1. A Briefing For BP Debate
9/22/2018
Prepared by Jason Hong, David Miko and the University of Calgary Debate Society
A Briefing For BP Debate
A Comprehensive Introduction To British Parliamentary Debate

2. Tournament Notes Name of Tournament # of Rounds
Open/Closed Adjudication

3. So, how about BP?
This Brief Presentation Will Cover Five Talking Points That Will Train You To Be Great.
Style of Debate
Role Of Each Team
Role of Each Debater
Notes on judging
Other Important Stuff
Prepared by the CA Panel of the 2008 CSDF National Seminar
Edited by the CA of the UCDS HS BP Tournament, 2010 & 2011

4. British Parliamentary Style
9/22/2018
British Parliamentary Style

5. What’s the Difference? There are 4 teams in one round
Teams are Ranked 1 through 4
Decisions Are Made by Consensus

6. 9/22/2018
The Order of The Debate
Understanding the proceedings of the debate is key to understanding BP debate. The basic structure of all debates remains consistent and is very simple.
Opening Proposition
Opening Opposition
Prime Minister
1st Speaker
1st Speaker
Leader of Opposition
2nd Speaker
Deputy PM
2nd Speaker
Deputy LO
All Speeches are Five Minutes, except break rounds, 7 minutes. Protected time will be 30 seconds in prelims, and 1 minute in break rounds
Closing Proposition
Closing Opposition
Member of Crown
1st Speaker
1st Speaker
Member of Opp
2nd Speaker
Proposition Whip
2nd Speaker
Opposition Whip

7. 9/22/2018
Role of Each Team

8. Opening Government Defines the Terms of the Debate
If necessary introduce a model
Opens the Case for the Government
Opposes the case of the Opening Opposition when it is presented

9. Opening Opposition Opposes the case of the Opening Government
Opens the Case for the Opposition
(Definition Challenge)
Definitional challenges are discouraged

10. Closing Government Extends the Government Case
Opposes the cases of the Opening and Closing Opposition teams
Summarizes the debate

11. Closing Opposition Extends the Opposition Case
Opposes the cases of the Opening and Closing Opposition teams
Summarizes the debate

12. 9/22/2018
Role of Each Debater

13. Prime Minister Defines the Resolution Presents a Model
Introduces the Government Case
It is the role of the Prime Minster to present a clear, coherent and contentious case that is in spirit of the resolution.
If required, the Prime Minister must also outline a clear and sensible model to support the resolution.
Example : TH Supports Carbon Taxes
While the burden of the government is to prove that Carbon Taxes will be beneficial, the government must provide us with the 5Ws
Who, What, When, Where, and Why
Difference between definitions and model
Models next slide

14. Models
Models or plans are used to determine how the team is going to take the action they are advocating
Not always necessary
Are useful in defining the pragmatics of the case
Does not need to address
Funding
Timelines
Legislative information
Only deals with how in an ideal world the Government would follow through
THBT v THW

15. Leader of the Opposition
Refutes what PM said
Introduces the Opposition Case
Possible Definitional Challenge
If the opposition feels the definitions set out by the PM are unfair, the definitional challenge must be provided during this speech
The leader is responsible for refuting the PM’s model, as well as his points.
Unlike Canadian Parliamentary, it is not enough to simply refute the Government’s case. A good team will present its own case with its own burdens and prove this in the round.

16. Deputy Prime Minister Refutes what LO Said
Continues the Government Case
Sums up the Debate thus far
The DPM is responsible for refuting the case presented by the LO
The DPM may also choose to rebuild some of his partner’s case before continuing
New points supporting the Government’s Case must be introduced in order to close the Government case
It is important for the DPM to conclude the OG’s case in a memorable fashion
An effective DPM will provide a brief crystallization of what happened in the first half of the debate.

17. Deputy LO Refute what the DPM said Continues the Opposition Case
Summarizes the debate thus far
The DLO continues the attack on the Government’s case
DLO should focus his/her refutation on the remarks of the DPM
New points supporting the Opposition Case must be introduced and the Opposition case should be closed
It is just as important for the DLO to conclude the Opposition’s case in a way that the judges will still remember them by the end of the debate
An effective DLO will provide a brief crystallization of what happened in the first half of the debate.

18. Member of the Opposition
Member of the Crown
Refutes the DLO / Opening Opposition (limited)
Introduces the Government Extension
Member of the Opposition
The Member of Government may take a brief part of his/her speech to quickly summarize, and attack loose ends left by the first opposition team
Focus of the MoG should be on the Government Extension
Extensions on next slide.
Refutes Government Extension
Introduces Opposition Extension

19. What is an extension? New or Distinct Material
Not Contradictory (knifing)
New Argumentation
New Analysis
Detailed – Stand-alone Case
Can Be Radical and Change the tone of the debate
Extensions should not contradict anything that was brought up during the first half of the team’s speeches (otherwise knifing, “auto-loss”)
Extensions should bring new analysis to the debate, reiterating points is not a good extension
Extensions may however expand in detail of a point that was briefly touched on by the first half (not recommended)
Extensions should be detailed. Although we may call it a 4th point, an extension is a case of its own
Extensions can be radical and change the tone of the debate
Example : THW ban convicted criminals of publishing accounts of their crimes. First-half focuses on – the rights of the criminal
Second half can extend to talk about protection of the victims

20. Government Whip Refutes the Opposition Extension Summarizes the Debate
(New contentions may be introduced, but not recommended)
This is the only time the Government has to attack the Opposition extension
However the main role of the whip is to summarize the round
Whip speeches should be well summarized, thematic speeches
Should cover everything in the debate, but focus on the 2nd half, especially the government extension (slightly biased summary)
Whips in 2 slides.

21. Opposition Whip Refutes the Closing Government (GW)
Summarizes the debate
(No new contentions may be introduced)
The opposition must finish its attack on the government
However the main role of the whip is to summarize the round
Whip speeches should be well summarized, thematic speeches
Should cover everything in the debate, but focus on the 2nd half, especially the opposition extension (slightly biased summary)
Whips next slide.

22. What is a Whip Speech?
Primary goal of a Whip is to summarize the round
Should not be a chronological summary of the debate
“He said, she said” etc
Summary should focus on themes, questions, or actors
Highlight the overarching concepts of the round
Does not need to cover everything, but must cover everything that is important
Strong Whips will prove the extension to be the winning point in the round
Primary goal of a Whip is to summarize the round
Should not be a chronological summary of the debate
“He said, she said” etc
That’s bush-league shit, and up with it I shall not put.
Summary should focus on themes or questions
3 themes or 3 questions are the most common
Highlight the overarching concepts of the round
Does not need to cover everything, but must cover everything that is important
Strong whips can identify the important or relevant arguments
Strong Whips will prove the extension to be the winning point in the round
This is because of teamwork

23. 9/22/2018
Notes on Judging

24. The Decision - rankings
Role Fulfillment
Argumentation
Clash
Manner
Done in Tandem unlike in the other styles you have done; first the win, then assigning the speaker points based on the components that comprise the victory
Consider these factors more holistically than in other styles.
Important to determine rankings first, since speaker score totals for the team must match the rankings (i.e. second place can’t have a total team score higher than/equal to the first place team, and so on).

25. Leader of the Opposition Member of the Opposition
Role Fulfillment
Prime Minister
Personally Responsible for Definitions
Case Construction
Opening Proposition
Provides a Clear and Fair Model
Is Responsible for Messiness of Debate
Staying Relevant
Opening Opposition
Effectively Deals with Proposition Case
Puts Forwards Important Arguments
Staying Relevant
Leader of the Opposition
Personally Responsible Introducing Case
Responsible for First Line of Clash
Deputy Prime Minister
Personally Responsible for Laying out Clash
Case Completion
Deputy Prime Minister
Personally Responsible for Doing All Clash
Case Completion
Member of the Crown
Personally Responsible for Extension
Proper Clash
Closing Proposition
Provides a Strong, Distinct Extension
Effectively Clashes
Planting Flag
Summation Speech
Member of the Opposition
Personally Responsible for Extension
Proper Clash
Closing Opposition
Provides a Strong, Distinct Extension
Effectively Clashes
Planting Flag
Summation Speech
With BP particularly it is very important to the quality of the round that each speaker fills their role. (And for each team to fill it’s role as laid out earlier.)
There is a fairly strong emphasis on role fulfillment in BP that is unique to the style.
Proposition Whip
Personally Responsible for the Quality of Summation Speech
Opposition Whip
Personally Responsible for the Quality of Summation Speech

26. Argumentation
When judging teams on argumentation there are two criteria:
Structure of arguments
Clear, concise, easy to understand, logical
Content of the arguments
Factually strong, well supported with evidence, valid arguments
Internal logic: supports and validates the argument itself
External logic: connects argument back to the case
Also: How to use evidence – an example might be pertinent, even obviously so, but it still requires analysis to make it relevant/connect.
Also: Janna hates feasibility arguments (principles versus pragmatics)
Engagement: it’s important for each team to choose relevant arguments (opposition should use their arguments to directly counter prop arguments/address the key issues in the round.

27. Clash
When judging teams on clash the criteria is the same as arguments:
Structure of clash
Clear, concise, easy to understand, logical
Content of the clash
Factually strong, well supported with evidence, valid clash
As a judge, try to track the connections between clash and opposing arguments (notes or what have you).
This is where we are hoping to see the most back and forth engagement between sides/teams.

28. Manner Least important in BP in regards to the Rankings
Should be used as a last resort for deciding winners
Manner is the way in which debaters spoke
Relevant for their Individual Speaker Points
Well organized, well spoken, and well presented
You would only penalize a debater if their manner detracted from the persuasiveness of the arguments. Structure and organization may affect coherence for instance.

29. Please refer to the backside of your ballot
Scoring
Please refer to the backside of your ballot
Minimum Score : 67
Average Score : 70
Maximum Score : 73
67 – Poor
68 – Work Needed
69 – Satisfactory
70 – Average
71 – Good
72 – Excellent
73 – Exceptional
Matter 27-29
The content of the debate including: argumentation, examples, logic, clash and reasoning. 28 Average
Manner 27-29
How the debater presented the speech – the verbal and non verbal communication that made the speech effective or not effective.
28 Average
Strategy 13-15
Use of the style, points of information, structure of speeches including time, strategic placements of clash and arguments. 14 Average
Totals have to match rankings.
It’s helpful to start with either the top or bottom speaker, place them relative to average, and work down or up from there, respectively.
The reason the range is restricted is due to the fact that we’re using human individuals to judge and each one has their own take on what scores are deserved – by restricting the range we protect the debaters from the extremes of that subjectivity.

30. Other Important Stuff 9/22/2018
These will be used to review a host of judging criteria key to debating Worlds Style, and will flow into the future rounds you judge

31. Points of Information Also a component of strategy
Used to ask questions in the middle of speeches
Pertinent
Should illustrate a flaw in the other teams arguments, or reposition one of their own arguments
Short, and Clear
The “Give Two, Take Two” Rule.
Each debater should make their best effort to give two POIs to the opposing side, and take two POIs during their speech. They should not be penalized if this is not reasonably possible (they weren’t offered two POIs at times they were willing to take them, or tried to offer many POIs but they weren’t accepted i.e. freeze-out).
POIs should be about 10 seconds/1-2 sentences.
They can be questions or leading statements.
The purpose of POIs is for debaters to engage when it is not their speaking time, and for the speaker to demonstrate control of their speech and an ability to deal with attack-points as they go.

32. Points of Clarification
May be asked near the beginning of the Prime Minister’s speech.
A non-partisan question seeking clarification of the definitions, model, or other context-providing point.
Should be short and to the point as it’s being accepted as a courtesy.
Should be accepted if offered.
Not considered part of anyone’s quota for POIs.
PMs should take them – if the round ends up being unclear, but they were offered a chance to clarify early on…

33. Impacting Statements S tatement E xample E xplanation
Substantiates arguments
Provides more evidence for the judges
Makes your points harder to bring down
Wins debates

34. Questions?