Debate lesson
Basics of British Parliamentary (BP) Debate
The British Parliamentary (BP) debate is a widely used competitive debating format,
especially in universities and international tournaments. It is structured similarly to debates in
the UK Parliament and involves four teams and two opposing sides.
1. Structure of the Debate
A BP debate features four teams (two on each side) and eight speakers:
● Government (Proposition) – Supports the motion
○ Opening Government (OG): First Proposition Team
○ Closing Government (CG): Second Proposition Team
● Opposition – Opposes the motion
○ Opening Opposition (OO): First Opposition Team
○ Closing Opposition (CO): Second Opposition Team
Each team consists of two speakers, and they each have 7 minutes to speak.
2. Speaker Roles
Opening Government (OG)
1. Prime Minister (PM)
○ Defines the motion
○ Presents main arguments supporting the motion
2. Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)
○ Rebuts Opposition’s arguments
○ Strengthens the Government’s case
Opening Opposition (OO)
3. Leader of the Opposition (LO)
○ Directly refutes the PM’s case
○ Presents Opposition’s main arguments
4. Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DLO)
○ Defends Opposition’s case
○ Further rebuts Government’s arguments
Closing Government (CG)
5. Member of Government (MG)
○ Introduces a new extension (unique argument)
○ Supports Opening Government’s case
6. Government Whip (GW)
○ Summarizes the Government’s arguments
○ Cannot introduce new arguments
Closing Opposition (CO)
7. Member of Opposition (MO)
○ Introduces an Opposition extension
○ Supports Opening Opposition’s case
8. Opposition Whip (OW)
○ Summarizes the Opposition’s case
○ Cannot introduce new arguments
3. Rules and Key Concepts
● Points of Information (POIs): During speeches, opponents can raise short
questions (POIs) after the first and before the last minute of a speech.
● New Material: The whip speakers (GW & OW) cannot introduce new arguments,
only reinforce existing points.
● Judging Criteria: Debates are judged based on argumentation, rebuttal, strategic
engagement, and persuasiveness.
● Team Independence: The closing teams (CG & CO) must bring a new
perspective while supporting their side, rather than repeating the opening team’s
case.
4. Scoring and Winning
BP debate uses a rank-based system where each team is ranked 1st to 4th (instead of just
winning or losing). Judges evaluate teams based on:
● Matter (Content & Argumentation)
● Manner (Speaking Style & Persuasiveness)
● Method (Structure & Engagement)
The team with the most persuasive and well-structured case wins the round.
Conclusion
BP debate is dynamic and strategic, requiring debaters to not only argue effectively but also
anticipate opponents’ counterarguments while presenting unique and relevant ideas.
The format encourages critical thinking, teamwork, and adaptability.
Defining the Motion & Forming Arguments in Debate
A well-structured debate requires clear motion definition and strong argumentation to make a
persuasive case. Below is a breakdown of how debaters should define the motion and
develop effective arguments.
---
1. Defining the Motion
The Proposition (Government) team is responsible for defining the motion in a way that is:
1. Clear – The meaning of the motion should be understandable to everyone.
2. Reasonable – The definition should be fair and debatable.
3. Debatable – The motion should allow for a clash of ideas, not be a one-sided fact.
How to Define a Motion
A good definition includes:
- Context: Why is this debate relevant? What background information is needed?
- Key Terms: Define important words or concepts in the motion.
- Model/Mechanism (if needed): If the motion is a policy, explain how it will work.
Example 1: Motion – "This House Would Ban Plastic Bags"
✔ Definition: The government will introduce a law prohibiting the production, sale, and use
of plastic bags.
✔ Key Terms:
- "Ban" means a legal prohibition.
- "Plastic bags" refers to single-use plastic grocery bags.
✔ Model: The ban will be enforced through fines and alternative eco-friendly bags.
Example 2: Motion – "This House Believes That Social Media Does More Harm Than Good"
✔ Definition: "Social media" refers to platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.
"Harm" includes mental health issues, misinformation, and privacy risks. "Good" refers to
social connectivity and education.
🚫
Avoid Unfair Definitions:
Overly specific:"Plastic bags are only banned in supermarkets." (Too narrow, limits
🚫
debate)
Truistic: "Murder is bad." (Undebatable, everyone agrees)
---
2. Forming Argumentation
Debaters need logical, structured arguments supported by evidence and reasoning.
Structure of an Argument (ARE)
1. Assertion – State your point clearly.
2. Reasoning – Explain why your point is true.
3. Evidence – Use facts, examples, expert opinions, or logical reasoning.
Example Argument: Motion –This House Would Ban Plastic Bags
- Assertion: Plastic bags harm the environment.
- Reasoning: They take hundreds of years to decompose and contribute to pollution.
- Evidence: According to the UN, over 100,000 marine animals die annually due to plastic
waste.
Building Strong Arguments with the PEEL Method
1. Point – State your argument.
2. Explain – Expand on why this is true.
3. Example/Evidence– Provide a fact, statistic, or example.
4. Link – Connect it back to the motion and why it matters.
Example Using PEEL: Motion – "This House Believes That Social Media Does More Harm
Than Good"
- Point: Social media negatively impacts mental health.
- Explain: It increases anxiety, depression, and body image issues.
- Example:Studies show that teen depression rates rose by 70% since the rise of Instagram.
- Since mental health is crucial for society, the harms of social media outweigh its benefits.
---
3. Balancing Arguments: Burden of Proof
- Proposition (Government) must prove why the motion is true and beneficial.
- Opposition must show why the motion is harmful or unnecessary.
- Each side should **engage with their opponent’s arguments, not just present their own.
---
Conclusion
A debate is only strong if the motion is well-defined and arguments are structured logically
with assertions, reasoning, and evidence. Good argumentation engages with the opposing
side and convinces the audience through clarity and logic.
