POLITICAL SCIENCE DEBATE CHALLENGE

Asian Parliamentary Debate General Rules

A. Teams

There two opposing teams in an Asian’s format of debate:

1. Government side – proposes and defends the motion;

2. Opposition side – refutes and negates the motion.

Each side is composed of three members.

a. The Members of the government side are the following:

1. Prime minister (PM) – opens the debate, defines the motion and advances arguments;
2. Deputy prime Minister (DPM) – refute at first instance the case of the opposition, re-establish the
government's claim, and advances arguments;
3. Government whip (GW) – makes an issue-based rebuttal of the opposition's case and summarizes
the case of the government.

b. The Members of the Opposition side are the following:

1. Leader of the Opposition (LO) – responds directly to the case of the government by giving a direct
clash, and advances arguments. May challenge the motion if the definition is challengeable;
2. Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DPL) – refutes the case of the DPM, re-establishes the case of
the opposition, and advances an argument;
3. Opposition Whip (OW) - makes an issues-based rebuttal of the government's and summarizes the
case of the opposition.

B. Time of Speeches

Each speaker is allocated three (3) minutes to deliver their constructive speeches. One speaker from each side
(For the Government: PM/DPM, for Opposition: LO/DLO) is given three (2) minutes to deliver a reply speech.
The speakers will be speaking in the following order:

1. Prime Minister (3 min)

2. Leader of the opposition (3 min)
3. Deputy Prime Minister (3 min)
4. Deputy Leader of the Opposition (3 min)
5. Government Whip (3 min)
6. Opposition Whip (3 min)
7. Opposition Reply (2 min)
8. Government Reply (2 min)

Both teams will also be given eight (8) minutes to prepare their speeches. The total runtime of each debate is
thirty (30) minutes.

C. Point of Information (POI)

During the constructive speeches, Point of Information (POI) may be raised by the opposing side after the first
minute up to the fourth minute. POI may be refused or accepted by the speaker. During reply speeches, no POI
may be raised.

College of Arts and Sciences

Borongan City 6800, Eastern Samar, Philippines
[email protected] / [email protected]
09981658332
D. Reply Speech

Reply speech is a comparative analysis of the strength and weaknesses of the case of both sides. The aim of the
speech is to give a bias judgment as to why should the people support the team's claim. The speech is first
delivered by the opposition side and followed by the government side that will close the debate.

E. Matter, Manner, Method

Asian Parliamentary Debate is assessed by an Adjudicator Panel composed of an odd number according to the
following criteria:

a. Matter (40) – substance of the debate, the arguments and evidence presented, and the logical
reasoning and presentation of said arguments.
b. Manner (40) – the style of delivery, the persuasion skills, and the conduct of the debaters.
c. Method (20) – the response to the dynamics of the debate, and the observance of the rules of
debate.

F. Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate

i. Government Side

a. Prime Minister (PM)

 Define context and parameters of debate. For example, in an open motion like "This House
Would Support Musicians", the debate could be contextualized into whether music should be a
commodity for trade, or it should be available gratis (i.e. free music download and transfer)
 Provide concise background or history leading to the issue
 Give framework of government bench's case. I.e. mechanisms (if any), argumentation flow (what
the government's first argument is and what the Deputy Prime Minister will talk about)
 Introduce 1st argument
 Assert Government stand

b. Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)

 Rebut first argument from Leader of Opposition

 Rebut rebuttals to PM's argument
 Introduce 2nd and 3rd argument
 Reassert Government stand and case

c. Government Whip

 Rebut Deputy Leader of Opposition, and Leader of Opposition

 Rebut rebuttals to DPM and PM arguments
 Provide a deeper level of analysis for previous arguments and rebuttals
 No new arguments, but new angles of arguments should be given
 Brief summary of entire case of Government
 Reassert Government stand and case

College of Arts and Sciences

Borongan City 6800, Eastern Samar, Philippines
[email protected] / [email protected]
09981658332
 ii. Opposition Side

a. Leader of Opposition

 Agree or disagree with context/ parameters of debate (any definitional challenges,

accusations of squirreling, or unfair set up should be made from the LO speech and no
later)
 Rebut Prime Minister's argument
 Give framework for Opposition case (if Opp. agrees to problem, then their case should
provide solution, or at least effectively highlight how Government proposal will worsen the
situation)
 Introduce First Opposition argument
 Assert Opposition stand

b. Deputy Leader of Opposition

 Rebut DPM and PM arguments

 Rebut rebuttals to LO arguments
 Introduce 1st and 2nd (if any) argument
 Reassert Opposition stand and case

c. Opposition Whip

 Rebut DPM and PM arguments

 Rebut rebuttals to LO & DLO arguments
 Provide a deeper level of analysis for previous arguments and rebuttals
 No new arguments, but new angles of arguments should be given
 Reassert Opposition stand and case

iii. Reply Speech

 Can only be done by either 1st or 2nd speaker from each bench
 Provide a biased 'oral adjudication' of why the debate should go to own bench
 Highlight issues you think your side won, carefully tip-toe around issues you think you lost
 New examples to expand on discussed examples is usually allowed and makes the reply speech
sound fresh as opposed to verbal regurgitation
 Reassert stand

College of Arts and Sciences

Borongan City 6800, Eastern Samar, Philippines
[email protected] / [email protected]
09981658332
G. Roles of Speakers in Asian Parliamentary Format

GOVERNMENT SIDE OPPOSITION SIDE

 Define and set-up  Respond to
the debate definition and set-up
 Present position and  Present position and
case case Leader of Opposition
Prime Minister (PM)
 Make 1 or 2  Rebut Government (LO)
arguments case
 Make 1 or 2
arguments
 Defend your case  Defend your case
 Attack LO’s case  Attack PM and
Deputy Prime Minister Deputy Leader of
 Make 1 or 2 DPM’s cases
(DPM) Opposition (DLO)
arguments  Make 1 or 2
arguments
 Briefly summarize  Briefly summarize
your team’s cases your team’s cases
 Summarize and  Summarize and
prioritize the main prioritize the main
issues in the debate issues in the debate
 Rebut and analyze  Rebut and analyze
Government Whip main issues main issues
Opposition Whip (OW)
(GW)
Be sure to respond to Remember, you cannot
new arguments delivered bring new arguments into
by DLO. You can do this the debate. You can
separately or include respond to the GW
them in your summary of speaker if you choose to.
main issues.
 Briefly summarize  Briefly summarize
the debate the debate
 Summarize the  Summarize the
position of your position of your
Government Reply
team and your team and your Opposition Reply (OR)
(GR)
opponent opponent
 Compare and show  Compare and show
why your team is why your team is
better better

College of Arts and Sciences

Borongan City 6800, Eastern Samar, Philippines
[email protected] / [email protected]
09981658332
H. Asian Parliamentary Debate Rubric

SCORE MATTER (40%) MANNER (40%) METHOD (20%)

Points should never drop below 20 even if a debater was particularly bad. Lower points
Under 20 often exclude a team from elimination rounds so if you give points below 20, you are in
effect saying that a debater has no chance of recovery.
Scores of 23 and below should be reserved for people who are unsuccessful as debaters
20 – 23
as well as obnoxious, disruptive, or mean-spirited.
Mumbles and rarely makes
Speech is poorly structured
Offers assertions with little eye contact. Is clearly
and difficult to follow. Does
reasoning or evidence. distracted by opponents’
not tie in with previous
Demonstrates fallacious interjections. Is clearly
speeches. Does not fully
24 reasoning. Repeats nervous while speaking.
make use of allotted time, or
previous arguments instead Rarely if ever makes
uses full time but does so
of adequately responding to interjections, and
ineffectively (with lots of
opponents’ points. disengages from debate
“fluff”).
after their speech.
Speaks clearly and
Consistently delivers understandably, with little or Speech is somewhat
complete arguments, poor body language structured, but this structure
though reasoning and (shifting, avoiding eye is not adhered to throughout
evidence may be weak or contact, etc.). Clearly the speech. Attempts to
insufficient at times. makes speech errors, but reference previous
25
Identifies obvious issues, none serious enough to speeches. Loses some
but miss complexities and undermine argument. clarity integrating opposing
nuances. Refutes opponent Makes interjections, but arguments into speech.
arguments but does so does not actively and Makes good use of allotted
inconsistently at times. consistently interact with time.
teammates.
effective delivery of
Speaks animatedly and
arguments, using Presents a structured,
remains engaged
convincing reasoning and organized speech. Points
throughout debate.
evidence throughout. are coherent and easy to
Demonstrates a degree of
Demonstrates a solid follow. Ties in speech with
26 – 27 confidence and gives
knowledge base. previous speeches,
general impression of
Demonstrates ability to advancing teammates’
credibility. Effectively
evaluate and find arguments and responding
interjects and responds to
weaknesses in opposing to opponents’ arguments.
opponents’ interjections.
arguments.
Demonstrates thorough
grounding in subject and Clear mastery of rhetorical
has a clear grasp of the devices like humor, pausing
complexities and nuances for emphasis, and vocal
involved. Delivers inflection to add depth and
Uses a stable structure,
arguments backed with character to speech.
organized in a clear, logical,
solid reasoning and Speaks passionately and
and easy to follow manner.
28 – 29 thorough evidence. convincingly. Actively
Effectively integrates
Critiques underlying engages the audience,
teammates’ and opponents’
assumptions and strategies maintaining interest
arguments into speech.
in opposing arguments. throughout the speech.
Demonstrates ability to Interjects when necessary,
improvise effective and responds to opponents’
arguments in response to interjections thoroughly.
opponents.
A score of 30 is considered flawless and perfect. This score should only be given to one
who has demonstrated true and complete mastery, exceeding all expectations. Giving a
30
score of thirty is essentially saying that you have no suggestions for improvement. Perfect
scores should be given out very rarely, for only the most exceptional of speeches.

College of Arts and Sciences

Borongan City 6800, Eastern Samar, Philippines
[email protected] / [email protected]
09981658332