The First Government 

 

The speech should begin by providing an adequate definition about what the debate will be about. This will involve defining or clarifying potentially contentious words in the motion, setting out a plan or likely plan if the motion necessitates some kind of action, or determining what criteria the debate ought to be judged upon. The speaker then has to outline the government case by announcing the case division. This means announcing which arguments will be presented by which speakers in the team. The speaker will usually then present the team line which is a sentence which encapsulates a team’s approach to the topic. Then the speaker should move on to presenting their arguments, prioritising the most important ones.

 

The First Opposition 

 

The first opposition speaker deals with the definition if the debate has been defined in an odd way. Any problems that the opposition team has with the way the government team has defined the debate have to be addressed in the first opposition speech. 

 

There are two different strategies that an opposition team can adopt, but this choice has to be made clear in the first opposition speech. The team can either opt to just present a rebuttal case or the stronger alternative: choosing to present an alternative case in addition to rebutting the government material. 

 

The speaker outlines the opposition’s case by explaining the case division for the opposition and presenting the team’s team line. They should move on to rebutting the arguments presented by the first government speaker and then present the opposition’s own substantive arguments.

 

The Second Government

 

If there has been a challenge or opposition to the definition by the opposition, the second government speaker should defend the initial definition or the reasons for choosing it. The speaker should then move on to re-establish the arguments presented by their teammate by focusing on the flaws in the rebuttal of them provided by the first opposition speaker.  If the opposition has chosen to present an alternative case too, then the speaker should engage with this material too. Finally, the speaker should also explain the new argument(s) that the first government speaker promised in the case division.

 

The Second Opposition 

 

The role of the second opposition speaker is much the same as that of the second government. During their speech they should re-establish their team’s arguments, rebut arguments presented by the government team, specifically focusing on the second government and continue the alternative case of the opposition if need be. If the opposition has chosen to present an alternative case, speakers will usually spend around 3-4 minutes on rebuttal and engagement with issues already in the debate and the remainder on explaining their case.

 

The Third Government

 

The third speaker will spend their speech engaging with the issues already in the debate and showing how they fall on the side of the government. This means that the majority of the time will be spent attacking the case of the opposition team. The third government speaker also needs to provide direct rebuttal to the arguments presented by the previous speaker. Third speeches can be structured according to the themes in the debate but some speakers go through the issues in the chronological order that they arose in the debate. The main focus of the speech should be the destruction of the opposition’s case but some teams choose to have third speakers also present a small part of the government’s case.

 

The Third Opposition

 

The third opposition speech performs the same function as the third government speech but is even more focused on destroying the case of their opposing team. Because this speech will be immediately followed by a reply speech that will deal with a broader overview of the themes in the debate, the third opposition speech has more of a chance to focus on the detail of the government case.

 

Opposition Reply and Government Reply

 

Reply speeches are given by either the first or second speakers on a team. They are biased overviews of the debate. In a way they are separate from the debate as they should not be a direct response to previous speakers/ specific examples in the debate but instead serve as a comparison of the points of view on the issues. Reply speeches should not deal with all points of clash within the debate, but should instead pick out the most important ideas or themes that the arguments in the debate will fall under. There will usually be 2 or 3. The reply speeches are the most comparative speeches in the debate which is why they are sometimes referred to as a ‘biased adjudication’ of the debate.

 

Point of Information (POI)

 

A point of information is brief question or comment that is linked to an issue in the debate, which is offered by one of the speakers of the opposing team during a speech. POIs can be offered after the first minute and before the last minute of a speech. Speakers will be made aware of these points by the timekeeper who will clap, ring a bell or make some other clear noise at the appropriate times. POIs are offered by standing up and making the speaker aware that a POI is being offered with a short interjection of ‘Sir’, ‘Madam’, or ‘Point of Information’. Speakers are not allowed to preface the topic of the question or comment in the interjection. For example: saying “On the rabbit population, Sir,” would be seen as unfair because the adjudicator will now know what the question even If the speaker doesn’t accept it. This may force the speaker into responding to a POI that hasn’t really been made, wasting time in their speech, even if they do not really have to. 

The speaker who is holding the floor can choose to accept or reject the POI. If accepted the person offering the POI has between 15-20 seconds to state it and then sit back down. If a speaker accepts a POI they have to answer it during their speech. Speakers should take 1-2 POIs during their speech.