British Parliamentary Style
British Parliamentary Style (BPS) is a format, i.e. a specific set of rules, of debating . This format is the most common in international tournaments, such as World and European Championships , and also in debating clubs in many countries. In Germany it is the most important format alongside the Open Parliamentary Debate (OPD). The format of the German Debate Championship alternates annually between BPS and OPD. A debate in the BPS requires eight speakers who act in four teams of two. Two teams form the government faction, the other two that of the opposition. The preparation time after the topic has been announced is 15 minutes, the speaking time per speaker is seven minutes.
Course of a BPS debate
| government | opposition |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| 1st speaker, 3rd speaker | 2nd speaker, 4th speaker |
|
|
|
| 5th speaker, 7th speaker | 6th speaker, 8th speaker |
Speakers and jurors
In a BPS debate, four teams of two speakers fight for victory, two on each side. The two teams on one side do not quarrel and the closing team must not contradict the opening one on its own side (stab in the back), but the teams compete within the faction as well as with the teams of the other faction. You can think of them as coalition partners who each want to develop their own profile. You pull in the same direction, but stronger than your colleagues if possible. Which of the four teams will take which of the four positions will be drawn - as in every debating format . The jury ( adjudication ) panel , which decides neutrally about victory and defeat, should consist of at least three jurors. In regular club operations, however, there is often only one juror, in the finals of large tournaments, however, up to nine. A lead judge acts as the president of the debate. He acts as an arbitrator during the debate and moderates the decision-making process after the debate.
Subject and preparation
At the beginning of the debate there is the topic ( motion ), which is often chosen by the participants in club operations, but which is determined and announced by the chief jurors at tournaments. The formulation of the topic traditionally follows the scheme “This house ...”, e.g. B. "This house would introduce the minimum wage". Topics can be very open and thus leave the opening government a lot of leeway (e.g. "This house would send the prodigal son away"), but are usually quite precisely defined (e.g. "This house would be the parents of Reduce child benefit for truants ”). After choosing or announcing the topic, the four teams have 15 minutes to prepare for the debate separately and without electronic aids.
The debate
Each speaker has seven minutes to speak. Between the first and the last minute, the four speakers of the opposing parliamentary group may stand up to offer short questions ( points of information ), of which the speaker should accept and answer at least one. The main juror of the debate, acting as president, ensures that speaking time is respected.
The inaugural government's first speaker, known as the Prime Minister, makes a specific proposal according to the binding subject. This means that he suggests a specific measure ( policy ) or represents a thesis given by the topic. This motion is now the subject of the debate, which the government and opposition representatives approve or reject in their speeches. To this end, all speakers bring their own arguments into the debate and also deal with the arguments of the other side. This also applies to the first speaker of the closing teams, while the two final speakers ( whips ) summarize the debate from their point of view without fundamentally new arguments.
Evaluation criteria and feedback
After the debate, the jurors, under the leadership of the main judge, determine a ranking of the teams from one to four in a non-public discussion and also award individual speaker points (not necessarily in club operations). The approach when comparing the four teams is holistic and is based on the tasks of the teams as defined by the set of rules. The focus is on the content ( matter ) of the speeches, but it is assumed that this content cannot be assessed independently of its strategic use in the debate ( method ) and the rhetorical form ( manner ). An argument is only as good as it is carried out, explained and used in the context of the team. The individual speaker points are awarded by the jurors on a scale from 50 to 100, with 75 points being the average and generally the vast majority of speeches are given between 70 and 80 points. If a result is found, this is communicated to the speakers of the debate and the reasons are given. If possible, this should be combined with constructive suggestions for improvement.
Tournament operation
Tournaments in the British Parliamentary Style initially have between three and nine preliminary rounds, in which all teams in the tournament take part. After each preliminary round, the teams receive three, two, one or zero team points according to their placements. The sum of the team points determines the ranking of the teams in the team tab. The best teams according to the team tab reach the final rounds ( break rounds ) held in the knockout system . In addition to the team tab, there is also a speaker tab, i.e. a ranking list of all individual speakers. The sum of the individual speaker points of a team serves as a tie-breaker in the event of a tie based on team points .
Which teams meet in the first preliminary round is decided by chance. In round two, the power pairing comes into effect, so teams with the same number of team points meet. This procedure means that teams of equal strength tend to debate one another. The tabbing software, which optimizes the setting of the debates, also ensures that all teams have to contest all four positions equally often.
The tasks of each speaker
- Prime Minister: Specification of the topic in the application. This consists of a description of the problem, a description of the cause, the government's plan and a description of the consequences of executing the plan. The plan must include a change in the status quo and it must be feasible through a parliamentary decision. Outlook on points of the Deputy Prime Minister.
- Opposition leader: Presentation of a fundamental point on the government proposal. The opposing position does not have to be directed against the basic problem, but can be related to any part of the government proposal. An opposition plan to solve the problem can also be proposed. Outlook on points of the deputy opposition leader.
- Deputy Prime Minister: Reinforce the Inaugural Government's Position; d. H. in-depth presentation of the application parts and introduction of new arguments. Important: Responding to previous speakers in counter-argumentation.
- Deputy opposition leader: underpinning the opening opposition's point of interest, d. H. in-depth presentation and introduction of new arguments. Important: Responding to previous speakers in counter-argumentation.
- Member of the government: continue the debate as proposed by the government. Absolutely: Introduction of a weighty new argument and / or an extension, i. H. a sub-proposal that adds a new aspect to the government proposal and ideally resolves critical points that emerged during the debate. Important: answer to the other side.
- Member of the opposition: continue the debate in line with the opposition point of view. Absolutely: Introduction of a weighty new argument and / or an extension, i. H. a sub-proposal that adds a new aspect to the opposition plan and ideally eliminates critical points that emerged during the debate. Important: answer to the other side.
- Government whip: Summarizing the debate from a government perspective. Filter out core theses and arguments. Promote plan including expansion emphatically and passionately. Under no circumstances bring new arguments. Nevertheless, it is important to respond to previous speakers on the other side.
- Whip in the opposition: Summing up the debate from the opposition point of view. Filter out core theses and arguments. Promote emphatically and passionately for the subject matter including extension. Under no circumstances bring new arguments. Nevertheless, it is important to respond to previous speakers on the other side.
See also
- World Schools Debating Style
- Association of Debating Clubs at Universities
literature
- Blum, Christian: Debating - learning the royal form of rhetoric. Munich 2007.