GPS Debating

AAGPS Debating Round 5 vs Scots

The Shore Debaters rebounded strongly against Scots, taking affirmative on topics relating to international issues. In the third last round of the season, we managed to take 10 of the 14 debates.

The Year 7 teams argued, “That we should not play sporting matches against countries who abuse human rights.” A topic reminiscent of the Opens debates from Round 2. On a complicated topic, the 7A, 7B and 7D teams all won their debates. Year 8 teams debated, “That Australia should prioritise geographically close countries in its foreign aid budget.” emulating the Year 7 results with wins for the 8A and 8C teams.

The Intermediate teams enjoyed their strong run, with a clean sweep across the Year 9 and Year 10 debates. The 9A and 9B teams successfully argued the same topic as Year 8 while the 10A and 10 B teams convinced the adjudicators, “That countries should deprioritise international trade agreements and instead seek to create domestic supply chains for common and essential goods.”

In the Opens, we debated the same topic as Year 10 with less success. While the Seconds secured a good win, the Firsts and Thirds prolonged their losing streak. In the Firsts’ debate, despite a strong prep room which produced many convincing points, we again failed in characterisation, not justifying why countries would need to have their own supply chain. Speaking out of position, Tim Barrett did well to set up the case, but, once Scots highlighted the harms to developing countries, not even strong performances from Tom Marshall and myself could tidy up our case and effectively rebut theirs, allowing Scots to walk away with a clear win.

Next week, the Debaters head to High for the penultimate debate of the season. After a tough round against Kings, the boys recovered well this week and I believe we’ll see a slew of wins to close out the season.

Mesake Taulawakeiaho
Captain of Debating