The House debating competition has been hotting up, and as we head towards the final next week crowds have been flocking to the preliminary heats. On Wednesday 9 March, Orchard Lapping took on Skipwith Wells Furby in the topic of Britain doing more to aid refugees. The heat on Thursday 10 March saw Burr take on Welsh in the battle to decide whether or not Britain should renew Trident. The heats were close and the competition fierce.
Ollie Riley and Justin Janse Van Vuuren, for Lapping, argued that ‘this house believes we should do more to help refugees’. Such a poignant topic given current political landscapes, the proposition argued that the cultural awareness brought by refugees would be largely beneficial to the UK. It would also help to counter the current aging population, and encourage a harmonious, multi-cultural society. Moreover, the team went on to suggest that we have a global responsibility to respond to the humanitarian crisis, and that ignoring the pain of refugees is grossly unfair. Joe Szweda and Jack Parrott, for Wells Furby, took the opposition’s stance, claiming that there could be more serious ramifications to allowing refugees to enter the country: disease, violence and terrorism amongst other, just as serious, issues. Whilst Lapping suggested that this is about ‘a benefit to Britain, rather than a deprivation of Britain’s benefits’, Wells Furby hit back with the statistic that Britain has already promised to give £1billion in aid, which is the second largest amount of money given by a nation. It is too much for a single nation to bear; we should be working on a unified solution. The judging panel of Miss Vanessa Green, Mr Nick Brown and Mr Alex Hunt found the decision incredibly difficult, but Lapping came out on top by a tiny margin of just five points.
The controversial topic ‘this house believes that Britain should not renew Trident’ was taken on by Matt Brown and Harry Ibbitson for Burr, debating the issue with Jack Peck and Seb Roberts for Welsh. Burr, for the proposition, kicked off the debate claiming that renewing Trident would make Britain a target, positing us as an enemy nation and spending money on a solution for a problem that we’ve never had. Welsh argued the opposition, claiming that the UK should renew Trident for the economic benefit, creating further jobs and solidifying the safety of the UK should a nuclear war break out. The crossfire rounds were comprehensive and well argued, with the proposition pointing out that the cost of renewing Trident is millions of pounds, and this is money that could go towards the bettering the NHS or improving the housing crisis. Welsh fought back with the belief that renewing Trident would act a deterrent of terrorism, and in choosing not to renew it, Britain puts itself in a position of vulnerability. However, the judges felt that Welsh’s argument was just not persuasive enough, and Burr won by a strong margin.
Congratulations to Eggar, Gilson, Lapping and Burr, who are headed to the final on Tuesday 22 March. The event will be held at 7.00pm in the Lecture Theatre, and parents are encouraged to attend. The programme for the event is as follows:
‘This house believes that the National Debt is a greater threat to Britain’s future than terrorism’, argued by Lapping (proposition) and Eggar (opposition).
‘This house believes that leaving the EU would be a catastrophe for Britain’, argued by Gilson (proposition) and Burr (opposition).
We look forward to seeing you there!
