Another great debate, this week on the introduction of very lax immigration controls. The Opening Government put the best case forward, so the team of Jaden Chiu & Sourish Chanda won the debate setting out all the advantages of immigration both to the immigrant and the host society. Well made, these are arguments hard to counter; however, the Opening Opposition team of Louis Vasseur & Kazuki Fairbrother put forward a few good points, the best being how mass immigration will dilute cultural heritage – a tidal wave of MacDonald’s drive throughs and Starbucks swamping cultural icons – but this wasn’t enough to overcome the advantages set out by the Government. A lot of the debate centred on abstract concepts like the advantages of competition and freedom, but why these things are necessarily good needs to be explained, and debaters need to make the impacts on the ground crystal clear and concrete, across a range of instances and how it affects a range of stake holders. Oxford University Schools Debate North competition is on Monday – a big challenge for four of our teams.  

 

Next week’s motion: This House regrets the portrayal of the developing world in the fundraising campaigns of charitable organisations.

Mr Ahern & Mr Murphy