Success for the Schools’ Debating Teams

The Debating Society has continued its impressive slew of success in February:

Oxford Schools’ Debate Regionals Qualifier, 4 February

Four teams entered the South East regional qualifier for the Oxford Schools’ Debate Final in Oxford Union in March. Head of School, Ethan (PS5) and Max (HS5), qualified for the final, taking First Place in the regional competition. Last year, the boys qualified for the Oxford Finals Day and won the Novice Final, so-called to denote their first year of competitive tournaments.

In addition, two Third Years, Matthew (FH3) and Christopher (JH3), qualified for Finals Day, meaning that yet again, Tonbridge was represented by two teams – the maximum allowed. The boys will be some of the youngest debaters in the final, competing against mostly Sixth Formers. The topics ranged from the harms of globalisation, to whether the right to vote should be dependent on whether potential voters pass a basic political knowledge test.

Cambridge Schools’ Debate Regionals Qualifier, 8 February

Four teams entered the online London regional qualifier for the Cambridge Schools’ Debate Final, which will take place in the Cambridge Union in late March. Ethan (PS5) and Max (HS5) again took First Place in a competitive qualifier, facing off against schools including St Paul’s Girls School, who won both the Cambridge and Oxford finals last year. They finished as the best two individual speakers on speaker points in the qualifier. In addition, Henry (JH5) and Sam (SH5) qualified in Fifth Place, despite being in their first year of competitive debating.

Imperial Schools’ Junior Debate Competition Runners-up, Saturday 8 February

On the same day as the Cambridge qualifier, our junior teams entered the Imperial Schools’ Junior Debate Final, a national tournament in London for teams up to Lower Sixth. Matthew (FH3) and Christopher (JH3) both qualified for the grand final after being the only team to win all three of their qualifying debates against the best three teams in the tournament.

There was a highly competitive field for the final, featuring schools such as St Paul’s School and St Paul’s Girls’ School, Westminster, and Highgate. The Tonbridge team debated against the motion that this house would take a pill to remove their capacity to feel envy, arguing fluidly about envy being the root of significant motivation, and the impact that removing one emotion may have on exacerbating other, more harmful emotions. Although they did not win the final, they were the runners-up and Matthew (FH3) finished as the fourth best speaker in the tournament on individual points.

All teams performed exceptionally well with the two Second Year teams and Novi gaining valuable experience, engaging with other schools on motions ranging from the harms of social media, to whether environmental activism should primarily promote positive or negative messaging about the world.