DUCKLINGS PARLIAMENTARY PROTOCOL
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
RULE 1: ADDRESS THE PROPOSAL, NOT THE TEAM
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
✓ "The proposed funding mechanism is flawed because..."
✓ "We respectfully disagree with the timeline outlined..."
✓ "The evidence cited does not support the conclusion..."
✗ "Churchill's team clearly doesn't understand economics"
✗ "This is a stupid proposal"
✗ "Why would anyone think this works?"
RULE 2: EVIDENCE-BASED CLAIMS
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
✓ "According to the Pond article on wait times, the current
average is 4.2 hours [link]"
✓ "StatsCan data shows a 12% increase since 2019 [citation]"
✓ "The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates costs at..."
✗ "Everyone knows this is true"
✗ "It's obvious that..."
✗ "Common sense says..."
RULE 3: CONSTRUCTIVE OPPOSITION
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
✓ "We oppose this proposal and suggest alternatively..."
✓ "While we appreciate the intent, we believe a better
approach would be..."
✓ "We move to amend Section 3 to read..."
✗ "This will never work"
✗ "We vote no" (without explanation)
✗ "Hard pass"
RULE 4: FORMAL MOTIONS
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
To propose: "We move to introduce..."
To amend: "We move to amend [section] to read..."
To support: "We second the motion..."
To oppose: "We rise in opposition to..."
To question: "Point of clarification..."
To withdraw: "We move to withdraw..."
To table: "We move to table pending..."
RULE 5: RESPONSE PROTOCOL
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Proposals get structured response windows:
├── Sponsor speaks first (introduce)
├── Opposition responds (critique)
├── Sponsor replies (rebut)
├── Open discussion (all teams)
├── Final statements
└── Vote
Not a free-for-all. Ordered. Structured.