Another International Final for TBSHS Debaters

Another International Final for TBSHS Debaters

The International Competition for Young Debaters is always the last big event of the schools’ debating season and this year’s Finals Day saw two pairs of Middle School students travel to the Cambridge University Union to take on 54 other teams, around 20 of which came from overseas – Greece, Singapore, India, Kazakhstan, Hungary, Greece and Ireland were all represented in four rounds of fiercely-contested debating.

The first motion of the day, “This House Would ban for-profit universities and colleges”, required some knowledge of Higher Education funding systems, which was difficult for all teams, including ours. J J Sathan (Year 10) & Alec Sneddon (Year 9) were drawn to open against St Paul’s Girls School in their room and had to be content with fourth place. James Frans & Kashan Johar spoke first against the motion in another debate won by SPGS and fared a little better, being placed third ahead of Blackrock College from Dublin.

The second round, however, saw a distinct improvement in TBSHS fortunes. Speaking first in favour of the belief that animal rights groups should prioritise their campaigns on the humane treatment of farmed animals rather than the use of animal-based products, James argued that this would put less financial pressure on the fragile farming industry, as they would still have a ready market for their products while behaving in an ethical manner. Kashan offered some effective rebuttal to the first speaker from Oundle School (who argued that humans had no right to kill animals) by pointing out that, firstly, not all animal products involve death and secondly death is eventually inevitable, so it is better to make sure that animals enjoy a good life.

These arguments gained them a third place in a debate won by a strong team from Scotland. Meanwhile Alec & J J closed the case for the Opposition in their room and were awarded a narrow victory because of their well-structured speeches and J J’s argument that advocating the more extreme measure on animal products would make the better treatment of farm animals more acceptable and likely to happen.

After a break for lunch, both our teams found themselves in the ‘bottom half’ of the debate for “This House Regrets the Culture of Fearing Death”. In a room containing a very forceful team from the British School of Budapest, and opposing the motion James produced a well-structured speech in which he argued that a fear of death helps one to adopt a more rational approach to life and to accept death when it comes. Kashan summarised the case against the motion effectively, focussing on the idea of ‘risk vs reward’ and drawing attention to the importance of his team mate’s points. I felt that they deserved a higher placing than the fourth that they were awarded, a result that J J & Alec, closing for the motion, unfortunately shared.