School Debates (January 2019)
Our team of debaters and School Council went along to the 21st annual Dudley debates which took place in Dudley Town Hall where all of Dudley’s councillors meet to make all the decisions about Dudley. Councillor Hilary Mills, Dudley’s Madam Deputy Mayor hosted our debate (before we started, we were told we could open the […]
Our team of debaters and School Council went along to the 21st annual Dudley debates which took place in Dudley Town Hall where all of Dudley’s councillors meet to make all the decisions about Dudley. Councillor Hilary Mills, Dudley’s Madam Deputy Mayor hosted our debate (before we started, we were told we could open the councillors drawers by their seats to see what was in there. We found chocolate wrappers!)
Mr Lockwood introduced the debates. The first person proposes the argument and everybody listens. Then the first person on the opposing side gives their opposite views. This carries on until all four people from each team have given their arguments. The debate is then opened up to anybody who is listening. Once we have heard all of the views we then all get a chance to vote on which side of the argument we think is right.
There were six different schools represented in the morning session with some interesting debates:
Milking Bank against Church of the Ascension; this house believes we should only eat local produce. A great set of arguments ended in Church of the Ascension giving Milking Bank a chocolate bar each (which of course they wouldn’t be able to have if we only ate local produce!)
Dudley Wood against Roberts; this house believes that the sugar tax should be abolished with Roberts saying we should keep it and keep paying extra for foods with sugar. There were some good arguments on our side with our debaters quoting facts about the number of obese adults and children with diabetes in the U.K. and the health implications associated with this, the fact that the NHS spends 6.1 billion pounds a year on obesity related illnesses, that money from the sugar tax goes towards education and leading healthier and more active lifestyles and, our final argument, that sugar substitutes are also not good for us. There were very few questions afterwards and Roberts won their motion with just 23 people voting against us and 55 voting for us.
Ham Dingle against Pedmore; this house believes that children should earn their pocket money. Both schools argued well with the main arguments being children understanding the value of money against children already having homework.