Home Random Page


CATEGORIES:

BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism






Parliamentary Debating

 

Debate is an exercise in persuasion, wit, rhetoric and logic. In your future life you will face some situations when you will have to think on your feet, be able to oppose and prove logically your point of view. Debates are the best school and practice that will help you develop all necessary skills and become successful in your life and future career.

 

This form of debate is called "parliamentary" because of its vague resemblance to the debates that take place in the British Parliament. The proposition team is called the "Government" and the opposition team is called (appropriately) the "Opposition". The job of the “Government” is to advocate the adoption of the resolution, while the job of the “Opposition” is to refute the resolution.

 

The resolution is usually not established until 10 minutes before the debate round begins, and there is a new resolution for every round of debate.

 

The Government team consists of two debaters, the Prime Minister (PM) and the Member of Government (MG).

 

The Opposition team also consists of two debaters, the Leader of the Opposition (LO) and the Member of the Opposition (MO).

 

Format

 

A round of parliamentary debate consists of six speeches: four constructive speeches (the teams are perceived as laying out their most important arguments) and two rebuttal speeches (the teams are expected to extend and apply arguments that have already been made, rather than make new arguments). The speeches and their times are as follows:

 

 

  Speech   Prime Minister (constructive)   Leader of Opposition (constructive)   Member of Government (constructive)   Member of Opposition (constructive)   Leader of Opposition (rebuttal)   Prime Minister (rebuttal)  
  Time     7 min.   8 min.   8 min.   8 min.   4 min.   5 min.

 

 

Point of Information.

 

During one person's speech, another debater (presumably from the opposite team) rises from his seat and says something like, "Point of information, sir?" The speaker has the option of whether or not to accept the point of information (it is usually good form to accept at least two points of information in a speech). If he accepts the point, the person who rose may ask a question of the speaker - usually a rhetorical question designed to throw him off. The speaker then answers the question (or ignores it if he can't come up with a good answer) and moves on with his speech. There are two main rules for points of information: they may only be asked in constructive speeches, not in rebuttals; and they may not be asked during the first or last minute of any speech.

 

Point of Order. A debater rises on a point of order when he believes one of the rules of debate is being broken. The most common use of the point of order is to say that the speaker is bringing up a new argument in a rebuttal speech, which is not allowed. The person making the point of order rises, says, "Point of order, argument X is a new argument." The judge makes a judgment as to whether the point of order is valid. If so, he/she says, "point well taken," and the speaker must quit making argument X. If not, he/she says, "point not well taken," and the speaker may continue with that argument if he wishes.



 

Point of Personal Privilege. This rarely used motion has a couple of different uses. The most common is to protest a gross misrepresentation of one's statements or an attack on one's character. For example: "Mr. Jones says he likes lynching black people." "Point of personal privilege! I merely said sometimes the death penalty is justified." As with points of order, it is the job of the judge to rule the point well-taken or not-well-taken.

 

Some useful tips.

ü While having the team-discussion, provide and put down a good number of pros and cons.

ü Try to predict the counter arguments of your opponents and consider how you can defend your ideas.

ü Think of the weak sides of the opposite point of view and get ready to benefit on them.

ü Come up with some factual information like historical examples, quotations etc. Make sure that your facts are true and justified.

ü During the opposite team’s speech put down the arguments they have mentioned and think how you can refer to them during your own speech.

ü Be polite to your opponents, avoid misquoting them or putting their words out of context.

 

GOOD LUCK! :)

 

Suggested resolutions:

 

1. Monarchy in the UK is outdated and has to be abolished.

2. National character is no more than a stereotype.

 

 


Date: 2015-01-29; view: 859


<== previous page | next page ==>
American revolution | The UK political system and its key concepts.
doclecture.net - lectures - 2014-2024 year. Copyright infringement or personal data (0.007 sec.)