Sounds like a company that overvalues debate for its own sake. I've worked in places like that. "Intellectual sparring" was considered important, even if you basically agreed with the discussion or it was uncontroversial, you were expected to find something to contest in almost every meeting. It was tedious but you could game it by having some stock objections ready to throw out. I moved on from there after a couple of years.

I'm not saying never say anything if something important and relevant is being missed, but in my experience that rarely happens.