GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO
DEBATING
handbook
REVISION PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY DATE
EUTL HOA AM
ASTRINA LEE NYUK MOI NORAZIAH
ASH’REE ABDUL WAHAB

01 30/08/2010
CONTENT PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 GENERAL RULES 1-4

3.0 SPEAKING ORDER IN DEBATE 4

4.0 TEAMS 5

5.0 RESEARCHING YOUR DEBATE 5-7

6.0 STRUCTURE OF A SPEECH 7-8

7.0 SPEAKING STYLE 8-9

8.0 POINTS OF INFORMATION 9 - 11

9.0 ROLES IN DEBATE 11 - 14

10.0 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 14 - 22

11.0 LIST OF PAST MOTIONS 22 - 23

12.0 SUMMARY 23

REFERENCES 24
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The aim of this handbook is to give you an idea of how to debate. It's not just a
simple case of standing up and saying the first thing that comes into your head. There
are certain rules and guidelines which have to be adhered to if you want to have any
chance in a competitive debate.
This is not the handbook with all the answers. It is only a rough set of guidelines
to help get you started. Everyone should try to find their own strengths and failings. In
the Debating Union we practice British Parliamentary style, which is now the official style
of the World Championships. In the U.S., Canada, etc. a very different style is practiced.

2.0 GENERAL RULES

1. Speeches should be SEVEN minutes in duration. Speakers exceeding this may

be penalised but should never be substantially less than this. In general you
should speak for at least 6:45 and generally no more than 7:20-7:30. Ideally stay
on your feet until you hear the 7th min bell and then finish (i.e. Mr. Speaker sir, I
beg to ...) and be in your seat by 7:15. Your times will be recorded by the
timekeeper and given to the adjudicators as they leave to make their decision.

2. In general most debates are in English. The main competitions are all in English
but occasionally there are other Language debates usually in conjunction with
some other event/soc. Debating in Europe, Asia etc tends to be in the local
language. At Worlds there is an English as a second language competition.

3. A bell will be rung after the expiration of one minute and six minutes. The bell will
be rung again at seven minutes and at regular intervals after that.

4. If the chair of the debate is the head of the host society he/she usually has a title
e.g. Speaker, Auditor, etc. Most often the proper form of address is Mr
Speaker/Madame Speaker. You must also acknowledge the adjudicators, if there
are any. Some speakers will also acknowledge other members of the house; it is
basically just a matter of personal preference as to how you begin your speech
after acknowledging the chair and adjudicators. (e.g. "Mr Speaker, Madame
Secretary, Adjudicators, Ladies & Gentlemen ...).

5. Points of information may only be offered after the expiration of one minute and
may not be given after the expiration of six minutes. Points of information may
only be given to opposing speakers and should generally be not more than 15
seconds in duration. The chairman may request a speaker to end a point of
information at his/her discretion. Adjudicators also frown upon barracking
(constantly interrupting the speaker by offering points) and the chair is expected
to control this. Acceptance of points of information is at discretion of the
competitor holding the floor. In competitive debates only the competitors may
offer points of information however in non-competitive debates points will often
be accepted from the audience. Once you have accepted a point of information
you can't just ignore it and carry on. You must deal with it or risk the adjudicator's
wrath.

Page 1 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

6. In most societies Maiden speakers (i.e. speakers making a speech for the first
time) have the protection of the chair. Other speakers may not offer them points
of information unless they choose not to accept the protection of the chair. Even
if they reject the protection of the chair most experienced speakers will not offer
them a point unless they run into difficulty and it can help them. If you are good
enough (or misfortunate enough depending on how you look at it) to be making
your maiden speech in an intervarsity (rare but it has been known to happen) you
do not have any special protection.

7. Points of order concerning the procedure of the debate must be addressed to the
chair. These can be brought at any time and take priority over all other speeches.
However these are only used in exceptional circumstances when the rules and
standing orders are being abused and the speaker making the point must be
certain that the point of order is appropriate. In British Parliamentary there is no
such thing as Points of Personal Privilege (which are used in the US/Canada). At
Worlds/Europeans it is made clear to the competitors in briefing that ONLY points
of Information may be offered. Repeated attempts to offer any other sort of point
can be heavily penalized by the adjudicators.

8. Speakers must observe parliamentary language i.e. bad language is not

permitted.

9. The use of Props is not permitted in a debate.

10. No amendment to the motion is permitted. You must debate the motion as
presented and interpret it as best you can. You cannot define a motion in a
Place/Time Specific sense (i.e. you cannot set the debate in Dublin 1916 and
therefore attempt to limit the scope of the debate and information which the other
teams can use).

11. The "house", which will often be referred to, is basically the chairperson
competitors’ audience etc.

12. The speakers are evenly divided on both sides of the motion. Speakers for the
motion are the "Proposition" or "Government", speakers against are the
"Opposition".

13. The opening Prop speaker (sometimes called "Prime Minister") has to define or
interpret the motion. If this definition is unreasonable or irrelevant then the
opening opposition speaker may challenge the definition. But if the definition is
relevant but just doesn't suit the opening opp. speaker attempting to redefine
may not go down well with the adjudicators. If a definition is given and all the
other speakers or teams completely ignore it then the defining speaker is
effectively out of the debate. Definitions must also be fair and debatable "Truistic"
or Self Proving arguments are not accepted. (e.g. The sea is full of water is pretty
hard to reasonably argue against) For full guidelines as to who can redefine and
when please refer to the Rules of British Parliamentary (e.g. the Sydney 2000
Rules).

Page 2 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

14. The last speaker on each side is expected to sum up his/her side's argument and
rebut or refute the arguments of the other side. Generally this speaker will not
add a great deal of new information to the debate.

15. Rebuttal is vital in any competitive speech. Any argument left unchallenged is
allowed to stand. The later you come in a debate the more rebuttals you must
use. Rebuttal basically involves ripping the opposing side's argument apart and
exposing its weak points. However don't forget to make your own argument and
ideally use that to rebut. It is important to also point out that unlike the style of
debating in some countries you do not have to defeat every one of the
opponents’ points (but of course all the Key ones must be knocked down). If the
Government makes 19 points and you only manage to hammer 17 in the time
allowed then you will win and any attempt by the Government to point out that 2
of their arguments are left standing is basically grasping at straws.

16. Be careful to avoid leaving statements hanging in mid-air. If you say something
important back it up. Just because you know something is true and where it
came from that doesn't mean the audience/adjudicators know where it came from
and why it's true. To a certain degree the safest bet is to assume that the
audience knows little or nothing about the subject.

17. Specialized Knowledge should not be used to unfairly define a motion. If you are
a Legal, Scientific, Management, Computer etc student then you must remember
that others in the debate may be "experts" in another field of study. Unfair
definitions would include things like why the case of Smith versus Jones is more
important to company law than Ryan versus Kelly. (These are just examples I
have no idea if these cases even exist).

18. Just because you may not be competing this does not mean that you can take no
part in the debate. All debates are usually opened up to the floor after the last
speaker and once the adjudicators have retired. Often there is a prize for the best
speaker here, but time allowed is usually no more than 3 min. to allow as many
people take part as possible.

19. Heckling is also common in some debates. This involves members of the
audience offering some good-humoured abuse to the competitors. However
there is a fine line between heckling and barracking and members of the
audience should remember to respect the speaker. Heckling can be scary at first
but you will soon get used to it.

20. Private Members Time, PMT, is a period of time at the start of each debate
where members may bring up a motion or issue that they wish to see debated.
Speeches here are limited to 3 min. This is often a part of the debate, which is
not only used to raise issues but also where many speakers show off their wit
and humour.

21. Remember you do not necessarily have to believe the side of the motion you are
on. You just have to make it appear as though you strongly believe in it for 7 min.
In competitive debates you will have very little choice as to which side of a
motion you get.

Page 3 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

22. No matter how bad you think your speech is try to stay up for the full seven
minutes. If the audience is giving you a hard time just remember that they
probably want you to walk off so don't give them the pleasure. If the chair doesn't
control the audience ask him/her to and put him on the spot with the adjudicators.
Of course you have to be able to handle a reasonable amount of heckling.

23. You don't have to be a genius for facts and figures to do well. If you can
remember an example, or fact which you researched, to back up your argument
use it. However if you get stuck and can’t remember the exact details of the fact
you want to use don’t worry about it. If the underlying details of the report,
researches etc are correct then the chances are you will not be challenged and
the point will be made. If an opposing member corrects you and gives you the
correct name of the report, researcher, institute etc then they are an idiot for
backing up your case.

24. You don't have to be a genius for facts and figures to do well. If you can
remember an example, or fact which you researched, to back up your argument
use it. However if you get stuck and think that a fact, figure or example is needed
and you don't have one, try making one up. It can be risky if you get caught by a
member of the opposing side who actually knows what they are talking about (it
can be painful, believe me) but it can be very effective if you get away with it.
This is not, however, a replacement for good research, only a fall back if you're in
trouble.

25. If you can use humour it can be extremely effective in a debate. You can ridicule
and destroy an opponent's whole speech with a one-line joke attacking it. But
don't go over the top, while humour helps, adjudicators may not be impressed by
stand up routine with little substance. Although humour can be an advantage
don't worry if you can't crack a joke to save your life (or speech). You'll be
surprised at the number of speakers who have to really struggle to include
humour in a speech while others do it with ease.

3.0 SPEAKING ORDER IN DEBATE

The speaking order depends on whether it is individuals or teams, or both, and the style
being used in the competition but it generally follows either "Times" or "Mace/Worlds"
format;

Individuals:

(1.) Opening Prop. (2.) Opening Opp.

(3.) 2nd Prop. (4.) 2nd Opp.

(5.) 3rd Prop. (6.) 3rd opp.

(7.) Last Prop. (8.) Last Opp.

Page 4 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

4.0 TEAMS

Times:
(1.) 1st speaker from opening prop. (2.) 1st speaker from opening opp.
(3.) 1st speaker from 2nd prop team. (4.) 1st speaker from 2nd opp team.
(5.) 2nd speaker from opening prop. (6.) 2nd speaker from opening opp.
(7.) 2nd speaker from 2nd prop. (8.) 2nd speaker from 2nd opp.

Mace/Worlds:
(1.) 1st opening proposition. (2.) 1st opening opposition.
(3.) 2nd opening proposition. (4.) 2nd opening opposition.
(5.) 1st closing proposition. (6.) 1st closing opposition.
(7.) 2nd closing proposition. (8.) 2nd closing opposition.

If there is a mixture of teams and individuals (e.g. in Times final), the Individual speakers
are inserted in the middle of the debate i.e. after the first speaker for the last team and
before the last speaker for the for the first team.

(1.) 1st speaker from opening prop. (2.) 1st speaker from opening opp.
(3.) 1st speaker from 2nd prop. (4.) 1st speaker from 2nd opp.
(5.) 1st proposing individual. (6.) 1st opposing individual
(7.) 2nd proposing individual. (8.) 2nd opposing individual.
(9.) 2nd speaker from opening prop.

and so on.

Naturally the actual order depends on the number of teams/individuals debating.

5.0 RESEARCHING YOUR DEBATE

Research is vital and cannot be avoided if you want to make a winning speech. Some
people say that only a small portion of your research should appear in your speech and
the majority will come into play later. I have yet to see the "later". This may be in the
form of points of information but that is assuming that you can predict what information
you will need to contradict what the speaker says. If you have information, don't keep it
to yourself, USE IT.

Look for facts and examples more so than statistics. While statistics can very handy for
filling up a few minutes, they are also boring. Your information should back up your
argument and be memorable. If you find a little known fact that will surprise the audience
and catch their attention use it strategically. Place it at a crucial stage of your speech in
a way that everything falls in together and the audience becomes convinced of the truth
of what you are saying. Remember that your argument is the most important part of your
speech and your research should back it up, not the other way round.

Sources:
There are invaluable sources of information all around and you will very rarely come
across a motion which you can find absolutely no information if you look hard enough.
Page 5 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

Internet:
Type any subject into the Internet and you are likely to get back 100 sites with useful
information and "Greater than 250,000" of utter rubbish (e.g. this site). However there
are a couple of good places to start. On the main page of this site you will find links to a
couple of research web pages which give pros and cons about many topics.
They are www.Debatabase.com and www.Youdebate.com

Library:
Although you may complain about your library, it is still an invaluable source of
information. Look around the sections which relate to your motion and flick through a few
books that look relevant. A good source of historical information are the "Chronicle"
style, black bound, journals in the history section of a good college library. These are
updated monthly. If you don't know where to go for information take the keywords from
the motion and type them into a nearby terminal. It should give you the book references
you need.

Books:
Yes there are books available which give Pros and Cons of various topics. They should
be used with caution and not a complete replacement for your own arguments and
research but they are a good start point and particularly useful in the first 2-3 min of your
15 min prep at Worlds style events. Not surprisingly the best of these books is called
Pros and Cons

Journals Room:
This is easily the best source of information on any campus. If you have a motion
dealing with a topical political, cultural, or scientific subject then the first thing you should
do is look through the back issues of Time and Newsweek. These contain a huge
amount of information and not only on current affairs. If you've never read them it is well
worth spending a short time flicking through them so that you get a feel for the sort of
information they carry and where to find it if you need it later. If you want more
information then there is bound to be some information about it in other more specialized
journals but it may be harder to find. You could also look up the past issues of
newspapers on microfilm but you really would want to know exactly what you are looking
for.

T.V. & Radio:

While it is unlikely that TV will oblige you by broadcasting a program dealing with the
subject behind your motion while you are preparing for it you can still use them for
information. If you know that there is a documentary, special report or debate on a
topical issue why not watch, or listen to, it. You don't have to go out of your way or sit
there taking notes like a lecture but if you have nothing better to do you might be
surprised how much of it you will remember if it comes up later.

Brainstorming:
This involves a group of people getting together to discuss a motion and come up with
ideas. The group meets in a room and trash out the various issues involved from a
definition and line to examples and the other sides’ possible strategy. One member
writes down all the ideas and this is best done on a blackboard so a tutorial room is
sometimes used. However these can also become side-tracked. If used effectively they

Page 6 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

should work well and we may start doing them on a more regular and organized basis.
Even if you don't want to hold a brainstorming session doesn’t be afraid to ask other
debaters for ideas most will be glad to help and may even have debated the motion
before.

A word of caution
There are many other sources of information if you know where to look. Perhaps the
best source is your own memory. If you remember some fact but are hazy on the exact
details of where or when you heard it, don't be afraid to use it. A debate isn't an exam so
the information you use doesn't have to be 100% accurate just sort of, from a certain
point of view of course.

However remember an outright lie can be considered unethical and some more
"conservative" people in debating would like to report students who break local codes of
ethics to their home college officials. These people have lost all sight of the goal of
debating and believe that an inability to stick to the moral code they subscribe to means
you can be expelled from college. They take no account of the fact that people get facts
wrong and often in an attempt to win will use facts they have not "properly researched".
In my opinion this is an extremely dangerous trend in debating and while rare you should
ask for clarification on the situation if debating outside the British Isles and Worlds
competitions (particularly in eastern Europe). Of course by even advocating a lack of
research I can be accused of unethical behaviour by these people. In response I say that
my view of debating is that it is a pastime not a research conference. I will never
condone blatant lies but I recognise that the world is far too vast for mere mortals to
research the hundreds of topics that could arise at worlds and the human brain could
never store that volume of information. You are dealing with young people who have to
absorb and remember vast amounts of information. Facts will muddle and quotes not
properly referenced. That doesn't make their central point any less valid. The cut & trust
of debating is to undermine and highlight flaws in the opposing side’s logic and fact. That
their facts are accidentally flawed is not justification to seek to formally punish them and
have them expelled from college as some misguided academics would seek.

6.0 STRUCTURE OF A SPEECH

Ideally you should try to have a structure to your speech. If you do then it is more likely
to be a good speech. If you don't have some form of structure you may be penalised by
Adjudicators and you may ramble. You don't have to use a strict structure just have a
mental layout of what you want to say and when. In fact if you have too rigid a structure
then you will find it impossible to stick to it, when you have to rebut and deal with points
of information.

The following is a rough outline of how to structure your speech. In general just use
these as guidelines and, ideally, develop a style and structure which you are comfortable
with.

1st Minute (0:00-1:00):

(Can't be given a point of information).
• Win the audience, perhaps with a joke.
• Don't rebut another speakers’ speech.
Page 7 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

• Define your speech, i.e. say what you will address and how.
• Ideally be able to state your argument in a single, short sentence.
• Define your team approach i.e. say, roughly, what your partner will say (or has said).

2nd Minute (1:00-2:00):

• Don't take any Points of information until foundation has been laid i.e. until you have
developed your speech a bit and layout of your argument.
• Usually best to propose/oppose on 3 points. (e.g. Political, Economic, Social).
• Begin your first point.

3rd-6th Minute (2:00-6:00):

• Accept 2 to 3 points of information. Say outline political aspects and deal with them.
• Then take a P.O.I. on that. Do the same for the other aspects (i.e. Economics &
Social).
• Use these four minutes to make all your points. Effectively this is your speech.
• Refer back to the single, short, core sentence one or two times.

7th Minute (6:00-7:00):

• Once the sixth minute bell has gone you can't be offered any points of information.
• Finish the point you were on as quickly as possible.
• Don't introduce any new points or arguments.
• Sum up. Reiterate your main points and arguments (and those of your partner if you
are the second team speaker.).
• Ideally, if possible, restate the single, core sentence as the last thing you say.

7:00 min:
• Stay on your feet until you hear the bell.
• Finish, immediately if possible, "Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to ... “
• Be back in your seat by 7:15, if possible, and no later than 7:30.

7.0 SPEAKING STYLE

One thing you are bound to notice at any debate is the different speaking styles used by
the competitors. Speaking style is perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of debating
to attempt to "teach". You will have to develop your own style and preferably one that
comes naturally to you. However there are a couple of things to be kept in mind.

1. You must speak clearly and loudly enough so that your voice can be heard by
everyone. Remember the adjudicators will sit towards the rear of the hall so at
the very least they must be able to hear what you are saying if you are to have
any chance of winning. However you shouldn't shout as the halls have generally
been designed so that your voice will carry towards the back.

2. Try to avoid monotone. If you are making an important point use your voice to
stress it and make it stand out. Try to slowly increase the stress and force behind
your voice as you go through your speech. Build up to a high point and make this
the crucial point of your speech. However don't bring the audience on a
rollercoaster ride. Don't start high, fall down, build-up and fall down again, it looks
as though you are only convinced about the truth of half your speech.

Page 8 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

3. Keep eye-contact with the audience and don't stare at the podium. It gets easier
to do this after some experience and once you use fewer notes. Some people
like to pick out individuals in the audience and look at them. Others just speak to
the audience as a whole. However you do it make sure to scan the audience and
move your gaze to different parts of the hall regularly.

4. Use your body language to back up your speech. If you stand rigidly and don't
move then you will find it very difficult to have any real conviction in your voice.
Use your arms and facial expressions to convey your emotions and back up your
speech. However don't go overboard, you want the audience's attention to be
focused on your speech not your arms. Try not to have anything in your hands.
Some people like to carry a pen and end up waving it about like a baton which
can distract the adjudicators. If you really need something use index cards.

5. You don't have to stand strictly behind the podium. Move around a bit and face
different sections of the audience at different times. Apparently studies have
shown that people tend to prefer to be able to see the whole person as this is
supposed to indicate that you aren't hiding anything. However, once again, don't
go overboard. It annoys people (and more importantly adjudicators) if you walk
too far from the podium. Try not to go more than 1-2 meters away from the
podium. One way to ensure this is to leave your notes on the podium; you'll find
yourself reluctant to move too far from them.

6. Don't be too complicated. If your argument is too elaborate people may have
difficulty following it. Don't use 15 syllable Latin words when a 2 syllable English
word will do. Remember you are trying to convince the audience that your
argument is the best and not that you consider your talent wasted on them (even
if it is).

7. Use humour to help win over the audience and make your speech stand out. If
you have a natural talent for comedy or impersonations etc. then use it. If you
don't then don't worry about it, even the most serious of us can be funny at times
(often even without meaning it). You can work out a few put downs and one-
liners in advance but be careful. If a joke sounds too prepared than it may bomb.
Try to make it sound spontaneous and it's more likely to be successful. • The
best thing to do is watch other speakers and see how they combine the various
elements. Experiment with different styles and try to find one that you are
comfortable with. However the only real way to develop a good style is to try to
speak on a regular basis and listen to the advice of adjudicators and the more
experienced debaters.

8.0 POINTS OF INFORMATION

• Points of Information are a vital part of any debate and should not be
underestimated. Before and after your speech you can't just sit quietly and enjoy
the other speeches. You must keep the adjudicators aware of your presence,
ideas and argument. Also P.O.I. can be used as a weapon to undermine, and
even destroy, an opponent’s speech.
Page 9 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

Presentation:
• When giving a point of information you are expected to stand up, hold your left
hand out (place your right hand on your head, honestly!) and say "On a point of
information sir". Different people use slight variations on this but this is the basic
one. Often speed is important to get in first, but that is no guarantee that you will
be accepted. So you should make sure that you have enough space to stand up
quickly and at a split second's notice (without sending your notes flying towards
the podium).

If you can do without a bench for writing, then a front row seat is ideal. If however
you can't then use a seat at the end of a row so that you need only stand out to
the side. Once you have been accepted stand facing the speaker at the podium
but also try to half face the chair and audience, if possible. Keep your P.O.I. short
and to the point. The maximum time allowed is 15 sec but you should try for
between 5 and 10 sec. Remember that many speakers like to take a P.O.I. and
then use the time to check what they will say next while half listening to the
person offering the point. Once they know what the next part of their speech is
they work out an answer to your point. If your point is only about 5 sec. in
duration it doesn't give them enough time and is more likely to catch them
(especially if the point is weak and wouldn't work well if they had time to think
about it). It looks bad if they have to stop to think what to say, especially if they
have to ask you to repeat it. • Timing is important. If a speaker is in full stride and
knows exactly where they are going for the next few seconds, he/she is unlikely
to accept a point. Wait for a pause, for breath etc. by the speaker and then offer
the point. Obviously you have to be quick and good reflexes are needed to be on
your feet literally within a split second. I've found that a point is more likely to be
accepted in this type of case but you can't wait for too long as the point could
then be out of place.

Styles:
• Different people have different styles when it comes to Points of Information.
Some people (no names) like to virtually barrage opposing speakers with every
point which pops into their head. This can be very difficult to deal with and takes
some getting used to. The trick is to just ignore it if possible and make your
speech. If you decide to use this type of style be very careful. It has been known
to annoy adjudicators if taken too far and there IS precedence for having
speakers disqualified. Different people have different styles when it comes to
Points of Information. Some people (no names) like to virtually barrage opposing
speakers with every point which pops into their head. This can be very difficult to
deal with and takes some getting used to. The trick is to just ignore it if possible
and make your speech. If you decide to use this type of style be very careful. It
has been known to annoy adjudicators if taken too far and there IS precedence
for having speakers disqualified. Most speakers prefer to just wait and see how a
speech develops. This involves leaving weak points go and use just one or two
attacking the central core of the speech once it has developed a bit.

Accepting:
• When you are speaking you should accept 2-3 points. Watch out for good
speakers. If someone has killed off every other speaker on your side be careful

Page 10 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

and don't assume that you can handle them. Accept someone else ideally
someone who has been offering poor points all night. Points should not be longer
than 15 sec. but you can cut that person off before this if they are making a very
poor point and particularly if you have a good put-down to use on them. Always
deal with the point that is offered. Never accept a point as true, unless the offeror
has made a mistake and it backs up your argument. Always try to dismiss a point
as incorrect or irrelevant. A point ignored is allowed to stand and will go against
you in adjudication.

9.0 ROLES IN DEBATE

Prime Minister (Opening Speaker);

• It is the duty of the “Prime Minister” to define the topic of the debate BUT it must
be clearly linked to the Motion. In some cases the motion will be worded in such
a way as to permit a wide variety of Definitions (e.g. “This house believes that the
Glass is half full”, Worlds 98.) Others will be tighter motions, which allow little
flexibility for Definition (e.g. “This house believes that Northern Nationalists have
nothing to fear from a United Kingdom” Irish Times 96). As 1st Government you
should look for a twist to the motion.
• For example “This house would rebuild the Berlin Wall” (Worlds 96) is often
defined as repartitioning of Germany and a return to Communism. This is, in my
experience, a very difficult line to win from. Two more “successful” definitions
which I have seen run are that the Berlin Wall represented a division between
East and west and that (a) the EU should not allow Eastern Bloc countries
membership until they have fulfilled certain Social and Economic Criteria. Or (b)
that NATO should not expand membership eastward.
• When Defining make sure that you have an argument. You have to propose
something. Saying that something is wrong and this is how it should be is not
enough. You must say that something is wrong and THIS is what you are going
to do about it. “What you are going to do” is the debatable part of the definition.
• Example “This house favours Positive Discrimination”.
Poor Definition: People have been discriminated against because of their
sex/race/etc and they shouldn’t be in the future therefore we’ll use something
called Positive Discrimination.
Better Definition: People have been discriminated against because of their
sex/race/etc and to correct that we are going to take actions X, Y, and Z under
the umbrella name of Positive Discrimination. You must then fully outline what
actions X, Y, and Z are and how they will work.

Opposition Leader;

• It is your role to set out the opposition to the Governments case. You have only 7
min (or less) to come up with your opposition case but provided that the
Government have presented a debatable case you will be expected to handle the
limited time for preparation. Outline and develop your case. Then deal with the
points made by the government and link back the reason for them being flawed
to whatever your team’s central case is. Remember the role of last Opp is to
rebut all four Government speakers in his/her 7 min and sum up the entire

Page 11 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

opposition case. You have only seen one speaker so you can’t make a “Last Opp
Speech”. Look at it in terms of proportions. You’ve only seen a quarter of the
Government therefore at most a quarter of your speech should be rebuttal. The
rest should involve outlining a “substantive” opposition case.
• It is also your duty to decide if the case is debatable. If it isn’t (and be very, very
certain that it isn’t) then you must submit an alternative definition. You cannot
simply say “That’s a Truistic/self proving” argument, spend seven minutes
outlining why and sit down. If you do that then you will have failed to do your duty
as 1st opposition. If you have the ability to spot a truistic argument then you
should have the ability to redefine, or at least to modify the Governments case to
make it debatable.

Deputy Prime Minister;

• You must further develop your team’s argument. Rebut what the first opposition
speaker has said but don’t spend all your time rebutting. Your team’s case can’t
have been fully outlined and developed so to spend 7 min attacking one
opposition speaker is no win tactic.
• You must back up your team-mate. If he/she has been torn apart then don’t jump
ship.
• “CLARIFY” what your team-mate said. Don’t abandon your case because you
realize that it is flawed. Judges will look out for that and will penalise a “Dump”
severely.
• You will gain more marks for bailing your team mate out than for jumping ship
and engaging the opposition on their ground leaving your team mate behind.

Deputy Opposition Leader;

• As with the second government speaker you must back up your team-mate.
Don’t abandon your case because you realise that it is flawed. Fix it but don’t get
an entirely new one. A good guideline is that you should spend double the
amount of time rebutting that your team-mate and therefore the rest of your
speech is reserved for YOUR team’s case.
• Remember that your team’s case should be set up in such a way that it in itself
rebuts the government case. Therefore simply by developing it you are rebutting
the government. If you remember this it should help you avoid the trap that a lot
of Opp speakers fall into of 100% point-by-point rebuttal. There is a
misconception that the opposition just have to oppose and don’t have to lend any
constructive argument or matter to the debate. People will get away with this
from time to time but the recent trend in adjudication is to frown on that. It is an
easy way out and doesn’t really lend anything to the debate. Constructive
opposition always looks better than mere opposition for opposition’s sake. This
applies in debating as well as most things in life.

Member for the Government (3rd Gov Speaker);

• You are the first speaker in the second half of the debate. Now you have options
to consider If there has been a redefinition, and IF it was a valid redefinition then
you must decide

Page 12 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

• if you are going to follow the Government line or switch to the definition which the
Opposition as offered and take them on at that. Be careful. It is also possible to
take a combination of both but you will have to be careful not to tangle your
argument up in trying to tie the two definitions together.
• If the Government presented a case, which was debatable but weak and has
been thorn apart you cannot simply stab them in the back. You may however
bring in an “extension” this allows you to bring in a new point of view while still
roughly following the Government line. Again just, as with 1st government, you
must present a debatable definition.
• Your role is to develop your team line. As with all government speakers you
cannot spend all you 7 min rebutting the opposition. Outline and fully develop
YOUR team line, showing how it links to AND backs up the original government
case. As you develop your case use it to rebut the opposition. Also remember
that a sizable amount of your team-mate’s speech will involve summing up the
entire Government case and rebutting the opposition. He/She will have little time
to further develop your team’s case so you must do a good job on your team line.
You are almost in an individual debate against 3rd Opp speaker and your
argument must be fully developed or he/she will destroy you, and there will be no
come back from your team-mate. If your team-mate has to spend all his/her time
bailing you out then you have failed and have dragged him/her down with you.

Member for the Opposition (3rd Opposition Speaker);

• In my experience this is a difficult position in terms of strategy. You can’t give a

100% rebuttal speech and you also are limited in that your team-mate will not be
in a position to spend a lot of time developing your case (see Opposition Whip’s
role). It is up to you to set out AND fully develop your team’s case. Remember
you have to provide matter of your team’s argument in such a way that it stands
out from the other teams. You should concentrate on the third Government
speaker in your rebuttal.
• You must rebut what the 1st Gov team said but it is primarily your duty to take on
the extension provided by the 2nd Gov team. If first opposition have done their
job then the time you spend rebutting the 1st Gov team will in effect be going
over what they have done and impinging on your team-mate’s role.

Government Whip; (last Gov speaker)

• Both Whips will be penalised if you do not Sum up your side and rebut the
opposition. You can develop your team line a little but the vast majority of your
time must be spent summing up the ENTIRE government case and rebutting the
Opposition arguments. Remember as well that the 3rd opposition speaker has
probably spent a sizable amount of time attacking your team-mate so you should
spend some time on your team line and counteracting the attack on it. In short
you must do 3 distinct things:
(1) Sum up your team line.
(2) Sum up the first Government’s arguments
(3) Rebut the Opposition. Remember that while you cannot stab the 1st
government in the back you should really reinforce your team line and
then sum up the rest of the Government argument.

Page 13 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

Opposition Whip; (Last speaker of the debate)

• Rebut, Rebut, Rebut, Rebut, oh and sum up. You are in pole position. You have
had almost an hour to develop your speech and this is a huge advantage. You
should not bring new information into the debate but remember that by new
information we mean new core arguments and examples. In your rebuttal you
may bring in new examples, which relate directly to the points you are rebutting
but you cannot make them the central plank on which your entire argument is
based. A lot of last Opp speakers will deal with the Government speakers almost
one at a time and this generally works quite well and lends a structure to your
speech.

• A lot of last Opp speakers make the mistake of just rebutting and not summing
up. Ideally you should use a summary of what has been said by the opposition
up to now as your rebuttal. However you should also try to have a clearly defined
period of summation. Don’t get carried away with your rebuttal and leave your
sum up for the last 30 seconds. Remember that there are a lot of inexperienced
judges out there who may not recognise that you have mixed summation and
rebuttal in your speech and will, unfairly, penalise you for only spending a few
seconds on sum up. Ideally aim to start your sum up of the Opp case with about
1.5 to 2 minutes left. You can use your last protected minute to sum up the entire
debate and not just your speech, it may go against the textbook structure of a
speech but it is accepted practice.

10.0 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

World Universities Debating Championship

World Parliamentary Debating Rules
By Ray D’Cruz

Part 1— Introduction

1.1 The format of the debate

1.1.1 The debate will consist of four teams of two persons (persons will be known as
"members"), a chairperson (known as the "Speaker of the House" or
"Mister/Madame Speaker" and an adjudicator or panel of adjudicators.

1.1.2 Teams will consist of the following members:

Opening Government:
"Prime Minister" or "First Government member" and
"Deputy Prime Minister" or "Second Government member";

Opening Opposition:
"Leader of the Opposition" or "First Opposition member" and
"Deputy Leader of the Opposition" or "Second Opposition member";

Closing Government:

Page 14 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

"Member for the Government" or "Third Government member" and

"Government Whip" or "Fourth Opposition member";

Closing Opposition:
"Member for the Opposition" or "Third Opposition member" and
"Opposition Whip" or "Fourth Opposition member".

1.1.3 Members will deliver substantive speeches in the following order:

(1) Prime Minister;
(2) Opposition Leader;
(3) Deputy Prime Minister;
(4) Deputy Opposition Leader;
(5) Member for the Government;
(6) Member for the Opposition;
(7) Government Whip;
(8) Opposition Whip.

1.1.4 Members will deliver a substantive speech of seven minutes duration and should
offer points of information while members of the opposing teams are speaking.

1.2 The motion

1.2.1 The motion should be unambiguously worded.

1.2.2 The motion should reflect that the World Universities Debating Championship is
an international tournament.
1.2.3 The members should debate the motion in the spirit of the motion and the
tournament.

1.3 Preparation

1.3.1 The debate should commence 15 minutes after the motion is announced.
1.3.2 Teams should arrive at their debate within five minutes of the scheduled starting
time for that debate.
1.3.3 Members are permitted to use printed or written material during preparation and
during the debate. Printed material includes books, journals, newspapers and
other similar materials. The use of electronic equipment is prohibited during
preparation and in the debate.

1.4 Points of Information

1.4.1 Points of Information (questions directed to the member speaking) may be asked
between first minute mark and the six minute mark of the members’ speeches
(speeches are of seven minutes duration).
1.4.2 To ask a Point of Information, a member should stand, place one hand on his or
her head and extend the other towards the member speaking. The member may
announce that they would like to ask a "Point of Information" or use other words
to this effect.
1.4.3 The member who is speaking may accept or decline to answer the Point of
Information.
1.4.4 Points of Information should not exceed 15 seconds in length.
Page 15 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

1.4.5 The member who is speaking may ask the person offering the Point of
Information to sit down where the offeror has had a reasonable opportunity to be
heard and understood.
1.4.6 Members should attempt to answer at least two Points of Information during their
speech. Members should also offer Points of Information.
1.4.7 Points of Information should be assessed in accordance with clause 3.3.4 of
these rules.
1.4.8 Points of Order and Points of Personal Privilege are not permitted.

1.5 Timing of the speeches

1.5.1 Speeches should be seven minutes in duration (this should be signalled by two
strikes of the gavel). Speeches over seven minutes and 15 seconds may be
penalised.
1.5.2 Points of Information may only be offered between the first minute mark and the
six minute mark of the speech (this period should be signalled by one strike of
the gavel at the first minute and one strike at the sixth minute).
1.5.3 It is the duty of the Speaker of the House to time speeches.
1.5.4 In the absence of the Speaker of the House, it is the duty of the Chair of the
Adjudication panel to ensure that speeches are timed.

1.6 The adjudication

1.6.1 The debate should be adjudicated by a panel of at least three adjudicators,

where this is possible.
1.6.2 At the conclusion of the debate, the adjudicators should confer and rank the
teams, from first place to last place. (See Part 5: The Adjudication).
1.6.3 There will be verbal adjudications of the debate after the first six preliminary
rounds of the tournament. The verbal adjudication should be delivered in
accordance with clause 5.5 of these rules.

Part 2 — Definitions

2.1 The definition

2.1.1 The definition should state the issue (or issues) for debate arising out of the
motion and state the meaning of any terms in the motion which require
interpretation.
2.1.2 The Prime Minister should provide the definition at the beginning of his or her
speech.
2.1.3 The definition must:
(a) have a clear and logical link to the motion - this means that an average
reasonable person would accept the link made by the member between
the motion and the definition (where there is no such link the definition is
sometimes referred to as a "squirrel");
(b) not be self-proving - a definition is self-proving when the case is that
something should or should not be done and there is no reasonable
rebuttal. A definition is may also be self-proving when the case is that a
certain state of affairs exists or does not exist and there is no reasonable
rebuttal (these definitions are sometimes referred to as "truisms").

Page 16 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

(c) not be time set - this means that the debate must take place in the
present and that the definition cannot set the debate in the past or the
future; and
(d) not be place set unfairly - this means that the definition cannot restrict the
debate so narrowly to a particular geographical or political location that a
participant of the tournament could not reasonably be expected to have
knowledge of the place.

2.2 Challenging the definition

2.2.1 The Leader of the Opposition may challenge the definition if it violates clause
2.1.3 of these rules. The Leader of the Opposition should clearly state that he or
she is challenging the definition.
2.2.2 The Leader of the Opposition should substitute an alternative definition after
challenging the definition of the Prime Minister.

2.3 Assessing the definitional challenge

2.3.1 The adjudicator should determine the definition to be ‘unreasonable’ where it

violates clause 2.1.3 of these rules.
2.3.2 The onus to establish that the definition is unreasonable is on the members
asserting that the definition is unreasonable.
2.3.3 Where the definition is unreasonable, the opposition should substitute an
alternative definition that should be accepted by the adjudicator provided it is not
unreasonable.
2.3.4 Where the definition of the Opening Government is unreasonable and an
alternative definition is substituted by the Opening Opposition, the Closing
Government may introduce matter which is inconsistent with the matter
presented by the Opening Government and consistent with the definition of the
Opening Opposition.
2.3.5 If the Opening Opposition has substitued a definition that is also unreasonable,
the Closing Government may challenge the definition of the Opening Opposition
and substitute an alternative definition.
2.3.6 If the Closing Government has substitued a definition that is also unreasonable
(in addition to the unreasonable definitions of the Opening Government and
Opening Opposition, the Closing Opposition may challenge the definition of the
Closing Government and substitute an alternative definition.

Part 3 — Matter

3.1 The definition of matter

3.1.1 Matter is the content of the speech. It is the arguments a debater uses to further
his or her case and persuade the audience.
3.1.2 Matter includes arguments and reasoning, examples, case studies, facts and any
other material that attempts to further the case.
3.1.3 Matter includes positive (or substantive) material and rebuttal (arguments
specifically aimed to refute the arguments of the opposing tea m(s)). Matter
includes Points of Information.

Page 17 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

3.2 The elements of matter

3.2.1 Matter should be relevant, logical and consistent.

3.2.2 Matter should be relevant. It should relate to the issues of the debate: positive
material should support the case being presented and rebuttal should refute the
material being presented by the opposing team(s). The Member should
appropriately prioritise and apportion time to the dynamic issues of the debate.
3.2.3 Matter should be logical. Arguments should be developed logically in order to be
clear and well reasoned and therefore plausible. The conclusion of all arguments
should support the member’s case.
3.2.4 Matter should be consistent. Members should ensure that the matter they
present is consistent within their speech, their team and the remainder of the
members on their side of the debate (subject to clauses 2.3.4, 2.3.5 or 2.3.6 of
these rules).
3.2.5 All Members should present positive matter (except the final two members in the
debate) and all members should present rebuttal (except the first member in the
debate). The Government Whip may choose to present positive matter.
3.2.6 All Members should attempt to answer at least two points of information during
their own speech and offer points of information during opposing speeches.

3.3 Assessing matter

3.3.1 The matter presented should be persuasive. ‘The elements of matter’ should
assist an adjudicator to assess the persuasiveness and credibility of the matter
presented.
3.3.2 Matter should be assessed from the viewpoint of the average reasonable person.
Adjudicators should analyse the matter presented and assess its
persuasiveness, while disregarding any specialist knowledge they may have on
the issue of the debate.
3.3.3 Adjudicators should not allow bias to influence their assessment. Debaters
should not be discriminated against on the basis of religion, sex, race, colour,
nationality, sexual preference, age, social status or disability.
3.3.4 Points of information should be assessed according to the effect they have on
the persuasiveness of the cases of both the member answering the point of
information and the member offering the point of information.

Part 4 — Manner

4.1 The definition of manner

4.1.1 Manner is the presentation of the speech. It is the style and structure a member
uses to further his or her case and persuade the audience.
4.1.2 Manner is comprised of many separate elements. Some, but not all, of these
elements are listed below.

4.2 The elements of style

4.2.1 The elements of style include eye contact, voice modulation, hand gestures,
language, the use of notes and any other element which may affect the
effectiveness of the presentation of the member.
Page 18 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

4.2.2 Eye contact will generally assist a member to persuade an audience as it allows
the member to appear more sincere.
4.2.3 Voice modulation will generally assist a member to persuade an audience as the
debater may emphasise important arguments and keep the attention of the
audience. This includes the pitch, tone, and volume of the member’s voice and
the use of pauses.
4.2.4 Hand gestures will generally assist a member to emphasise important
arguments. Excessive hand movements may however be distracting and reduce
the attentiveness of the audience to the arguments.
4.2.5 Language should be clear and simple. Members who use language which is too
verbose or confusing may detract from the argument if they lose the attention of
the audience.
4.2.6 The use of notes is permitted, but members should be careful that they do not
rely on their notes too much and detract from the other elements of manner.

4.3 The elements of structure

4.3.1 The elements of structure include the structure of the speech of the member and
the structure of the speech of the team.
4.3.2 The matter of the speech of each member must be structured. The member
should organise his or her matter to improve the effectiveness of their
presentation. The substantive speech of each member should:
(a) include: an introduction, conclusion and a series of arguments; and
(b) be well-timed in accordance with the time limitations and the need to
prioritise and apportion time to matter.
4.3.3 The matter of the team must be structured. The team should organise their
matter to improve the effectiveness of their presentation. The team should:
(a) contain a consistent approach to the issues being debated; and
(b) allocate positive matter to each member where both members of the team
are introducing positive matter

4.4 Assessing manner

4.4.1 Adjudicators should assess the elements of manner together in order to

determine the overall effectiveness of the member’s presentation. Adjudicators
should assess whether the member’s presentation is assisted or diminished by
their manner.
4.4.2 Adjudicators should be aware that at a World Championship, there are many
styles which are appropriate, and that they should not discriminate against a
member simply because the manner would be deemed ‘inappropriate
Parliamentary debating’ in their own country.
4.4.3 Adjudicators should not allow bias to influence their assessment. Members
should not be discriminated against on the basis of religion, sex, race, colour,
nationality, language (subject to Rule 4.2.4) sexual preference, age, social status
or disability.

Page 19 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

Part 5 — The Adjudication

5.1 The role of the adjudicator

5.1.1 The adjudicator must:

(a) Confer upon and discuss the debate with the other adjudicators;
(b) Determine the rankings of the teams;
(c) Determine the team grades;
(d) Determine the speaker marks;
(e) Provide a verbal adjudication to the members; and
(f) Complete any documentation required by the tournament.
5.1.2 The adjudication panel should attempt to agree on the adjudication of the debate.
Adjudicators should therefore confer in a spirit of cooperation and mutual respect
5.1.3 Adjudicators should acknowledge that adjudicators on a panel may form different
or opposite views of the debate. Adjudicators should therefore attempt to base
their conclusions on these rules in order to limit subjectivity and to provide a
consistent approach to the assessment of debates.

5.2 Ranking teams

5.2.1 Teams should be ranked from first place to last place. First placed teams should
be awarded three points, second placed teams should be awarded two points,
third placed teams should be awarded one point and fourth placed teams should
be awarded zero points.
5.2.2 Teams may receive zero points where they fail to arrive at the debate more than
five minutes after the scheduled time for debate.
5.2.3 Teams may receive zero points where the adjudicators unanimously agree that
the Member has (or Members have) harassed another debater on the basis of
religion, sex, race, colour, nationality, sexual preference or disability.
5.2.4 Adjudicators should confer upon team rankings. Where a unanimous decision
cannot be reached after conferral, the decision of the majority will determine the
rankings. Where a majority decision cannot be reached, the Chair of the panel of
adjudicators will determine the rankings.

5.3 Grading and marking the teams

5.3.1 The panel of adjudicators should agree upon the grade that each team is to be
awarded. Each adjudicator may then mark the teams at their discretion but within
the agreed grade. Where there is a member of the panel who has dissented in
the ranking of the teams, that adjudicator will not need to agree upon the team
grades and may complete their score sheet at their own discretion.
5.3.2 Team grades and marks should be given the following interpretation:

Page 20 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

Grade Marks Meaning

Excellent to flawless. The standard you would expect to see from
A 180-200 a team at the Semi Final / Grand Final level of the tournament.
The team has many strengths and few, if any, weaknesses.
Above average to very good. The standard you would expect to
see from a team at the finals level or in contention to make to the
B 160-179
finals. The team has clear strengths and some minor
weaknesses.
Average. The team has strengths and weaknesses in roughly
C 140-159
equal proportions.
Poor to below average. The team has clear problems and some
D 120-139
minor strengths.
Very poor. The team has fundamental weaknesses and few, if
E 100-119
any, strengths.

5.4 Marking the members

5.4.1 After the adjudicators have agreed upon the grade that each team is to be
awarded, each adjudicator may mark the individual members at their discretion
but must ensure that the aggregate points of the team members is within the
agreed grade for that team.
5.4.2 Individual members’ marks should be given the following interpretation:
Grade Marks Meaning

Excellent to flawless. The standard of speech you would expect to

see from a speaker at the Semi Final / Grand Final level of the
A 90-100
tournament. This speaker has many strengths and few, if any,
weaknesses.
Above average to very good. The standard you would expect to
see from a speaker at the finals level or in contention to make to
B 80-89
the finals. This speaker has clear strengths and some minor
weaknesses.
Average. The speaker has strengths and weaknesses and roughly
C 70-79
equal proportions.
Poor to below average. The team has clear problems and some
D 60-69
minor strengths.
Very poor. This speaker has fundamental weaknesses and few, if
E 50-59
any, strengths.

Page 21 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

5.5 Verbal adjudications

5.5.1 At the conclusion of the conferral, the adjudication panel should provide a verbal
adjudication of the debate.
5.5.2 The verbal adjudication should be delivered by the Chair of the adjudication
panel, or where the Chair dissents, by a member of the adjudication panel
nominated by the Chair of the panel.
5.5.3 The verbal adjudication should:
(a) identify the order in which the teams were ranked
(b) explain the reasons for the rankings of team, ensuring that each team is
referred to in this explanation; and
(c) provide constructive comments to individual members where the
adjudication panel believes this is necessary.
5.5.4 The verbal adjudication should not exceed 10 minutes.
5.5.5 The members must not harass the adjudicators following the verbal adjudication.
5.5.6 The members may approach an adjudicator for further clarification following the
verbal adjudication; these inquiries must at all times be polite and non-
confrontational.
5.5.4 The verbal adjudication should not exceed 10 minutes.
5.5.5 The members must not harass the adjudicators following the verbal adjudication.
5.5.6 The members may approach an adjudicator for further clarification following the
verbal adjudication; these inquiries must at all times be polite and non-
confrontational.

11.0 LIST OF PAST MOTIONS

• This house believes that the government should pay women for giving birth.
• This house believes that Malaysia should grant citizenship to foreign athletes.
• This house would boycott products of companies that provide support to Israel.
• This house would teach all subjects in secondary schools in the English
language.
• This house would legalise voluntary active euthanasia.
• This house would enforce a total ban on the selling of cigarettes.
• This house would sanction countries that allow child labour.
• This house would implement a complete ban on the use of plastic bags.
• This house would make annual environmental service compulsory for all
citizens.
• This house believes that First World countries should accept environmental
refugees.
• This house would name and shame environment-unfriendly corporations.
• This house believes that hybrid cars are a false hope. This house believes that
economic development is more important than the environment.
• This house would not experiment on animals for human benefit.
Page 22 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND
GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

• This house would not allow the use of animals for entertainment.
• This house believes that killing for sport is morally wrong.
• This house would place an environmental levy on aviation tickets.
• This house would link developmental aid to reduction in emissions.
• This house believes that the government should subsidize non-petrol cars.
• This house believes that, in overpopulated countries, government benefits and
subsidies should be limited to the first child only.

12.0 SUMMARY

So after all that how do you apply it in 15 minutes to prepare your speech?

Be prepared

Have a broad general knowledge of events issues etc BUT be sure to prepare 3 or 4
cases in advance for when you are defining “Open” motions. This should give you an
edge in the debate as you will be talking about something you know well.

Have an argument

Don’t base your case on loads of facts and try to work towards and argument. Think of
the argument/Core-team-line first, then 3 main points to back it up and then the facts to
back those up.

Analyze yourself and others

(Thanks to Mark Dowling for this)

Gov Case (4 steps) Opp Case (pick one and attack)

Problem There is a problem The problem doesn’t exist
Cause This is the cause That’s not the right cause
Solution Here is our solution The solution isn’t workable
Effect And it’s effect It won’t have those effects

This is one way to give structure to a government speech. It is also a highly effective
method for the opposition to look at the Government case and say it falls down for any of
the above four reasons (Opp doesn’t have to attack each area usually just one will do)

Know your role

1st Gov : Define & Outline 1st Opp: Rebut, Alternative, (Re-define)
2nd Gov: Defend, Explain & Rebut 2nd Opp: Rebut & Defend
3rd Gov: Backup, Extend & Rebutt 3rd Opp: Rebut & Backup
4th Gov: Explain, Sum up & Rebut 4th Opp: Rebut, Rebut, sum up

Page 23 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK
 TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE SARAWAK

REFERENCES

1. World Debate Website (2010). WUDC World Parliamentary Debating Rules.

Retrieved from http://flynn.debating.net/Sydrules.htm

2. HELP University College (2009). HELP NATIONAL ENGLISH DEBATE

COMPETITION 2009. Retrieved from http://www.help.edu.my/node/2456

3. World Debate Website (2006). General Guide to Debating. Retrieved from

http://flynn.debating.net/genguide.htm

4. World Schools Debating Championships (2009). WSDC Rules. Retrieved from

http://www.schoolsdebate.com/guide.asp

Page 24 of 24 GENERAL RULES AND

GUIDELINES TO DEBATING
HANDBOOK