Intervarsity Debates, 1995-1996
MICHAELMAS TERM
Observer Mace, First Round
(Each
debate consisted of six teams, with two teams to qualify for the semi-finals)
“that this house has
nothing to fear from Bill Gates”
“that this house would picket abortion clinics”
“that this house believes that the O.J. Simpson trial was
good for justice”
“that this house would
permit gays in the military”
“that Northern
nationalists have nothing to fear from a
“that this house would ban boxing”
Teams qualifying for semi-finals: Brian
Hughes & Mary Cosgrove
Clodagh Beresford & Michelle
de Brún
Irish Times, First Round
(Each
debate consisted of ten teams, with either one or two teams to qualify for the semi
finals, together with either one or two individual speakers)
“that this house would
ban blood sports”
“that this house would join a European defence alliance”
“that this house regrets the breakup
of the
“that this house would permit gay couples to adopt”
“that this house would positively discriminate”
“that arms decommissioning should be a precondition to
all-party talks”
“that this house believes that the United Nations is a spent
force”
“that extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice”
“that the private
lives of public figures should remain private”
“that the O.J. Simpson verdict was good for justice”
Qualifying for semi-finals: Brian Hughes (as individual Speaker)
Clodagh Beresford & Michelle de Brún (as Team)
Jarlath Ryan & Ronan MacSweeney (as Team)
Heineken Intervarsity
(One-day
competition; 24 teams participating; three impromtu
rounds with four teams each; four teams to qualify for the final)
Round I: “that a return to religion is the only solution to our modern malcontent”
Round II: “that this house would float like a butterfly and sting like a bee”
Round III: “that the values of western society are ill-equipped to cope with the stresses of modern life”
Result: 5th place (from 24 teams)
HILARY TERM
XVIth World Debating Championships
(Week-Long tournament; 247 teams participating; nine impromtu rounds with four teams each; 32 teams to qualify for knockout stages)
Round I: “that this house would put pragmatism before its principles”
Round II:
“that this house would test nuclear weapons”
Round III: “that this house would rebuild the
Round IV: “that this house would sacrifice economic growth for the sake of the
environment”
Round V: “that this house would give racists a platform”
Round VI: “that this house would make the blood of the patriarchy run in the
streets”
Round VII: “that this house would heed its priests”
Round VIII: “that this house believes that developing nations should adopt western
feminism”
Round IX: “that this house believes in trial by jury”
Results: Clancy & Hughes - 59th place (from 247 teams); Cosgrove & Healy - 103rd; Beresford & de Brún – 187th.
Kingsmill-Moore Debate
(Debate
consisted of six teams with prize for best team)
Motion: “that
this house would legalise the sale of ‘Playboy’”
Winners: King’s Inns
Amnesty International Debate
(Invitational debate consisting of four teams with prize for best team and best individual)
“that the UN is still the best hope for humanity”
Proposition Opposition
1. John Sweeney, UCG 2. Dermot Conway, UCC
5. Brian Hughes, UCG 6. Adrian Jackson, UCC
3. Simone Murray,
7. Ian Duncan,
Winning Team: Simone Murray & Ian
Duncan,
Winning Individual: Brian Hughes, UCG
Observer Mace, Semi-finals
(Each
semi-final consisted of four tennis; except one
semi-final which had six teams; with one team from each to qualify for the
final)
“that this House would legalise hard drugs”
Proposition Opposition
1. Colm O’Connell, UCC Philosoph 2. Joe Herron, TCD Hist
3. David Leahy, UCC Philosoph 4. Alex Massie, TCD Hist
5. Mary Cosgrove, UCG Lit & Deb 6. Jamse Bourke, TCD Phil
7. Brian Hughes, UCG Lit & Deb 8. Andrew Beck, TCD Phil
Qualifying Team: Brian Hughes & Mary Cosgrove, UCG Lit & Deb
***
“that Brutus was an honourable man”
Proposition Opposition
1. Tom Wright, UCD Lit & Hist 2. Patricia Kearney. UCC Philosoph
3. Roddy O’Sullivan, UCD Lit & Hist 4. Una Kearney, UCC Philosoph
5. Michelle de Brún, UCG Lit & Deb 6. Nathy Dunleavy, TCD Hist
7. Clodagh Beresford, UCG Lit & Deb 8. Natalie McDonnell, TCD Hist
9. Rossa Fanning, UCD Law 10. Traolach Collins, TCD Phil
11. Ian Walsh, UCD Law 12. Ruth McAvinia TCD Phil
Qualifying Team: Tom Wright & Roddy O’Sullivan UCD Lit & Hist
Irish Times, Semi-finals
(Each
semi-final contained four teams and four individual speakers; with one team and
one individual to qualify for the final. The qualifying individual can be any
one of the twelve speakers)
“that home rule is no longer
Proposition Opposition
1. Michael McNicholas, UCD Lit & Hist 2. Sean Guerin, King’s Inns
9. Kathryn Matthews, MCD Lit & Hist 10. Mark Harty, King’s Inns
3. Bernadette Quigley, UCD Lit & Hist 4. Douglas Clarke, TCD Hist
11. Barbara O’Neill, UCD Lit & Hist 12. Catherine Donnelly, TCD Hist
5. Brian Hughes, UCG Lit & Deb 6. Ciara Bradshaw, TCD Hist
7. Andrew Beck, TCD Phil 8. Brian O’Farrell, UL Debating
Qualifying Team: Douglas Clarke & Catherine Donnelly, TCD Hist
Qualifying Individual: Brian Hughes, UCG Lit & Deb
***
“that this house would welcome the return of communism”
Proposition Opposition
1. Malcom Byrne, UCD Lit & Hist 2. Michelle de Brún, UCG Lit & Deb
9. Roddy O’Sullivan, UCD Lit & Hist 10. Clodagh Beresford, UCG Lit & Deb
3. Ian Walsh, UCD Law 4. John McElligott. UL Debating
11. Rossa
Fanning, UCD Law 12. Mark Dowling, UL Debating
5. Clodagh Whelan, UCC Philosoph 6. Denise Hanrahan, UCD Lit & Hist
7. Colm Ó Mongàin, TCD Phil 7. Margaret Kane, NCIR
Qualifying Team: Clodagh Beresford & Michelle de Brún, UCG Lit & Deb
Qualifying Individual: John McElliott, UL Debating
***
“that
Proposition Opposition
1. John Gallagher, UCD Lit & Hist 2. Treasa Ni Mhiocháin, TCD Hist
9. Caolfhionn Gallagher, UCD Lit & Hist 10. Alex Massie, TCD Hist
3. Jarlath Ryan, UCG Lit & Deb 4. Colm O Cinneide, King’s Inns
11. Ronan MacSweeney, UCG Lit & Deb 12. Tabitha Woods, King’s Inns
5. Fiona Ó Conaill, DIT 6. Jackie O’Hara, TCD Phil
7. Adrian Langan, TCD Hist 8. Mark Resdale, UCC Law
Qualifying Team: Jarlath Ryan & Ronan MacSweeney, UCG Lit & Deb
Qualifying Individual: Alex Massie, TCD Hist
Observer Mace Final
“that the scales of Irish justice are tipped in favour of the
criminal”
Chair: Mr Harry Whelehan, SC
Proposition Opposition
1. Tom Wright, UCD Lit & Hist 2. Frank Mitchell, TCD Phil
3. Roddy O’Sullivan, UCD Lit & Hist 4. Aideen Lysaght, TCD Phil
5. Colm Ó Cinneide, King’s Inns 6. Mary Cosgrove, UCG Lit & Deb
7. Mark Harty, King’s Inns 8. Brian Hughes, UCG Lit &
Deb
1996 Observer Mace Winners: Mary Cosgrove & Brian Hughes, UCG Lit & Deb
Runners-up: Colm Ó Cinnéide & Mark Harty, King’s Inns
Irish Times Final
Chair: Mr Michael McDowell TD
Proposition Opposition
1. Jarlath Ryan, UCG Lit & Deb 2. Michelle de Brún, UCG Lit & Deb
9. Ronan
MacSweeney, UCG Lit & Deb 10. Clodagh Beresford,
UCG Lit & Deb
3. Paul McDermott, King’s Inns 4. Douglas Clarke, TCD Hist
11. Helen Boyle, King’s Inns 12. Catherine Donnolly, TCD Hist
5. Alex Massie, TCD Hist 6. John McElligott. UL Debating
7. Brian Hughes, UCG Lit & Deb 8. James McDermott, UCD Lit & Hist
1996 Irish Times Winning Team: Helen Boyle & Paul McDermott, King’s Inns
1996 Irish Times Winning Individual: Douglas Clarke, TCD Hist
Runner-up Team: Jarlath Ryan & Roman MacSweeney, UCG Lit & Deb
Runner-up Individual: James McDermott, UCD Lit & Hist
1995-1996 will go down in history as a remarkably successful year for the Lit & Deb’s performances in intervarsity debating. It sometimes seems hard to comprehend but, in no uncertain terms, winning the Observer Mace and having no fewer than five speakers in the Irish Times final is unprecedented in the Lit & Deb, and quite a haul for any university debating society. In fact, only Trinity have ever had more than five speakers in an Irish Times final. It is certainly to be hoped, therefore, that our debators (and their fans) are careful not to take such achievements for granted, and that a huge amount of time and effort will again have to be invested next year in order to emulate this year’s success.
For readers who are perhaps unaware, there are two national championships in Irish debating: the Times and the Mace. The difference between the two is the format of the debates and the manner in which the motions are defined. The Times format is uniquely Irish, whereas the proper name for Mace format is ‘British Parliamentary Style.’ This year was the first year anyone can remember that the Lit & Deb reached the Observer Mace Final (never mind win it), and only the second time since 1987 that we had anybody in the Times final. What contributed greatly to our progress through the preliminary rounds was the fact that all the speakers who qualified from a first round proceeded all the way to the final.
What has also distinguished this year’s intervarsity debating is the number of new speakers coming on stream, and also the clear improvement brought on by experience. All of our finalists had participated in intervarsities for at least two years, each time with more and more success. This compares favourably with the situation in many other colleges, who send out the same old hacks for years on end who keep getting knocked out at the semi-finals. This year sees the arrival of a number of first time speakers, who next year will be making their second assault on the intervarsity circuit. Also, unlike this session, next year we do not lose our top debaters to foreign shores or the ‘real’ world. The only speaker who is leaving the Society at the end of this year is Mr MacSweeney. whom we wish the best of success. Next year also sees the return of Eoin Mac Giolla Rí, Richard Brennan, and Marguerite Clancy, all of whom are past Irish Times semi-finalists.
At the time of going to press, our Observer
Mace winners are warming up for the International Mace Debate, where the
winners of the Scottish, English, and Irish Maces compete for an overall
Brian Hughes
External
Convenor