Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


British Parliamentary Debate

A description of the British Parliamentary Debate or World-style debate

Kyle Hamar

on 5 December 2011

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of British Parliamentary Debate

British Parliamentary Debate Rules What is it? Structure Arguements A good debate consists of well-supported arguments.
Arguments have three basic components:

A claim is a statement that is something is so or a future action the speaker wants the audience to accept.

Reasoning is a further explanation of why the listner should accept the claim. It is the "because" component.

Evidence is the proof that the speaker provides to support the reasoning - facts, research, or something observable. It is used to persuade the listner to accept the claim British Paraliamentary (BP) debate based on the British Paraliment system.

BP is about using good speaking skills to present logical and philosophical arguements
define the motion and provide a clear model
outline the case your team will present and explain which speaker will cover the arguments to be explained
explain your arguments and finish by providing a summary of your main points. Prime Minister First Gov Deputy Prime Minister re-cap the team line (main point)
respond to rebuttal from Opposition Leader
develop your own arguments (extension)
finish with a summary of the whole first government case First Gov What is it? Structure Roles of Speakers Rules respond to the definition
rebut the Prime Minister's speech
constructively argue the opposition point of by presenting positive matter. Opposition Leader First Opp re-cap the team line (main theme)
rebut the response of the deputy prime minister to the arguements made by opposition leader.
develop your positive arguments (case split)
finish with a summary of the whole first opposition case Deputy Opposition Leader First Opp state your team's unique arguement or claim in debate
refute some of the key arguements from the first opposition's case
provide points of positive material in support of your team's unique claim Member of Government Second Gov briefly add to what your partner said, but move quickly to summing up the debate for the government
review the entire debate and show why the government side has won (usually done by summarizing the main clash points and explain why government side wins each issue)
finish by summarizing the main reasons you should win. Government Whip Second Gov state your team's unique argument or claim in the debate
refute key points presented by the government
provide points of positive matter in support of your team's unique claim Member of Opposition Second Opp do NOT introduce any new arguements
review the entire debate and show why the opposition side has won
finish by summarizing the main reason why your side has won Opposition Whip Second Opp BP is a limited preparation format (15-20 minutes)
Composed of four two-person teams
Generally, 7 minute speeches
Points of Information Points of Information During any of the speeches , an opposing team may ask a question of the current speaker. However, questions cannot be asked during the first and last minute of a speech. This considered "protected time."

The speaker has the option to address or ignore the question from the opposition. If the speaker takes the P.O.I. then the opposition has 15 seconds to ask a question, make an observation, or state a point. P.O.I. Government Opposition Clash Refutation Refutation is the process of providing answers to previously mentioned arguements. Effectively, it is a 4-step process.

1. "They say..." You need to mention the arguement you about to refute so that the audience and judges can easily follow your line of thought.

2. "But I disagree..." Here is where you state the basics of your counter-arguement. It can be an opposing view or an arguement against the logic or reasoning of the arguement you are opposing.

3. "Because..." Now, you offer your reasoning for opposing.

4. "Therefore..." Draw a conlusion that compares your refutation to your opponent's arguement and show why your arguement is better. A summary. Refutation Refutation is the process of providing answers to your opponents arguements. Effectively, it is a 2-step process.

1. "They say..." You need to state the other sides argument or claim

2. "But I disagree because..." You need to present why it is weak or wrong

Full transcript