Debating Rules, Roles & Regulations Sponsored by:

Recap 4 teams of 2 people, with 2 teams in favour of each side 4 teams of 2 people, with 2 teams in favour of each side 15 minutes prep time15 minutes prep time 5 minute speeches 5 minute speeches During opposition speeches you can (and should) offer POI’s (Points of Information During opposition speeches you can (and should) offer POI’s (Points of Information You are trying to convince the judge that your view on the particular social policy is correct You are trying to convince the judge that your view on the particular social policy is correct Each different position on the table has different roles associated with it Each different position on the table has different roles associated with it

Table Diagram Sponsored by: 1 st Prop 2 nd Prop 1 st Opp 2 nd Opp

Constructing a Speech Sponsored by: In prep time, you and your partner should attempt to come up with as many points in support of your argument as you can In prep time, you and your partner should attempt to come up with as many points in support of your argument as you can If you are first half of the table you should then take your 6 strongest arguments and split them between you (3 each) If you are first half of the table you should then take your 6 strongest arguments and split them between you (3 each) You should then split your speech as following: You should then split your speech as following:  State your three points (This is called “signposting”)  Rebuttal – seconds, this should deal with the speeches from the other side that have gone before you, explaining why things your opponents have said were wrong  Your three points – lasting seconds each – you should aim to explain each of your points in a logical fashion with as much justification as possible in order to convince the judge what you’re saying is true.  Summary of speech – once you’ve run out of material, briefly summarise each of your 3 points (if you have any time remaining in which to do so)

Special Roles on the Table Sponsored by: 1 st Prop – 1 st Speaker – Must define the motion, decide actually what we’re talking about and tell us HOW you are going to do it 1 st Prop – 1 st Speaker – Must define the motion, decide actually what we’re talking about and tell us HOW you are going to do it 2 nd Prop/Opp – 1 st Speaker – Extension Speakers – These two must aim to bring new material to the debate, try and come up with arguments that will take the debate in a new direction that hasn’t already been discussed. 2 nd Prop/Opp – 1 st Speaker – Extension Speakers – These two must aim to bring new material to the debate, try and come up with arguments that will take the debate in a new direction that hasn’t already been discussed. 2 nd Prop/Opp – 2 nd Speaker – Summary Speakers – These two must summarise the debate, they do this by using the three strongest arguments from their side in order to try to persuade the judges that their side has won the debate 2 nd Prop/Opp – 2 nd Speaker – Summary Speakers – These two must summarise the debate, they do this by using the three strongest arguments from their side in order to try to persuade the judges that their side has won the debate

1 st Prop Sponsored by: Identify the problem addressed by the motion Identify the problem addressed by the motion Explain the Mechanism to solve the problem Explain the Mechanism to solve the problem Explain how society will work with the solution in place Explain how society will work with the solution in place Problem Mechanism Solution For Prop to win the debate, they must prove this process, and prove that the solution world is better than the status quo For Prop to win the debate, they must prove this process, and prove that the solution world is better than the status quo

1 st Opp Sponsored by: Deny the existence of the problem itself Deny the existence of the problem itself Identify new, bigger problems that are created in the solution world Identify new, bigger problems that are created in the solution world Claim that the mechanism itself doesn’t solve the problem Claim that the mechanism itself doesn’t solve the problem Problem Mechanism Solution For Opp to win the debate, they have to prove that Prop’s model doesn’t work, they can attack this on any one of three fronts: Opp can choose which line of argument to go down Opp can choose which line of argument to go down

An Example Sponsored by: Prop: There is a lack of regulation of drugs – leading to people taking poorly manufactured drugs and doing damage to themselves Prop: There is a lack of regulation of drugs – leading to people taking poorly manufactured drugs and doing damage to themselves Problem Mechanism Solution This House Would legalise all drugs Opp: These people are committing an act that is illegal and immoral, so when they come to harm as a result it is their own fault Opp: These people are committing an act that is illegal and immoral, so when they come to harm as a result it is their own fault Prop: We will legalise all drugs, with sellers having a licence and supplies being given strict instructions as to what can go into the drugs Prop: We will legalise all drugs, with sellers having a licence and supplies being given strict instructions as to what can go into the drugs Opp: The state won’t want to sell drugs that are particularly strong, so people will still use unregulated back street drug dealers. Opp: The state won’t want to sell drugs that are particularly strong, so people will still use unregulated back street drug dealers. Prop: People will not be taking drugs with unknown content, and will be much more aware of the specific effects of each individual drug, what’s more, doctors will be able to know exactly what people have taken Prop: People will not be taking drugs with unknown content, and will be much more aware of the specific effects of each individual drug, what’s more, doctors will be able to know exactly what people have taken Opp: Knowing that the drugs are safe is going to make more people more likely to take drugs, which will turn us into a society full of drug addicts! Opp: Knowing that the drugs are safe is going to make more people more likely to take drugs, which will turn us into a society full of drug addicts!

Extension Sponsored by: You & your partner should come up with as many different points before the debate as you can, think about all the wider implications of the motion and the different groups of people affected. You & your partner should come up with as many different points before the debate as you can, think about all the wider implications of the motion and the different groups of people affected. During the debate cross off the arguments as they come up in the first half of the table, look for things that you think have been missed by your side – or arguments of the other side that need taking down During the debate cross off the arguments as they come up in the first half of the table, look for things that you think have been missed by your side – or arguments of the other side that need taking down Let’s go back to the drug debate...

An Example Sponsored by: Prop: There is a lack of regulation of drugs – leading to people taking poorly manufactured drugs and doing damage to themselves Prop: There is a lack of regulation of drugs – leading to people taking poorly manufactured drugs and doing damage to themselves This House Would legalise all drugs Opp: These people are committing an act that is illegal and immoral, so when they come to harm as a result it is their own fault Opp: These people are committing an act that is illegal and immoral, so when they come to harm as a result it is their own fault Prop: We will legalise all drugs, with sellers having a licence and supplies being given strict instructions as to what can go into the drugs Prop: We will legalise all drugs, with sellers having a licence and supplies being given strict instructions as to what can go into the drugs Opp: The state won’t want to sell drugs that are particularly strong, so people will still use unregulated back street drug dealers. Opp: The state won’t want to sell drugs that are particularly strong, so people will still use unregulated back street drug dealers. Prop: People will not be taking drugs with unknown content, and will be much more aware of the specific effects of each individual drug, what’s more, doctors will be able to know exactly what people have taken Prop: People will not be taking drugs with unknown content, and will be much more aware of the specific effects of each individual drug, what’s more, doctors will be able to know exactly what people have taken Opp: Knowing that the drugs are safe is going to make more people more likely to take drugs, which will turn us into a society full of drug addicts! Opp: Knowing that the drugs are safe is going to make more people more likely to take drugs, which will turn us into a society full of drug addicts! What can our extension speakers talk about?

Prop Extension Sponsored by: Bring drugs into discussion in mainstream culture Bring drugs into discussion in mainstream culture Lifting taboo on drugs takes away some of the “enjoyment” of doing drugs – no longer rebellion against the state Lifting taboo on drugs takes away some of the “enjoyment” of doing drugs – no longer rebellion against the state People will take drugs in visible areas, which means crime is easier detects, and “drug ghetto’s” don’t arise People will take drugs in visible areas, which means crime is easier detects, and “drug ghetto’s” don’t arise Freedom to Choose, drugs do more harm to the individual themselves therefore it should be there decision to engage in destructive behaviour or not Freedom to Choose, drugs do more harm to the individual themselves therefore it should be there decision to engage in destructive behaviour or not There’s nothing wrong with taking drugs, stigma attached just stems from a historical fear of the unknown There’s nothing wrong with taking drugs, stigma attached just stems from a historical fear of the unknown We can monitor those who are taking drugs – abusers will be easier to identify and therefore easier to treat We can monitor those who are taking drugs – abusers will be easier to identify and therefore easier to treat

Opp Extension Sponsored by: Drugs are bad, people trust the government and will interpret this as the government telling people taking drugs is ok Drugs are bad, people trust the government and will interpret this as the government telling people taking drugs is ok The state has a duty of care to look after it’s citizens, drugs are harmful and therefore we must protect them from it The state has a duty of care to look after it’s citizens, drugs are harmful and therefore we must protect them from it Drugs being tucked away in their own mini-crime zones is a good thing – keep it all in one place away from the law abiding citizens Drugs being tucked away in their own mini-crime zones is a good thing – keep it all in one place away from the law abiding citizens Increased drug consumption as a society would lower efficiency, those that are addicted to drugs often become apathetic to other things (career, family etc.) Increased drug consumption as a society would lower efficiency, those that are addicted to drugs often become apathetic to other things (career, family etc.)

Summary Sponsored by: During prep time, the summary speaker simply has to help his partner (the extension speaker) come up with arguments During prep time, the summary speaker simply has to help his partner (the extension speaker) come up with arguments During the debate he should note down what each speaker on both his, and the opposing side say During the debate he should note down what each speaker on both his, and the opposing side say When it comes to his speech he should choose the 3 strongest argument’s from his side and re-analyse them When it comes to his speech he should choose the 3 strongest argument’s from his side and re-analyse them Ideally, this should deal with the strongest arguments from the opposing side (the arguments should “clash”), but if not, it may be useful to also take them down during your speech Ideally, this should deal with the strongest arguments from the opposing side (the arguments should “clash”), but if not, it may be useful to also take them down during your speech Summary speakers shouldn’t bother with rebuttal, their speech should deal with pretty much anything that’s of importance to the debate Summary speakers shouldn’t bother with rebuttal, their speech should deal with pretty much anything that’s of importance to the debate Remember, it’s a biased summary, you’re trying to convince the judge that your side won the debate. Remember, it’s a biased summary, you’re trying to convince the judge that your side won the debate.

Motion Sponsored by: THW Bring Back the Death Penalty