Debate 5: IPP vs IYDF

The last round of debate was between Indian Youth Democratic Front (IYDF) and Indian People’s Party(IPP). The opening statement was given by IYDF PM Candidate Raymond Pao Lung Yu who spoke about their vision statement, which aligns with their party ideology. They support and promote multiculturalism. They claimed that the opposition party’s manifesto has an extremely two-faced ideology. The IPP raised a point of order wherein they stated that the party was taking contemporary references in their opening statement. But that wasn't the case as the moderator said. The opening remarks consisted of both parties highlighting the different policies they have undertaken to provide a break of friction in the social hierarchy of the economy. The IPP further raised a point of information and questioned the fact that in the party manifesto, the IYDF states that “The party would also like to bring back the reservation of two seats for the Anglo-Indian community in the Lok Sabha” the IPP further added that they sense a disregard of other minority communities, for instance, the Rohingyas. The PM Candidate of IYDF got gagged for cross-talk in the first round of the conference.

The IPP’s opening statement was in regard to the reforms related to healthcare infrastructure among other reforms and further went on to criticize the opposition party's manifesto arguing that they do not have any good reform prevalent in the manifesto. They stated that the IYDF being a national party needed to be taught about the large population of India as in their manifesto under the section of Educational Aims they have focused on just one private university which in their opinion does not make sense at all. Lastly, the IPP made points in relation to its manifesto and how it actually has a vision to make changes, unlike the opposition party.

The main argument started with the IPP questioning “who is the youth?” according to the IYDF those people not in schools, and who do not have access to education are not the youth.

They argued which National level party would drag the name of a private institution in their manifesto and focus solely on that. Why did the manifesto only talk about the Chinese diaspora, what about the other minorities which need representation? They stated that the policies of IYDF have insulted the youth which they have tried to protect. The IPP raised a point of information where they asked about what steps to be taken to eradicate social hierarchy in the party manifesto. The opposition party said that their manifesto has several programs dedicated to the youth. They have introduced Night schools for working students to aid in completing their education.

In the closing argument of IYDF, they started by saying that change begins at home and the fact that if religious sentiments are not protected what will happen to diversity in the country? The IPP closed the debate by conducting a comparative analysis of both the party's manifestos. They claimed that the IYDF has no set roadmap or concrete plans as to how they will implement their reforms and have an extremely basic structure in their manifesto. The IPP praised its own manifesto by saying that they have novel ideas and reforms like Criminalizing Marital Rape, and same-sex marriage with a set vision of how to go about the reforms.