SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

jaden avatar
jaden
11 diapositives · 1.2K Views · Feb 06, 2012

BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM. FORMAT. Motion Teams in debate Order of speaker Speech duration  7 min with POI at the 1 st -6 th min. Onus of prove. Government  support proposition and demonstrate that on balance of probabilities

#move #hansard #lay #closure #table #tory #fabian #side
BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM - slide 1
01 / 11BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

  2. FORMAT • Motion • Teams in debate • Order of speaker • Speech duration  7 min with POI at the 1st-6th min

  3. Onus of prove • Government  support proposition and demonstrate that on balance of probabilities • Opposition  demonstrate that the preposition should not be accepted • There is no onus of the opposition to provide an alternative proposition

  4. Roles of team and speakers

  5. Opening government  OG • Set up the debate by defining the motion and introducing arguments to support their proposition in BP definitional challenge can only be done if it’s UNREASONABLE contrast with MORE/LESS REASONABLE in Austral/Asian  opposition must be more flexible, less def challenge. • Both 1st & 2nd speaker for OG present the most obvious arguments favor to the motion • Less obvious will takes risk to be count as irrelevant (and taken by CG)

  6. Opening Opposition OO • Respond “dynamically” to the OG, provide effective opposition to the arguments of OG • They MAY introduce substantive arguments against the motion (arguments which are not rebuttal)

  7. Note for Opposition • There is no requirements for an opposition team to provide substantive arguments but it may be strategic tactic where there are strong arguments against the motion which would not come to light solely trough rebuttal

  8. Closing Government  CG • Remain consistent with the general approach of OG • Expand / extend OG case  introducing new arguments to support the motion & develop the existing OG arguments which have come under attack from opposition. • The arguments introduced by CG must be within the parameter of the debate established by the definition

  9. Note for Closing Government (& opposition) • Continuing the parliamentary analogy the CG (&CO) occupy a similar role to a coalition partner. While the coalition broadly agrees with the approach by OG, it has additional reasons relevant to it’s constituency for it’s policy approach.

  10. Closing Opposition  CO • Remain consistent with the approach taken by OO. • Provide effective opposition to the CG (which should have extended the debate beyond the arguments of the opening team) • Provide excellent analysis of the significant issues I the debate as this team has had an ample opportunity to prepare their speech

  11. Note for CO • CO is prohibited to introduce new matter in the same way that 3rd negative speaker in Asian / Austral is prevented from introducing new matter