Finals: Motions and Assignments

Secondary Division

This House Would Distribute Cash Handouts to Households to Stimulate Growth in the Economy
	School	Roles assigned
Proposition Team 1	Hwa Chong Institution	Ministry of Finance
Opposition Team 1	Nanyang Girls' High School	Tax Payers and Businesses
Proposition Team 2	Methodist Girls' School	Low-income groups/ Unemployed; Charities, Retailers
Opposition Team 2	Raffles Institution	Ministry of Trade and Industry and Industry Promotion Agencies

Junior Colleges/ Pre-University Division

This House Would Not Bail Out Banks If They Fail
	School	Roles assigned
Proposition Team 1	Anglo-Chinese School (Independent)	Ministry of Finance
Opposition Team 1	Hwa Chong Institution	Failing Local Banks and Global market observers/investors
Proposition Team 2	Innova Junior College	Free-Market economists and Proponents of targeted assistance packages
Opposition Team 2	Victoria Junior College	Local retailers, individual savers and taxpayers

	Secondary School
	15 Jan 09 (Thursday)

	Junior Colleges/Pre-University
	16 Jan 09 (Friday) 1The National Debate Team will participate as a non-breaking team and will not proceed to the Finals.

The debates will take the form of a mock parliamentary budget debate. Click here for more details.

Each speaker is expected to speak for 5 minutes. Those who speak under 4 minutes 30 seconds or over 5 minutes 30 seconds will be penalized. Speakers must accept at least 1 and not more than 2 queries (Points of Information—POIs) from opposing teams during their speech. Points of Information cannot be offered during the first and last 30 seconds of each speech (i.e. only during the middle 4 minutes can POIs be offered).

Teams will be assessed on the following broad criteria:

Content:

• Good quality substance to the speech
• Sound, well-explained arguments
• Relevance of speech to the motion of the debate
• Adequate evidence by debaters to justify their arguments.
• Adequate use of allocated time for each speaker.
  

Analysis:

• Logical and non-contradictory speech/argument.
• Clarity and organization of speech
• Adequate assessment of the topic
• Thorough and in-depth understanding of topic
  

Rebuttal:

• Effective, organized and logical responses to arguments raised by the opponents
  

Delivery:

• Effective eye-contact
• Avoidance of distracting physical and verbal mannerisms
• Appropriately varied pace, tone and style of the speech
• Incorporation of wit and humor
  

Points of Information (POI):

• Use of well-delivered and effective POIs throughout the debate
• Quality and quantity of POIs offered
• Quality of response to POIs

Burden of Proof and Fulfillment of Team Roles:

• Teams should fulfill and adhere to the team responsibilities and unique team roles assigned. Failure to do so will be marked down.
• Teams which attempt to make all possible arguments beyond their scope, in an attempt to crowd out the other team on their side of the debate, will be penalized by judges.

Q1. When and where will the debate competition be held?

Preliminary rounds

Secondary school category	: 15 January 2009
Junior Colleges / Pre-University category	: 16 January 2009

Time:	2pm to 6pm
Venue:	Auditorium at Treasury Building
	1st floor 100 High Street

Finals

The finals of the debate competition will be held on 30 January 2009 (Friday), venue to be confirmed.

Q2. What is the format of the debate?

The debate is modeled on the British Parliamentary (BP) debate format. A layout of the debate format is provided in the Format section above. Each debate will comprise of 4 teams (2 Proposition and 2 Opposition teams). Each speaker has 5 minutes. Points of Information (POIs) may be offered at all times in all speeches, except in the first and last 30-seconds of each speech.

Q3. What is expected of each team?

In this adapted BP format, teams are given a specific group in society to represent, such as small business owners, teachers or even certain government ministries. These groups and roles have been carefully identified and selected for each unique debate in this competition. The reasons for this are two-fold.

Firstly, we encourage schools to challenge themselves by exploring the full range of arguments unique to their assigned role so as to deepen critical thinking on their given topic. We hope to see students attempting to place themselves in the positions of the specific sectors of society they represent in their own debate. However, teams are free to choose the specific identities they wish to play within the assigned group roles. Hence, if a team is assigned “Environmental groups”, the teams can decide which group to represent (such as Greenpeace-Singapore or a fictional environmental support group in Singapore whose name teams are free to come up with) and what specific individuals they represent in that group. A suggested role here would be the CEO or organization head and his deputy. Have fun with this!

Secondly, it is crucial for teams to keep within the roles given to them in terms of the arguments they cover because it is taken into consideration by the judges. Teams, especially opening Proposition and Opposition teams who attempt to disadvantage subsequent teams in their own debate by ‘matter sweeping’ (i.e. by covering all possible arguments available, even if irrelevant to their assigned role) will be severely penalized by judges. In several instances, multiple roles are suggested. Teams are free to represent one or both of the suggested groups. However, we encourage making full use of all suggested roles because it is important for teams to have enough material spread over both speakers.

Q4. What is the distinct role of each team or speaker?

1^st Proposition Team: For this competition, the opening Proposition team is generally assigned the role of the Ministry of Finance, represented by the Finance Minister and his deputy. For some debates (specified in the table above), the opening Proposition represents the Finance and Manpower Ministers. In all cases, the opening Proposition team is expected to outline a clearly considered and detailed policy in support of the motion, along with 1-2 basic arguments explaining the principle and rationale behind such a policy (i.e. the arguments in favour of the policy). The intention is for teams to imagine that they are the Finance Minister, speaking in Parliament, outlining a policy (represented by the assigned motion) and the rationale behind it.

1^st Opposition Team: The Opening Opposition team is expected to rebut the policy and rationale raised by the Opening Proposition and offer opposing arguments to build up a substantive Opposition case. What this means is that Opposition teams cannot merely rebut and must offer constructive points of their own to add to the debate. While not mandatory, the Opening Opposition may also wish to consider offering a counter-policy to support their constructive arguments.

Second Proposition and Opposition Teams: The second Proposition and Opposition teams should extend or add to the debate. This means that they are expected to bring new perspectives to the debate and show the judges that their views contribute to the debate, and that they speak and defend it persuasively. This could include extending the debate and adding to arguments on the table by pointing out economic, social or political implications of the policy at hand on their own group that have not been considered by the other teams. Teams could also suggest some slight modifications to the policy suggested by the opening team on their side, although outright opposition to it is disallowed. Second teams’ arguments must not overlap with or contradict the opening teams’ arguments. The key action strategically here is to agree largely with the general direction of the opening team on your side, but present different perspectives and arguments to stand out as a distinct voice at the table.

Final Opposition and Proposition Speakers. The primary role of the very last speaker of each side of the debate is to review and summarise the debate for the judges, although the last speaker should also allocate 1-2 minutes to rebuttal. The summary must cover points raised by both teams on both the Proposition and Opposition sides.

Further details are available in the PowerPoint explanation provided of individual speaker roles

Finally, some advice: When setting cases, it is highly advisable for all teams to take note of the roles assigned to them and other teams in the debate and work with a fair assumption of the arguments the other teams will raise. This will help you pre-empt what your opposing team will say and thus help with the thoroughness of your rebuttal preparation. It will also help avoid overlaps with the other teams on your side of the debate.

Q5. Are the teams of each proposition or opposition side expected to collaborate with each other?

As each school is assigned the role of a different interest group or organisation in society, arguments and rebuttals made by the second team should naturally come from a different point of view from the first team on their side of the debate. Schools should also consider that they are competing against all other teams in their round, including the team on the same side of the house as themselves. Hence collaboration between schools is neither necessary nor encouraged, although the ultimate decision is left to schools.

Q6. Will MOF be conducting any training for this competition?

No training will be conducted. However, teams with queries can seek clarifications through email.

Q7. Since there are now 2 schools debating on the same side, how will you select the winning teams?

Panels of judges will select winning teams by ranking each team as 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd or 4^th in the debate. During the debate, each judge will form his or her own assessment of team rankings and select the 1^st-ranked team (the winner). After the debate, the judges confer in order to agree on the rankings and select the winner. The winner (the 1st-ranked team) in each preliminary round will advance to the Finals.