summary of the arguments presented by the opposition’s opening team, and how the rebuttals launched by the government have been answered in order to demonstrate their soundness). The opposition extensionist contributed valuable ideas that further strengthened the opposition’s position. For example, (mention the arguments presented by the extensionist) This argument adds an additional layer of support to the case defended by the opposition team in this debate (justify how the argument presented by the extensionist contributes to reform the opposition’s position). Regarding the arguments presented by the government team in the debate, PM mentioned in his intervention that (argument). However, this argument does not take into account (rebuttal). On the other hand, DPM claimed that (mention argument). But this argument does not take into account that (rebuttal). MG argued that (mention argument), but did not take into account (rebuttal). As you can see, it is clear why the opposition’s arguments are still valid and why the government’s position is invalid. Therefore, we ask you to support our proposal.”

CHAPTER 4. Debate preparation

CHAPTER 4.2. Debate format Lincoln-Douglas