The Great Debate

This year’s House Debating Competition has been especially fierce. With every House fielding a team, Thursday nights were dramatic and informative with topics such as abolishing trial by jury, prohibiting another Trump presidential run and not allowing countries with poor human rights records to host sporting tournaments.

The House teams showed great skill and preparation, thinking on their feet and crafting precise and convincing arguments. It has been wonderful to see the enthusiasm and organisation with which the teams approached the competition and the support from the audiences, coming en masse to support their Houses and their friends. Head’s, Field’s, Handford and Gibbs’ made it into the coveted Final Four spots with some close-fought victories to push into the last round. The final motion This House regrets the rise of cancel culture featured Handford and Gibbs’ battling out on the last Wednesday of term with the Head Master and Dr Keane judging. After a very close debate showcasing excellent arguments and rebuttals, Gibbs’ House claimed the prize. Congratulations go to Toluwani Adedeji, Annika Finkel, Cooper Forde and Nur Leadbetter for their participation and to our audiences, judges, chairs and timekeepers for making this competition so vibrant and fun.

The House Debating Competition is one of my favourite parts of life at Lancing. Last year, in the Fifth Form, I represented Manor for the first time; we won three consecutive debates and succeeded as the champions. Having learned how to debate at my prep school, it was so wonderful to progress from being in the audience as a Third Former to being ‘up there’ myself. This year, I represented Manor again, with a new partner. We lost our debate, which was lively and controversial in its unfolding: we took on Fields’ and argued against abolishing the monarchy. That’s one important part of

DR ELIZABETH KEANE Head of Politics

debating that I’ve learned to tolerate (or, perhaps, to cherish): you cannot change the motion that you’re given, even when your ‘real-life’ views clash with it. This year and last, I have also been able to chair (and time keep for) several debates, which is always an enjoyable experience. There is arguably nothing more satisfying than, when one likes precision, being equipped with a bell and a gavel to ensure that this most wondrous kind of argument retains structure and discipline. It’s certainly an art.

Hannah Cleallsmith, Lower Sixth