- <div class="article section"><h2>The round under the WUDC manual</h2><p>British Parliamentary (BP) is the format of the World Universities Debating Championship and many university and school competitions. Four teams of two debate one motion: Opening Government (OG), Opening Opposition (OO), Closing Government (CG) and Closing Opposition (CO). Teams get 15 minutes to prepare after the motion is released, with no internet and no help from anyone but their partner. The <a href="https://debate.ethz.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/WUDC-Debating-Judging-Manual-Revised-November-2024-.pdf">WUDC Debating & Judging Manual</a> sets this order:</p><div class="table"><table><thead><tr><th scope="col">Speech</th><th scope="col">Team</th><th scope="col">Time</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Prime Minister (PM)</td><td>Opening Government</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Leader of the Opposition (LO)</td><td>Opening Opposition</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)</td><td>Opening Government</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DLO)</td><td>Opening Opposition</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Member of Government (MG)</td><td>Closing Government</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Member of Opposition (MO)</td><td>Closing Opposition</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Government Whip (GW)</td><td>Closing Government</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr><tr><td>Opposition Whip (OW)</td><td>Closing Opposition</td><td>7 minutes</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Points of information can be offered between the end of the first minute and the end of the sixth; the first and last minutes are protected. Signals sound at 1:00, 6:00 and 7:00, and judges disregard anything said after 7:15. The manual calls the member speakers Government Member and Opposition Member; the timer uses MG and MO. The <a href="/tools/debate-timer?format=bp">free debate timer with the BP preset</a> knocks at each signal.</p><p>At the end, the judges rank the four teams from first to fourth. There are no draws, and a team can beat the other team on its own side of the table. At WUDC, a first place is worth three team points, second two, third one and fourth none.</p><h2>Worked example: all eight speakers on one motion</h2><div class="card"><h3>Practice motion: This House would give each city neighbourhood a binding vote on new chain stores opening there</h3><p><strong>PM:</strong> Defines the model: a chain is a business with ten or more outlets, a planning application triggers a vote of the ward's residents, and a majority against blocks the permit. First argument: residents bear the costs of a changed high street, so they should decide.</p><p><strong>LO:</strong> Rebuts the model's fairness, since turnout in local votes skews toward older homeowners. Argues the vote protects incumbent businesses and raises prices for the residents least able to pay.</p><p><strong>DPM:</strong> Answers the turnout point and adds a second argument: independent shops keep more spending in the area and give a neighbourhood a reason to visit.</p><p><strong>DLO:</strong> Rebuts the local spending claim and adds that blocked chains move to the next ward, so the policy shifts costs rather than removing them.</p><p><strong>MG extension:</strong> The vote changes chains' behaviour before any ballot. To win, a chain offers local hiring, smaller formats or design concessions, so most neighbourhoods get better chain stores rather than none.</p><p><strong>MO extension:</strong> Distribution across the city: wealthier wards organise and vote chains out, poorer wards do not, so low-wage retail and its traffic concentrate where residents already have least say.</p><p><strong>GW:</strong> Organises the debate into two clashes, local control and who pays, shows why the government bench wins both, and argues that the MG's negotiation mechanism is the strongest material on that bench. No new arguments.</p><p><strong>OW:</strong> Does the same for opposition, arguing the MO's distribution point outweighs because it applies citywide. No new arguments.</p></div><p>Both extensions work because they move the debate. The MG adds a mechanism the opening did not consider, and the MO adds a stakeholder comparison across the whole city. A closing team that only explained the opening's arguments better would struggle to rank above that opening.</p><h2>How to find an extension</h2><p>The manual defines an extension as anything that side of the debate has not yet said, but a closing team is credited only for what goes beyond its opening half. In 15 minutes of prep, a closing team should prepare two or three candidate extensions and choose once the opening speeches are known.</p><ul><li>A new mechanism: how the policy changes behaviour before or after it takes effect, as in the MG example.</li><li>A new stakeholder or scale: a group, a region or a time frame the opening half did not weigh.</li><li>A new comparison: a reason the clash the opening half won matters more than the clash it lost.</li></ul><p>Check every candidate against the opening's material during their speeches. If OG or OO already ran your best idea, drop it and use the next one; repeating the opening is the most common reason a closing team ranks below it.</p><h2>Points of information</h2><p>A POI lasts up to fifteen seconds and can be a question or a comment. The manual says teams should take at least one POI per speaker and encourages three across the team, including one from the team on the diagonal. Offer them often, keep them short, and aim at the one link a speech depends on. When you take one, answer in a sentence and go back to your structure.</p><h2>Common BP mistakes</h2><ul><li>An opening government model so vague that the opposition can define the debate instead.</li><li>A closing team that contradicts its opening half. The manual calls this knifing and allows it only in rare cases.</li><li>A whip speech that adds new arguments. Judges ignore them, and the time is lost.</li><li>Refusing every POI, which reads as avoiding the strongest objection.</li><li>Weighing only against the team opposite, when the ranking also depends on the team on your own bench.</li></ul><h2>A 15-minute BP drill</h2><ol><li>One minute: pick a motion from the <a href="/tools/debate-motion-generator">free debate motion generator</a> and assign yourself closing government.</li><li>Five minutes: write the two arguments you expect opening government to run.</li><li>Five minutes: write two extensions that neither argument covers, one mechanism and one stakeholder.</li><li>Three minutes: deliver the strongest extension out loud against the BP preset, offering yourself one POI at the two-minute mark.</li><li>One minute: write the sentence a whip would use to say why that extension beats the opening's material.</li></ol><p>Brainstorm in DebateLab maps angles for both benches of a motion, which helps with the five-minute extension step, and Case Attacker tests whether an extension depends on a weak link. Sparring does not run BP rounds.</p></div>
0 commit comments