The Inter-House Debating Competition reached its conclusion this week and with the Intermediate title still to be decided it was tense.
The final Intermediate debaters were poised for a battle as Dickson took on Colbourne to debate the pros and cons of extending the sugar tax. With a range of arguments spanning health benefits and the potential damage to sugar cane growers, we were treated to some stellar performances from those involved. Striving to level the playing field between them and the other houses, the Dickson team presented a range of arguments to claim the victory. That took the final result down to points difference and with an overall score of +8 across the series, Dickson were crowned Intermediate champions.
With the Senior title already awarded to Dickson following their unbeaten spell, the final debate between Colbourne and Walters could have been a subdued affair. However the efforts from both teams meant that was far from the case. Battling for bragging rights and buoyed by a lively audience, Colbourne proposed a ban on fossil fuels by 2030, providing ample evidence to support the motion. However a determined and passionate Walters side rebutted their points and were awarded the win in a very tight and tense competition.
Enormous congratulations go to all participants for the high standard of debates that we have been treated to this year. Well done also to Dickson on their success this year and to L6’s Amy B who ably led them from the front.