Annual Parliamentary Debating Tournament

BITS Pilani

10th

to 12th

April

TOURNAMENT

FORMAT

AND RULES

BOOKLET

Rule Book

Overview of the Competition

The competition is divided into 2 phases.

1. Preliminary Rounds 2. Knockout Rounds: Quarterfinals, Semifinals and Grand Final.

The registration will begin at 10:00 AM on the 10th of April which will be followed by the mock debate. The adjudication test shall start right after lunch which will be followed by the first round of debating. Details of Each Round :

For the first round of debating, the match ups will be through a random draw of lots. After the preliminary rounds of debating, the teams that qualify for the Quarterfinals will be decided on the following criteria in the order of decision:

1. Number of wins / losses 2. Total Speaker Scores 3. Cumulative Margin of Victory

Eight teams will qualify for the Quarterfinals, and the remaining rounds will be held in a knockout manner.

Format of the Debate

i) There will be two teams, namely: - Government (Affirmative proposing the motion) - Opposition (Negative opposing the motion)

i) Each team will consist of three members: - Government:

o Prime Minister (PM) o Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) o The Third Affirmative/ Proposition Whip

- Opposition o Leader of Opposition (LO) o Deputy Leader of Opposition (DLO) o The Third Negative /Opposition Whip

i) The speaking time will be as follows: o Constructive speeches by first three speakers (6+1 minutes)

-reply speeches (3+1 minutes)

Each Speaker has 20 seconds grace period, after which he/she will be drowned out

Beginning the Debate

Deciding Proposition, Opposition and Releasing the Motion

o The Chairperson has the onus of deciding the Government and the Opposition by a toss of coin. o Three closed motions, in accordance with the theme of the round will be put forth by the Chair, following which the motion to be debated is to be decided within 2 minutes on the following grounds:

The Opposition first gets 1 minute to cancel the least acceptable motion.

The Government then gets 1 minute to strike off the less acceptable of the remaining two.

The final untouched motion is then debated.

Motions and Themes

o Each round will be a theme based round. The themes and motions are debatable and unbiased.

o Themes for each round will be only announced prior to the round in the main room. Motions will be released at the venue.

o All participants must note that any interpretation of the motion has to be limited to the theme of the round. Not doing so can lead to a definition challenge. A good interpretation will lead to a more competitive nature of debating and is encouraged.

o All teams are advised to also not interpret the various aspects of the motion in a biased fashion, i.e. country, city, religion, sex, caste etc. specific. Obviously biased interpretations will not be well received by adjudicators.

Preparation

o Once the motion under debate is decided, it is the privilege of the Government to

decide whether they would prepare their constructive cases in the room or outside. In case they chose the room assigned, it is the responsibility of the Chair to make sure that members of the opposition, adjudicators for the debate along with the Chair, vacate the room for the next 20 minutes.

o At the end of the scheduled 20 minutes, the Chair, along with the adjudicators and the Opposition, returns to the room.

o In case either of the teams do not reach the assigned room within 5 minutes after the preparation time is over, the team present there gets a walkover.

Timing

Pre- Debate

o The opposition followed by the proposition strike off undesirable motions; each team may take up to one minute to decide on which motion they want to strike off.

o As mentioned earlier the proposition gets 20 minutes preparation time, starting when the last person leaves the venue or the location of choice of the proposition. In case one of the teams do not reach the assigned room within 5 minutes after the preparation time is over, the team present there, gets a walkover.

During the Debate o It is the duty of the runner to time all the speeches in a particular round. o The timing of each speech starts at the moment the member begins speaking.

o The Time limit for the six speakers implies, that after the first minute there will be a single bell, which is a signal for the opposing team members to begin shooting POIs, (explained later) while the next bell at 6 minutes), a double bell at the end of the 6th minute. No POIs can be raised during the first and last minute of constructive speeches.

o No POIs can be raised in the Reply speeches, therefore, there will only be a warning bell at the end of 3 minutes and the speaker should wrap up by the end of 4 minutes.

o In every case, 20 seconds of grace period will be given to the speaker after the double bell at the end of the scheduled time, following which the bell is rung continuously also known as Drowning Out, and the adjudicators are requested to not take into consideration anything said after this. It is to the discretion of the adjudicators to penalize or not penalize the speaker.

o If the speaker concludes his or her speech before the 6th minute (8th minute in case of finals), he or she should be marked low on Method and possibly also on Matter. The latter assuming that less matter was advanced, and the former assuming that matter although advanced was clearly underdeveloped.

Post Debate

o Once all the speeches are over, the Chair should request the debaters to vacate the room a maximum time of 10 minutes to evaluate the team scores & decide which team wins by how much margin. The adjudicators must reach a decision independently. The adjudicators cannot discuss amongst themselves, the winning team and the pros and cons of the debate as such. (This is to ensure no biased or influential marking by any adjudicator.)

o Following this, the debaters are called back into the chamber/room, and a round of Open Adjudication follows, whereby the teams are informed of the loopholes in the debate, a personal feedback (if time permits) and the winning team.

o During this time adjudicators must submit their adjudication forms to the runner who will then compile the Speed Ballot form.

o Also the runner will hand out the two teams Adjudicators Feedback forms. o While the runner goes to give the Speed Ballot form (returning all the adjudicators their

respective adjudication sheets for them to confer during open adjudication rounds) to the main tabs room. Adjudicators may continue to give feedback. But upon the return of the runner the feedback must not continue for more than 5 minutes.

o At the end of the Open Adjudication, the Runner is requested to collect all the Adjudication Sheets and Team Feedback Forms and report to the main room.

Speaker Roles

The Prime Minister

The PM begins the debate by proposing a definition. The definition here implies; the interpretation of the motion as seen by the Government within the theme of the round. The PM must give the house:

o A Logical Link between the motion and the definition as seen by the proposition in case of a specific interpretation in case of a weak logical link the definition is prone to a challenge. However, a logical link is not mandatory since the motions are fairly close- ended.

o Setting the parameters of the debate specifically within the theme of the round. o A Case Statement which basically refers to the entire definition stated in a

single sentence o The Burden of the Proposition, which should essentially reflect what they are out

to prove and the essentialities around which their debate rests. o The Team Split whereby the PM informs the house of the structure of their debate which

is very important for the proposition and if not given may be penalized by adjudicators for lack of structure.

o Constructive Arguments in support of his/her motion. o If the proposition wishes to run a Practicality based debate, then the PM must also

put forth a Detailed Model. o No floating model is allowed i.e. The DPM can only explain certain points in the

model as put forth by the PM, but cannot add any new points to the model. o If the proposition wishes to run a Principle based debate then it is not essential to

but forth a model, since it is not of great significance in this case.

Leader of Opposition

The LO comes up and either accepts or challenges the definition (the details on grounds of a challenge and the proceedings are given in the next segment). The onus of the LO is:

o To Accept or Challenge the definition o (If accepted) to identify the Point of Clash which essentially is the point the opposition

realizes is debatable. There may be multiple Points of Clash also. o To state the Burden of the Opposition. o He must then go on to rebut certain arguments made by the Prime Minister o Present his own constructive arguments and/or put forth a model. o To give his Team Split which is in no way an absolute must but when present has

a positive effect on scores. o A proper structure, if missing in the LOs speech should not be marked down heavily

by the adjudicators, considering that he has the least time to prepare his speech. Deputy Prime Minister

The DPM is supposed to:

o Reiterate the Case Statement and Burden of Proposition in case of a Challenge the DPM has to prove why the Challenge does not stand and then proceed with his/her case.

o If the definition is not challenged, then the DPM Rebuts the Oppositions case. o The DPM then goes on to present his/her Constructive arguments and/or explain the

model, in adherence with the PMs team split.

Deputy Leader of Opposition

It is the DLOs onus to:

o Reiterate the Burden of the Opposition and go on to refute the Governments Arguments.

o She/he moves forward the Constructive Case and/or explain the model put forth by the LO.

o In case of a Challenge, the DLO reiterates the grounds of challenge, and then goes on to oppose his/her case as presented by the LO.

Proposition Whip

The Duties of the Third affirmative are as follows:

o Rebut the points raised by the LO, DLO o Rebut the case of the opposition, pointing out the major flaws in argumentation and logic o New matter is allowed in the Government Whips speech and it can be used to

reinforce the teams case by giving further example to the points raised in the first two constructive. However, ethically the whip should not introduce a totally different line of thought or an argument that is radically different from that originally being followed by his team till the first two speeches.

o Rebuild the teams case and summarize the issues of the debate and thematize the debate.

Opposition Whip

The Duties of the Third Negative:

o Rebut the points raised by the PM, DPM o Bring out the flaws in argumentation and logic of the Proposition. o Summarize the issues of the debate and thematize the debate.

o The third negative has duties similar to that of the 3rd affirmative. However, the 3rd

negative cannot introduce new matter, since the proposition would be at a disadvantage as they would not have any speech left to respond. He may give examples to reinforce an argument brought up previously.

Reply Speeches

o The second last speech is delivered by either the LO or the DLO as a Reply speech which is essentially a summary of the Arguments, proving in turn how the Oppositions case stands. Its primary aim is to bias adjudication.

o The last speech is the PMs or the DPMs Reply speech, proving how the motion is carried.

o Please note that No New Matter can be introduced in the Reply speeches. o No POIs are allowed during the reply speeches.

Point of Information (POI)

o During the speeches of the PM, LO, DPM and DLO debaters may rise to ask the speaker a question or insert a short statement.

o Points of Information (POIs) may be offered during constructive speeches only, after the first single knock of the gavel and up to the second single knock of the gavel.

o POIs may not be offered during the first and last minutes of constructive speeches. If they are, however, it is the duty of the speaker holding the floor to reject the same as being out of order. If the speaker fails to do so, the Chairperson may briefly intervene to call the house to order.

o After a POI has been asked a team may not raise another POI for the next 15 seconds after the first POI has been asked and answered.

Definition Challenge

o The definition is the interpretation of the motion as put forward by the Prime Minister, or

the First Affirmative in his opening remarks. The onus for establishing how the definition ties with the given motion lies completely upon the Prime Minister. All subsequent speakers have purely clarificatory role (if any) in this regard.

o The definition should be reasonable in term of its knowledge. o The definition should state the issue or issues arising out of the motion to be debated,

state the meanings of any terms in the motion requiring clarification and display clear and logical links to the wording of the motion.

The Negative may challenge The Affirmatives definition on the basis of any of the following grounds:

Squirrel: The Negative may challenge on the grounds of a squirrel if there is no logical link, or a very weak link established by the Proposition to connect themotion with the interpreted definition. Although the almost entirely curbed through close-ended motions.

scope for a squirrel is

Truism: A truism is matter stated as a fact. It refers to a situation where theGovernment tries to move a motion

which already exists or is already true.

which has already been moved, i.e.

Tautology: A tautology is a definition which, in development proves itself. When the Negative challenges on the grounds of a tautology, it is essentially challengin

g the

fact that the Prime Ministers arguments are self proving, or circular in nature. Place Set: It refer

s to setting an unnaturally restrictive or spatial location as

a major parameter Time Set: It refers

to setting unnaturally restrictive chronological durations as

a major parameter.

It should be noted that the Negative may challenge the definition on

multiple grounds as well.

o The Negative may not challenge a definition supplied by the Affirmative based on the fact that:

Its own definition is more reasonable. A better debate will result. Nor may the Negative re-define terms or words

contained in the motion so that a completely different debate is thereby set up. However, the Negative may contend with the specific or general approach to terminology supplied by the definition of the Affirmative.

o The definitional challenge must be made in the speech of the Leader of Opposition only, following a clear statement that the definition is being rejected or challenged. The onus for establishing the definitional challenge lies completely upon the Leader of Opposition. Subsequent speakers are strictly permitted a purely clarificatory role (if any) in this regard.

o In the event of a challenge, once the grounds of challenge have been stated by the Leader of Opposition, a substitute definition must be supplied by him, which the Opposition must then go on to negate.

o If the Leader of Opposition does not challenge the definition then no other speaker may do so.

o The onus to prove that the definition is unreasonable lies on the Opposition and should not be presumed by adjudicators.

o The final decision as to whether a definitional challenge has succeeded must take into consideration all 8 speeches in any debate.

o Neither team should abandon either the definition or the challenge of its opening speakers.

o If a definitional challenge is upheld, the team making the challenge wins by the maximum possible margin

o In case of a definition challenge it is up to the discretion of the chief adjudicator whether to have the Whip speeches or not. If the chief adjudicator feels that they are satisfactorily convinced on the definition challenge, then he/she may omit the Whip speeches. But in this case the Proposition provides the reply speech first.

Team Slide

A team slide is when a particular team slides on its own case. It occurs when statements made by two speakers from the same side of the house are essentially contradictory in nature. For example: If the primary speaker says: The war in Iraq was about oil and oil only, following which the next speaker from the same side says: The war in Iraq was about oil, but it was also about fighting terrorism. Here, clearly, the team has changed their stance and contradicted themselves, thereby sliding their case.

Team slides must be marked negatively by all adjudicators. Team slides are generally not the sole reason for a team to win or lose, but this again depends on the extent of the slide.

Team slides should be distinguished from concessions that, if not too substantial, will allow the debate to proceed on the contentious ground. For instance, it would not be an unreasonable concession for a negative team to concede, on the topic, that smoking should be banned, that there is a recognized link between smoking and disease. Such a concession would allow the debate to proceed upon the more contentious issues surrounding prohibition.

Adjudicators note it is your discretion to credit or discredit a team slide. If you are convinced that a team slide has occurred, you must mark down the team which makes the slide, NOT mark up the team which points the slide out.

Adjudication and feedback forms

It must be mentioned that we shall try our level best to have open adjudication for every round. In a situation where we are short of time, we might have to incorporate a round of closed adjudication.

After the tabulation of the results the two panel adjudicators will begin with their feedback to teams. This will be followed by inputs from the chief adjudicator. The feedback should be a reflection of the basic contentions of the adjudicators decision.

Speakers must look for well-constructed reasons for the adjudicators decision and also valid application of parliamentary rules in the process of judgment. As this debate wishes to enhance the spirit of debating feedback should not be purely on method and manner but truly reflective of argument vs. argument analysis. Adjudicators must realize the importance of feedback and its quality, as this would affect their next round of adjudication and the debates that they will adjudicate.

Open adjudication is mainly for an open interaction between speakers and decisions makers so as to remove all elements of negativity and bias. We hope the response from adjudicators is taken positively and used to improve over subsequent debates.

Adjudicators must realize a feedback session must be purely constructive and to the team and not to the individual unless it is highly necessary. Feedback must always be constructive and positive in its approach and must highlight the main reasons for your decision. A well- constructed feedback will make adjudicators advance in their adjudication group.

The Margin of Victory (MOV) awarded by the adjudicators must be independent of

the team scores.

However, after making their decision, the adjudicators must ensure that the winning time has the higher score of the two teams.

Conflicts

The Organising Committee requests all the participants attending the debate to bring to their notice any conflicts that might exist. All are also requested to update the Committee about any conflicts that might arise within the course of the tournament.

List of recognized adjudicator conflicts that will be entertained during the debate:

1. Personal Relationships (romantic relationships, liaisons, grudges

and vendetta etc.) 2. Institutional Conflict

i. Same school ii. Same college (previously or currently)

3. Ex Teammate 4. Family

IN CASE OF ANY ISSUE REGARDING THE DEBATE, PLEASE CONTACT

ORGANISING COMMITTEE

1) Neil Dave

Tournament Director, Q.E.D 2015 09772211599

neildave.nd@gmail.com

2) Abhishek Ghosh

Director, Correspondence, Q.E.D 2015

08503993484

abhi362000@yahoo.co.uk