20/11/2006

"This house would abolish the Monarchy and replace it with an Elected Head of State".

Monday 20th November saw the seventh Public Speaking Forum of the 2006/7 academic year in the Harold Wilson Room. The topic this week was "This house would abolish the Monarchy and replace it with an Elected Head of State".

To propose the motion we were delighted to welcome two guest speakers, Mr. John Campbell, a former student at the University of Liverpool and Mrs. Suzanne Campbell, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary candidate for the Vale of Glamorgan in 2005. Both spoke in their capacities as members of Republic: The Campaign for an Elected Head of State. Speaking against the motion were Tom (surname) and Steve Molloy. Craig Williams acted as Chairman. Cakes present were Chocolate Indulgence, Coffee, Carrot and Orange, French Fancies and Viennese Whirls. The floor vote was taken and was found to be narrowly in favour of the proposition.

Mr Campbell opened the debate by setting the scene, explaining the inherantly undemocratic nature of the monarchy, the fact that it is a relic from an era which supported priviledge, aristocracy and snobbery over democracy and achievement, and that everyone should have the chance of achieving the role of head of state rather than a person receiving the role by accident of birth.

Tom replied by speaking of the idea that under the monarchical system there is a consensus that the people give up a certain degree of freedom in return for the protections that monarchy offers. He argued that an elected head of state would almost certainly be political in nature and that this would be less desirable as the monarchy in the U.K. is essentially benign compared to a head of state such as that in the U.S.A.

Mrs Campbell argued that the monarchy is an institution which is grossly over-resourced and has undue influence behind the scenes, giving many examples in which Royal powers being exercised on behalf of the Crown have had negative impacts upon the lives of ordinary people. She advocated a system in which an elected head of state would have a ceremonial role, citing Ireland as an excellent example of a benign head of state.

Steve closed the debate by arguing that the monarchy has practical benefits, that it is a stabilising influence and that in any event many progressive European Union member states are also monarchies but conceded that most of these had a more reformed system than that of the U.K. He cited the popularity of this form of government where the option to restore monarchies had been taken, for example in Spain. He proposed that it would be better to reform the present system rather than abolish it, and that there is little evidence that republics are inherently more progressive in the policies and governments they produce.

There followed a lively and prolonged floor debate, following which the floor vote indicated a further swing towards the proposition. Mr and Mrs Campbell were thanked for their excellent and insightful speeches, and engaged members in further informal conversation.

It was resolved that next week's forum would be on the topic of religion and its effects on the advancement of knowledge.

The Committee of the University of Liverpool Debating and Public Speaking Society would like to thank Mr and Mrs Campbell once again for a most enjoyable and thought-provoking evening.

13/11/2006

"Should Saddam Hussein Hang?"

This week's lively and highly controversial forum "Should Saddam Hussein hang?" was recorded and broadcast on Icon Radio.

6/10/2006

"Can colonialism be a force for good?"

Monday 6th November saw the fifth Public Speaking Forum of 2006/7 in the Harold Wilson Room. The topic this week was "Can colonialism be a force for good?" The speakers were Anna Welsh for the proposition and Kymn Butcher opposing. James Fraser acted as Chairman. Cakes present were Chocolate Indulgence, Coffee Cream and French Fancies. The initial vote was cast in favour of the proposition with a large number of abstentions.

Anna opened the debate citing the economic issues behind colonialism, how the colonial experience was founded on trade and brought with it a number of advantages to colonised countries. She cited the vast developments made during the colonial era including opportunities for education of colonised peoples, and the benefits of economic development.

Kymn argued that the colonial experience was for many a bad thing, and that these percieved benefits did not outweigh the disadvantages including the wiping out of many indiginous peoples through disease brought upon them unintentionally by the colonial powers, the loss of indiginous heritage, citing the example of the Caribbean where descendents of African slaves have little concept of their African heritage, be it language, culture or even knowing from which part of Africa one's ancestors originated. Furthermore the imposition of cultural norms by the colonial powers had the effect of creating an idealism towards European cultural ideals to the detriment of indiginous culture.

There followed a floor discussion in which various issues were discussed including the remaining colonial possessions and the relationships with their colonial masters, the different experiences of different parts of the world (for example India and the African continent), the difference in approach between France and Britain on integration of their colonies into the state. The final vote was cast in favour of the proposition but with an even swing, so the debate was declared a draw. It was resolved that the topic of the next forum would be "Should Saddam Hussein be hanged?" following the previous day's news that the former Iraqi dictator had been sentenced to death for crimes against humanity.