In Policy Debate, a counter-plan (abbreviated as a CP) is an argument that can be run by the negative team. Traditionally, the negative defends the status quo against the affirmative plan; however, if the negative chooses to run a counter-plan, then a different policy action is defended against the plan.

Theory

Burdens of a Counter-plan

Topicality

As the Affirmative plan affirms the resolution, the Negative must negate it. Thus, it is accepted in many debate theories that counter-plans must not be topical; that is, they must not affirm the resolution. However, certain theorists believe that the negative only has a burden to present an option superior to the affirmative plan and the topicality of a counter-plan is a moot issue.

Competition

Counter-plans must also compete with the affirmative plan. This is generally defined as having the plan and CP be mutually exclusive. A test of competition is called a permutation, or perm for short. The most common perm is when the Affirmative argues that the plan and CP can be done at the same time (the "do both" perm).

Net Benefit

The counter-plan must be a superior policy action than the affirmative plan. The term Net Benefit is used to describe the advantage that the CP has that the plan does not. Obviously, if the CP provides no unique benefits, then it is not a superior policy action. Negative teams can run a disadvantage or kritik that links to the affirmative plan, but not the counter-plan, claiming that as the net benefit. Also, a counter-plan can enact the plan better, cheaper, faster, or with a better mindset than the plan.

Counterplan Status

The counterplan status is the set of conditions under which the negative will advocate the counterplan.

The affirmative may argue that a certain status is theoretically illegitimate (usually for conditional or dispositional) which is why negatives may choose to run counterplans unconditionally or dispositionally.

Conditional

A conditional counter-plan can be dropped by the negative at any time.

Unconditional

A unconditional counter-plan must be advocated by the Negative throughout the round.

Dispositional

A dispositional counter-plan can be dropped by the negative, unless the affirmative straight-turns the counterplan.

Types

Plan Inclusive

A plan inclusive counter-plan (PIC) enacts some or all parts of the Affirmative plan, but in a superior method. There are many different types of PICs:

Consult

A consult counter-plan has another entity (other governments, NGOs, etc.) overview, and possibly make revisions to the Affirmative plan. If the entity approves the plan, it is passed by the original actor. If it is rejected, the actor does not pass the plan. Consult counter-plans generally have a net benefit of improved relations with the consulted. An example would be for the European Union to overview the plan, make revisions, and have the actor follow the EU's suggestions.

Agent

An agent counter-plan has the affirmative plan be enacted by a different actor (other governments, NGOs, etc.). Net benefits are usually solvency boosts, which can include better execution, increased effectiveness, shorter timeframe, and less corruption. An example would be for the Red Cross to enact the plan.

Exclusion

An exclusion counter-plan only enacts certain parts of the Affirmative plan. Net benefits are usually kritikal in nature. An example would be for Sudan to be excluded from a plan that feeds Africa until certain humanitarian conditions are met.

Could also exclude certain areas or amounts of money or resources from the effects of the plan.

Plan Exclusive

A plan exclusive counter-plan (PEC) does not use the affirmative plan, but still is competitive to the plan. If the affirmative plan uses the United States as an actor, an example of a PEC would be to disband the U.S. Government.