The Wykehamist
and rebutted the LO’ s claim that the right to strike is inviolable— he instead held that essential service workers were still free to express themselves as any other citizen could, but that striking was simply too harmful as a method of protest. For the second half of the debate, the emphasis shifted from impacts of strikes and rights to the misuse of strikes. The Government Member contended that many of these striking workers had good working conditions and pay, and that demanding further pay rises was unreasonable.‘ But does one not still have the right to express their demands, even if they are unreasonable?’ asked the Opposition. The reply was a resounding no— strikes effectively abuse the trust put in the workers to work for the common good of others; striking, a powerful feat of leverage, is but used to better themselves, without a care for those whom they ought to care for. The Government Whip summarised this exchange: the Opposition wants to protect the workers’ leverage, while the Government would rather save lives and better others who rely on these people doing their jobs. The Opposition Whip had a difficult task on his hands, and he attempted to rescue his side by mentioning the awful conditions that essential workers experience even with the right to strike, and stated that they needed more rights, not less. Even this valiant effort was not sufficient to snatch defeat from the hands of the Opening Government.
Opening Government— 137 / 160 Opening Opposition— 131 / 160 Closing Government— 130 / 160 Closing Opposition— 128 / 160
The results of these debates are by no means meant to reflect the general political opinions of the school. Rather, they provide people with chances to explore arguments on both sides, sharpening their argumentative skills along the way.
Alongside running beginner sessions, we have also been preparing for a range of competitions next term, including Oxford and Cambridge Schools’ debating. On behalf of Deb: Soc, we would like to thank all of those who have taken an interest in debating this term; people who have enabled us to civilly and reasonably discuss polemic topics, an activity that seems increasingly difficult in today’ s world.
Matthew Sneller( Coll:, 2021-)
46