Madame Chairperson...

Edward Heath, Benazir Bhutto and William Gladstone lined the walls of the chamber of the Oxford Union as we stepped out onto the floor in this year’s Oxford Union International Competition for Young Debaters. But these grand busts were far less intimidating than the panel of Oxford University student judges assembled to test our skill over four rounds of debating on controversial issues of today.

A fter success in the first regional round of the competition we were preparing to take on the best teams from across Britain, Ireland, Canada and America. All the rounds gave us only 15 minutes to devise our case, a prospect both exciting and alarming in its unpredictability.

Our first round that morning proved to be a good one, leaving us in first place out of the four teams in the debate. The motion challenged the existence of extremist political parties within a liberal democracy. We were first opposition, and so in favour of permitting such parties presence; arguing the importance of challenging them publicly rather than letting them promote their views underground, unmonitored. Also demonstrating that the minority that goes against convention and general opinion can sometimes be right, as for example the suffragette movement.

Coming first meant that in the second round we were placed against some of the best teams there. This made for a challenging but exhilarating debate on a difficult motion putting forward the compulsory teaching in schools of endangered languages that are part of the heritage of a country. We were the first team proposing the motion and talked of freedom, culture and identity within a country. This soon widened into debates about the importance of the Tibetan people’s sense of their own identity under China’s occupation. We came second to the team who were to win the whole competition.

The third debate was held in the Union Chamber itself and the daunting echo and huge space, as we stood by the famous dispatch box, may have led us to lose our nerve slightly! We debated the banning of advertisements that turn women into sex objects; we had to oppose any ban - a position we found hard to justify! Despite arguing that this was the beginning of a slippery slope towards a censored, puritanical society and that women’s bodies have been admired since the times of Botticelli, we were placed 3^rd.

Our final debate was as the second team proposing that western governments should promise to be pacifist nations for the duration of their time in office. We argued that this is totally unrealistic, however appealing, and that we have to accept that our world is one in which military action can sometimes be the best course of action. Despite discovering in the feedback that we had fully convinced one of the two judges, we were placed 3^rd leaving us in 24^th position overall out of 76 teams.

To be in Oxford on a beautiful May weekend, debating in the colleges and the union itself, meeting so many great teams from different schools and doing well against many competitors from the year above us, is a truly wonderful experience. We are looking forward to taking part next year and have learnt and enjoyed so much in the competition. We congratulate all the finalists, Dulwich, Leeds Grammar, St Columbus (Dublin), and Habs Boys on their performances.

By Imogen and Vicky