Debating News

YEAR 7 FED A Report

On 19 February, the Year 7 FED A Debating Team duelled with in Newington in the 3rd round of the 2021 FED Debating Competition. It was a first in many respects. The team consisting of E. Eswaran (7We)J. Arnold (7Ar), W. Skinner (7WH) and H.Turner (7Ta), once again debated on Zoom. We affirmed the topic “That voting should be voluntary.” Newington’s argument was focused on the notion that voluntary voting would decrease the number of different diverse perspectives among various people, and that it would discourage disabled and disadvantaged individuals to vote, making the overall results inadequate. We argued that voluntary would significantly decrease the number of uneducated and ‘donkey’ votes, as people that were not interested in voting, or did not particularly like the candidates running for a role, did not have to vote, therefore portraying a much more accurate picture of what citizens wanted. We also highlighted the increased stress put on the various organisations and government departments due to mandatory voting, and how voluntary voting could ensure less resources invested into polls were wasted. All speakers of the Trinity team presented compelling arguments, illustrating flaws in the opposition’s case, and accentuating the ambiguous nature of the affirmative argument. We still have a lot to learn but we charged into the new frontier of Zoom debates, proposed arguments, pushed ourselves to our limits, and worked effectively with each other. Despite our hard effort, Newington just squeezed past with a win.

J. Arnold (7Ar)

Year 8 FED A Report

Coming up against a tough Newington FED side in our third debate, the 8As managed to pick up their first scalp of the season, amidst the stormy deluge outside, affirming the topic, ‘That all major political parties should be required to have at least one minister under the age of 25.’ We were able to identify the issues of the debate, representations of the society, and experience levels. 

After discussing our points, ably assisted by 4th speaker I. Mukesh (8Sc) we got to work and came up with four solid points. Trinity began the debate strongly, with H. McLean (8Yo) proposing a concise model that eventually brought the opposition’s arguments undone. He went on to elaborate mostly on the issue of representations of the public. The Negative 1st speaker came out with points on whether it is morally right to base selection on age, and whether the change would be effective in terms of respect. Trinity’s 2nd speaker A. Zhou (8WJ), in his first debate back for this season, continued Trinity’s strong case with rebuttals that questioned the legitimacy of the arguments and introduced the points of giving younger politicians more opportunities and having a more informed society to make the right political decisions. These points were met with minimal resistance from the opposition, and our 3rd Speaker, K. Rathore 8(He) provided a fine rebuttal to finish strongly. 

Overall, we came out with a good win, but there is still a lot to take from this debate. Next time, we could focus more on coming up with points quickly in the prep room and having more thorough explanations. Going forward and facing more challenging opponents, I’m confident that this team has what it takes to do well in the competition if we debate well and follow the advice from adjudicators and coaches.

A. Zhou (8WJ)

Year 9 FED Debating Report

Last Friday, the boys in the Year 9 FED debating team comprising of A. Nair (9Yo), I. Parker (9We), J. O’Shea (9He) and B. Logarta (9Ta) faced off against Newington with Trinity being the affirmative team. The round was based around politics, not typically our strong suit, and the topic, “That members of parliament should be fired for spreading disinformation.” In the beginning, we came out with a strategy to implement this policy, (the firing of MP’s), and explained the reasoning behind disinformation being a prevalent issue throughout society, especially when coming from supposedly trustworthy figures. Our points from speaker to speaker were consistent, and we were able provide a consistent argument in order to prove that disinformation was a prevalent issue, along with the fact that our solution was able to solve it. Of course, no debate can be won on points alone. The opposition provided valid counterarguments, along with consistent rebuttal, however, this would not go unanswered. Our second speaker, J. O’Shea (9He), a new addition to the team, was able to counter the opposition’s point and introduce new mechanisms and arguments onto the table, an excellent performance for his first debate. Finally, our third speaker was able to close off our case in this neck and neck debate. In the end, we were able to win the debate, a nice achievement to end off the school week and a great way to introduce a new member to our team.

I. Parker (9We)

Senior B FED Debating Report

On Friday night the Trinity “Friday Evening Debating” or “FED” debating teams were up against Newington. My team, the Senior B team; consisted of Y. Cho (1st speaker), J. Bettar (2nd speaker), A. Berg (3rd speaker) and J. Vandergoot (4th speaker). Ultimately, Newington won the debate on the topic “Donald Trump Should Have His Twitter Account Reinstated”. We were assigned the affirmative case and we’d had issues with agreeing on a consistent team line with regard to a particular argument that may have cost us the debate. Beyond that, we could also generally work on being more efficient in the prep room in future debates. Overall, it was a good debate and Newington should be congratulated for their efforts.

A. Berg (11Fo)

Related Articles

Head Master's Bulletin

Academic Focus

Academic Excellence Citations and Engagement Citations – Semester Two I am delighted to publish the names…

Head Master's Bulletin

Basketball News

It was great to see 27 teams hit the court against Waverley on Saturday. There were…

Head Master's Bulletin

Colours Awarded | Term 4, 2021

Askew, Oliver (10We) Line Track and Field NSW Nitro Schools Intermediate Champs 2021 Dedousis, John (11Mu)…