December
Nineteen people attended the Christmas Balloon Debate when 5 panellists argued over which was "The Best Type of Holiday". It was a closely fought contest but amid much hilarity, Golfing, Coaching, Camping and Skiing were ejected leaving Lorry Greenall's choice of Cruises as the final winner. Afterwards those present shared seasonal refreshments and a Christmas Raffle.
November
For the November debate, Mary Lane proposed the motion that "There is Hope for Humanity.” She said that the world was in a bad state where aggression and cruelty predominated but went on to cite historical events including the Reformation and various wars, where despite unbelievable brutality, humanity eventually prevailed. Furthermore, she believed that in present times, there was considerable evidence that people were working together, from international cooperation through to local charities supporting the less fortunate, all to make the world a better place to live in. Humans are learning lessons, improvements are being made and, because of this, the better side of human nature will triumph.
Opposer Chris Lane disagreed stating that we are currently facing dangerous issues that are unprecedented. He asserted that we have survived past catastrophes because of geographical limitations but rapid technological growth has introduced globally interdependent systems which can destabilise everything when they breakdown. Furthermore, the introduction of Artificial Intelligence has resulted in the gradual erosion of the human element in the workplace and at home. In addition, global warming and consumption misuse of pollutants and nuclear deterrents in an over populated world is a huge threat meaning humanity has neither hope nor chance in the future.
Following a variety of thought provoking responses from the floor, the motion was defeated by 8 votes to 4 with 4 abstentions.
October
The debate was preceded by the AGM.
Emily Richards proposed the motion that Sport is Good for You, defining it as a daily physical activity which is both competitive and good for general health. These benefits included reducing chronic diseases and obesity, increasing life expectancy and adding balance to lifestyle. Research was cited which showed that the elderly do not exercise enough and examples were given which demonstrated how participating in regular physical activity could enhance lifestyle. She also argued that organised sport boosted confidence as well as improving mental well-being and social skills.
Opposer John Ratford agreed that sport could be good for you but considered that it could also be detrimental to health. He felt that the use of anabolic steroids and serious sporting injuries is not conducive with a high level of physical fitness. Furthermore, he believes that winning is not everything and does not necessarily bring about the best in people. For every victor there is a loser and many struggle, particularly at school, with not being picked for a team.
After a diverse range of comments from the floor, the motion was won by 8 votes to 4 with 1 abstention
September
Fifteen people attended the September debate about issues of topical interest. Considerable time was spent discussing the plethora of Union and England Flags currently being displayed and if they were a fitting patriotic display. Other items that came under consideration included whether the proposed Trump State Visit should be revoked, making social media safer for teenagers and the appropriateness of sending people to Mars. All shared viewpoints were informative, interesting, and delivered with both sensitivity and humour.
August
The motion for the August debate was "The Country will benefit from a Populist Party being in power". Proposer Barrie Mills defined populism as being where policies are driven by the people, citing Switzerland as an example of where this actually works. He stated that most UK parties are left of centre with just the Conservatives on the right, however populism is not exclusively in either of these arenas. People feel trapped by the existing political structures and representative parties which are not offering attractive policies giving simple answers to their issues. As a result, electors become disenfranchised and discouraged from voting. While a Populist Party attracts interest with the promise of easy answers, it is the structure of government that needs to change and the real solution is to adopt a system similar to that used by Switzerland.
Opposer Chris Lane disagreed, saying that Populism was all about focussing on a simple solution to a specific problem which, sadly, is often misinformed and impossible to deliver in practice. Several examples were provided including the Kent Council, which was won by Reform with promises of immigration control but who are nevertheless asking for visa waivers to support their employment crisis. He thought that voters for Populist parties were attracted more by a charismatic leader than by the policies themselves and wondered whether Reform would exist without Nigel Farage as their spokesperson. Nevertheless, the tragedy is, that the mainstream parties have neither clearly communicated their manifestos nor provided adequate explanations of the detail behind them encouraging voters to transfer their allegiance elsewhere.
Following various thoughtful comments from the floor, the motion was defeated by 9 votes to 3 with 1 abstention.
July
Chris Lane proposed the motion "Working from home is the way of the future" arguing that this is not just the way forward but had already been the case for thousands of years and cited many examples of how and when this had happened. He stated that now AI was replacing lower-level skills, it was people with professional qualifications who were ten times more likely to choose to work from home. He considered that Covid lockdown had paved the way for the increase in the number of people taking this option because it saved them money and commuting time as well as minimising travel and childcare problems and difficult workplace relationships.
Opposer Barry Mills disagreed asserting that there are many potential futures and it would never be possible for all employee categories such as nurses or teachers to work from home. He also believed that it would cause problems if being part of a working community was totally taken out of the equation as the human condition required people to work collectively for support, mentorship, and monitoring. He felt that while working from home may save money for all concerned, it would be more difficult to pick up on complex or tricky situations which could otherwise fall through the cracks.
Following a wide range of thoughtful comments from the floor and a lot of hilarious banter between the speakers, the motion was lost by 8 votes to 4 with 4 abstentions.
June
Mary Lane proposed the motion that "Friendship is the most important thing in life” asserting that true friends are essential for a happy life and while they may not always be with you, they are present in every stage of our existence. She argued that adults need people who share their interests and outlook. These individuals act as an unbiased confidant for safely sharing intimate thoughts and opinions as well as providing trusted support when needed. She also considered that friendship is dependent on mutual politeness and tact which is not always present in families.
Opposer Helen Rees agreed that good friends are essential, just not the most important. She contended that family bonds are crucial relationships in life claiming that they provide a constancy as they are always with us and we can always turn to them in times of need. She maintained that humans need to know and understand their family links as our family members provide us with our next of kin and, they are given priority in health and legal settings. We also invariably leave our assets to them.
Following many varied comments from the floor, the motion was carried by 7 votes to 2 with 2 abstentions.
May
Unfortunately the planned debate had to be cancelled as one of the speakers was unwell. Instead a range of topical issues were discussed including shoplifting, illegal migrants, elections, and the politics of Farage and Trump.
April
The motion for the April debate was "Voting should be compulsory for all adults". Both speakers agreed that it would not be easy to implement this in the UK without additional structural changes being made to the electoral system. However, proposer Chris Lane stated that since most voters were, on average, older and more well off, party politics were pitched to attract their support. As a result younger and poorer people were less inclined to take part in elections feeling they were irrelevant to them. He considered that if people were made to vote, policies could become less exclusive and this in turn, would ensure less extremism and more continuity between governments.
Opposer Barry Mills argued that legislating in this way could be divisive and threatening if people had to choose between political parties that did not represent their views. He considered that it would make voting a numbers game for its own sake rather than improving the quality of votes. He felt that encouraging national pride would be a more preferrable path to take as it could provoke a passion to participate.
Following a wide range of thoughtful comments from the floor, the motion was carried by a narrow margin - 9 for 7 against and 2 abstentions.
March 2025
Sixteen people attended the March debate about issues of topical interest. Understandably, most time was spent discussing the Russia/Ukraine war and the effect that the American led peace talks were having, including whether Trump has a specific rationale and if he is really making America great again. Other items covered were should parents be allowed to smack their children and do current lifestyles mean we are becoming disengaged with reality. Opinions shared were sensitively considered, informative and interesting and despite the serious nature of the topics, were also the source of some laughter.
February 2025
Clive Hill proposed that "A1 does more good than bad" Opposer Jean Cheek. The debate provoked much discussion before a vote was taken. Six voted for the motion with 1 against and 3 abstentions.