Home Search Contact
Members and Schools:
Log in or sign up.

Welcome to the DAV Website
The DAV is a non-profit association which exists to promote debate. It is the peak debating body in Victoria and runs large competitions for adults and for schools across Victoria. It provides training and resources for debaters, teachers and adjudicators.

The Resource Guide is not a substitute for proper preparation, and its aim is simply to help you prepare your own case. You should not structure your case around the questions asked, nor should you rely too heavily only on the articles to which we provide links. Adjudicators are not asked to read the Resource Guide, so any ideas that it gives you will need to be explained just like any other material.

A Grade

Round 1 - That we should set a maximum wage of $1 million for corporate executives

Introduction

Executives of companies listed on the stock exchange are typically well paid. Sometimes, chief executive officers in Australia have been paid more than $25 million per year. In recent times, trade unions, political parties and journalists have suggested various means of limiting how much corporate executives are paid.

It is important to understand how their pay is currently set. A publicly listed company is governed by a board of directors who guide the company, but the company's employees do most of the work. The directors decide how much the company's senior executives will be paid. Often, they will be paid a base wage, plus bonuses if they meet specified aims. (The directors also decide their own pay.) Thus, the employees are responsible to the board of directors. The directors are in turn responsible to the shareholders. Historically, governments in Australia have not restricted how much companies' directors and employees are paid. Government has left these decisions to the board of directors, and ultimately to the shareholders (who decide who the directors will be).

There has always been some debate about executives' pay. In the last year, though, there has been widespread discussion, including in the USA, the UK and Australia, about whether the government should limit executives' pay. One way of doing this is by setting a maximum wage of $1 million per year.

—WAJ

Questions

  • How would a maximum wage work? What would happen to the money that companies would have paid their executives but for the maximum wage?
  • Why is the CEO of a bank paid more than a cleaner at its head office?
  • Would a maximum wage change where corporate executives would work or how hard they would work?
  • Who should decide executives' pay: shareholders or the government?
  • Why should a government care how much a company pays its executives?
  • Why are corporate executives different from other people who earn much more than average?
  • What would you do with $5 or $10 million per year?

Links

Round 2 - That the West should fear the rise of China

With China set to emerge as the next superpower, their rise will have profound political and economic consequences. China has experienced unprecedented economic growth over the past 20 years, affording them significant political leverage over other nations. Political unrest and anger over the widening gap between the rich and poor have resulted in significant political repression of dissidents and ethnic minorities. China has also sought to exert military power over Taiwan, and suppress independence movements in Xinjiang and Tibet.

However, China’s economic rise has been successful in lifting millions out of poverty. The interconnected nature of the modern globalised economy means that China is dependent on the West to purchase its goods, and supply it with natural resources. This ensures that China’s political influence is controlled. China is also increasingly concerned with cultivating a peaceful international image.

The key with this debate is not to argue whether China’s actions are good or bad – you’ll do much better if you instead use this information to examine the competing influences on each of the actors, and decide whether or not the West has the ability to control China’s ambitions. This debate also doesn’t center solely on China’s current capabilities, but its rise and its consequences for the future.

—MJP

Questions:

  • What are China’s ambitions? What image is trying to present to the West?
  • Is it in China’s interest to exert its military power? What are the trends we’re seeing in China’s foreign policy?
  • Does China’s economic power give it influence over the West?
  • How does the globalised nature of the world economy serve to limit China’s ambitions?
  • What are the environmental consequences of China’s rapid growth?

Links

B Grade

Round 1 - That the police should not carry guns on the beat

Introduction

In December 2008, 15-year-old Melbourne resident Tyler Cassidy was shot and killed by police officers after advancing on them with two knives. Victoria’s police force has a reputation - whether deserved or not – for fatally shooting members of the public at a higher rate than other police forces in Australia. It can be argued that a contributing element of this higher rate of shootings is the fact that Victorian police carry guns with them on all regular patrol shifts. Some would say that the constant availability of guns changes the psychology and choices of police officers – making them reach for potentially deadly force in dangerous situations early than they otherwise should.

Those in favour of police carrying guns argue that they need to be respected and have the ability to decisively incapacitate criminals. Those who oppose guns on the beat argue that if guns are available they do not act as a last resort, but are drawn earlier, and that guns are unnecessary for the police to incapacitate criminals. This debate involves both practical and symbolic issues – how would removing guns from patrolling officers actually change things, and how would it change how those involved feel and think. Ultimately it must be examined whether not carrying guns on patrol would change police reactions to certain dangerous situations and interactions with the community – and whether those changes are for the better.

—ASG

Questions

  • What are the dangers of police carrying guns on patrol?
  • If police do not routinely carry guns on their patrol shifts, what would they use instead? Tasers? Capsicum/pepper spray? Would those alternatives be better or worse?
  • Would not carrying guns change the attitudes of police officers, criminals or the public at large? If so, in what ways?
  • What happens in other countries – particularly New Zealand and the United Kingdom?

Links

Round 2 - That Melbourne's growth should be upwards, not outwards

Melbourne’s continued population growth is leading to dramatic urban sprawl, threatening the ‘green belt’ which was established thirty years ago. This arc of land from the coast at Werribee to the Mornington Peninsula was set aside to protect valuable agricultural land, resources, environmental features and to provide for recreational use.

Low-density housing means that individuals have to travel longer distances to work, school or to shop, resulting in higher levels of car dependence. This is a significant problem in Melbourne where our struggling public transport system doesn’t have the ability to adequately service outer-suburban areas. Urban sprawl has also been linked to decreases in land and water quality, higher infrastructure costs and declines in social capital. Upwards growth would also lead to better environmental outcomes, and a greater quality of life.

However, upwards growth is not always the best environmental solution. An alternative solution could be better urban planning, where we establish urban centers in suburbs, so that people no longer need to travel long distances to reach vital amenities. This also means that people can continue to enjoy large open spaces, and fulfill their vision of the ‘Australian dream’. High rise buildings can be also poorly insulated, and be made with environmentally damaging materials.

—MJP

Questions

  • Which model leads to better environmental outcomes?
  • Which should we prioritise – the environment or individual choice?
  • Will this enhance or decrease environmental awareness?
  • Could Melbourne cope with an influx of people to the inner city? How fast would this migration occur?
  • How does Melbourne’s current housing crisis affect this debate? Which model provides a better solution?

Links

The Age – green belt or urban sprawl

The Age – urban sprawl may grow with new outer ring road

Melbourne 2030 strategy

ABC – rezoning to fix housing crisis

Public Transport Users Association

C Grade

Round 1 - That Australia should adopt a national internet filter

Introduction

Governments across the world classify and censor some material in some media. This is the role, for example, of the Office of Film and Literature Classification in Australia.

Australian governments do not currently filter the internet. While some organisations and people choose to use filters to restrict their internet access, most people are able access anything on the internet. This includes information about government and politics. It also includes things like illegal pornography and material promoting terrorism. People may access these things on the internet, but creating, distributing or even accessing them might be a crime. The material is thus illegal but uncensored.

The current federal government has proposed a national internet filter that would seek to prevent people in Australia from accessing certain websites.

—WAJ

Questions

  • What's wrong with stopping people from accessing websites promoting terrorism or illegal pornography?
  • Who would decide what a national internet filter would block? Would the public know what material was being filtered?
  • Is the internet different from other media (like film and magazines) that are already censored in Australia?
  • Who would a national internet filter be designed to protect? Children? Everyone?
  • What is the role of freedom of speech, information and thought?
  • What countries already use a national internet filter?
  • Are there likely to be any technical problems in implementing a national internet filter?
  • Would there be any ways of avoiding the operation of a national internet filter?

Links

Round 2 - That Australia should accept far fewer migrants

Australia’s political landscape is currently dominated by debates over immigration, indicated by the creation of the new ‘Population’ portfolio and Urban Taskforce. Politicians are considering how we want Australia to develop and the kind of nation we want to be in the future. Remember, this debate focuses on skilled migration rather than refugees.

Australia is already having problems with significant population growth, and our population is set to double by 2050. With growing urban sprawl, and a current housing crisis, our ability to cope with continued large-scale migration is questionable. We also don’t have the resources to adequately provide healthcare and education to all Australians at present. Migration also has economic implications. Often the money migrants earn is sent overseas in remittances, rather than being spent in Australia. Also, the government should prioritise training unemployed citizens to take these jobs, rather than importing labour.

However, migration has been a significant boon to Australia’s economy, helping to ensure low unemployment, and continued economic growth despite a global recession. They also help address our serious skills shortage. While we could train citizens to take these jobs, Australia’s unemployment levels are already very low, so this is limited solution. Also, migration is part of a rich tradition in Australian, and serves to enrich Australia culturally. While population is an issue, Australia has successfully coped with large-scale migration in the past.

—MJP

Questions

  • Can we cope with continued large-scale migration?
  • What are the economic implications of limiting migration? Can existing citizens take these jobs?
  • Is there a right to emigrate?
  • How do we best cope with the needs of existing migrants, and prevent ghettoisation?
  • How does migration enrich Australia?

It’s important in this debate to ensure that your team doesn’t make racist arguments, or generalizations about a particular group. These assertions often aren’t true, and are therefore not persuasive, and are sometimes offensive.

Links:

Round 3 - Advised topic: Animals and the Environment

REMEMBER – Advised topics will be released one hour before your debate starts. Make sure you arrive early so you have the maximum amount of time to prepare.

You may bring in any books, notes or printed materials, but no electronic devices can be used. Up to 5 team members can prepare together.

Human beings are thought to be the most advanced species on earth. Some people think that because we are more advanced we have a responsibility to the world around us. Currently we exploit natural resources for entertainment, scientific and economic benefits. We use fur and animal hide for fashion and accessories. We clear land and mine for minerals to expand our economies. Many industries pay no attention to theenvironment, continuing to use large amounts of finite resources such as water and coal. Sustainable energy is available, but still very expensive.

Individuals are encouraged to take up initiatives such as shorter showers and energy saving appliances, but may be unwilling to pay more for these options or sacrifice their quality of life. Governments around the world recognise that something must be done, but no one can agree on a solution. There are many issues surrounding animals and the environment to consider this round.

—CAD

Questions

  • What are the differences between people and animals?
  • Do animals have the same rights as humans?
  • What are some situations where humans and animals are treated differently?
  • What do humans use animals for?
  • Do humans have a responsibility to animals and the environment?
  • What is Australia’s position on whaling? What is Japan’s view?
  • What steps are we taking to be more environmentally friendly?
  • Who are the biggest polluters?
  • What is global warming?
  • How much water does Victoria have? What are we doing to conserve water?
  • What happened in Copenhagen last year?
  • What sources of energy do we currently use? What are the alternatives?
  • Should we sacrifice other interests to protect the environment?
  • What are the effects of increased pollution and industrial expansion?

Links

Round 5 - That the police should hold the DNA of all Australians on a national database

Introduction:

Currently, all states and territories in Australia have access to a national DNA database administered by the company CrimTrac, containing information of some convicted criminals which can be accessed in order to solve crimes. This topic proposes that we would implement a DNA database for every single person within Australia, rather than just those convicted of a crime.

Those in favour of a DNA database favour its use in criminal investigations and to identify victims of disasters. Those against a national DNA database are concerned about privacy, the possibility of misuse of information in order to discriminate against people on facts obtained from their DNA and incorrect assumptions of guilt on the basis of DNA.

—MEH

Questions:

  • Should people have a right to privacy of their DNA? When it it/is it not possible for the state to override this right ?
  • What are the uses for the DNA which would be held on this database? For example crime, disasters, heath, others?
  • Are there any problems with reliability of the information?
  • Who could access this information? How well can it be protected?
  • Is there any potential for the misuse of this information?
  • How is this policy likely to affect different groups of individuals?

Links:

D Grade

Round 1 - That we should ban cosmetic surgery

Introduction

In November 2007 Kanye West’s mother, Donda, passed away as a result of complication from cosmetic surgery. In 2010, 23-year-old television star Heidi Montag had 10 cosmetic surgery operations. Cosmetic surgery is a large industry, helping many people change their appearance to one they prefer more. It comes with physical and emotional health risks, and might be influencing how society perceives attractiveness.

Supporters of cosmetic surgery believe that people should be able to change how they appear, and if they can do so through exercise, why not through other means too? Opponents of cosmetic surgery note its risks, the way it changes social expectations of beauty and the fact that many people who pursue cosmetic surgery are actually quite unhappy and remain so after surgery.

—ASG

Questions

  • What is cosmetic surgery and how does it differ from reconstructive surgery?
  • What are the risks of cosmetic surgery? Can people consent to those risks?
  • What kinds of people use cosmetic surgery?
  • What might happen if cosmetic surgery were banned? Would people still want to get it done?
  • How does cosmetic surgery affect society’s attitudes to beauty? What else contributes to our general ideas of what is and isn’t attractive in a person?
  • Does cosmetic surgery provide any additional benefits to society?

Links

Round 2 - That modern technology is a plague on human relationships

Modern technology has been important in bringing together people previously separated by distance. Facebook, MySpace and Skype have allowed more people to keep in contact, and share photos and videos instantly. Modern technology also helps people build new relationships, through online message-boards or online dating. Also, it’s important to consider that the technology itself isn’t inherently damaging to human relationships, it’s the individual who uses it. If they are anti-social, bully others, or commit crimes, they may have done so anyway without the help of modern technology.

However, modern technology can be blamed for making us far more anti-social. While modern technology allows us to have wide circles of acquaintances, we may never see them offline. Modern technology also presents new ways for people to harm others – sites such as Formspring allow people to bully anonymously. Also, online bullying can be much more pervasive because there is no respite for the person being bullied.

Remember that this is an empirical debate. Rather than focusing on whether modern technology is good or bad, or that we could never live with out it, spend more time on analyzing its impact on human relationships and whether it’s worth that harm. No side will win by simply proving technology is good or bad, you should instead focus on proving what we should prioritise.

—MJP

Key questions:

  • Does technology make us more anti-social?
  • Do the benefits of rapid communication outweigh the harms?
  • Does this lead to more bullying or anti-social behavior?
  • Is technology to blame for societies problems?
  • While you may be ‘connecting’ more, how many meaningful relationships can you maintain?

Links:

Round 3 - That Australia should embrace nuclear power

Australia is an industrialised country with a strong economy and an even stronger domestic demand for electricity. Our industries need energy to function so that goods can be made and sold within Australia and abroad. Individuals consume electricity every day, especially through heating and cooling because of the harsh climate in many Australian cities. As Australia’s population continues to grow, demand for energy will continue to rise.

At the same time, the world is facing a climate change crisis. Global warming is caused, in part, by the burning of fossil fuels such as coal to produce electricity. All potential solutions to climate change involve a reduction of fossil fuel usage and transition to a lower-emission energy source. Some people argue that using nuclear power to generate electricity is the best way for Australia to transition to low-emission energy production – which is essential to reducing the effects of global warming. Others argue that nuclear power is dangerous, produces environmentally damaging waste and would lead Australia to rely on yet another limited source of electricity.

—ASG

Questions

  • Why do we need nuclear power?
  • What are some of the unique benefits of nuclear power, particularly compared to other power sources?
  • What is “base load power”?
  • What are the alternatives to nuclear power? How do they compare? Terms to look for include:
    • Gas
    • Solar
    • Wind
    • Hydro-electric (waves)
    • Carbon-capture and storage (CCS)
    • Biomass
  • What are some of the risks and dangers of nuclear power?
  • Which other countries currently use nuclear power to generate electricity?

Links

Round 4 - That judges should be elected

In Australia, judges are appointed by the government. The process differs slightly for federal judges (in the High Court and the Federal Court) and Victorian judges (in the Supreme Court and County Court). (The discussion below is broadly true of other judicial roles like federal and State magistrates and some permanent members of tribunals.)

Federal judges are appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Commonwealth Attorney-General. The Attorney-General may consult a number of people (such as the heads of the courts and the State governments) and appointments are usually approved by Cabinet.

State Judges are appointed by the State Governor on the advice of the State Attorney-General. However, lawyers must apply to become judges in Victoria. Once people have applied for a position, the State Attorney-General consults others and seeks Cabinet approval before a judge is appointed.

In both the federal and State courts, judges must retire at a specified age (usually 70). Judges cannot be sacked except where both houses of the relevant parliament agree that the judge has misbehaved.

The courts are one of the three sources of government power in the 'Westminster system' of government that Australia follows. The other two sources of power are parliament (the upper and lower houses) and the executive (the dominant party in parliament, the ministers and the public service). While there is broad agreement that government power should be shared across the courts, parliament and the executive, there is much debate about exactly how they should relate to one another.

In other jurisdictions, notably some parts of the United States, judges are elected to office by the public rather than appointed by the government.

—WAJ

Questions

  • What role and power do judges in Australia have now? Would that change if they were elected?
  • What would be the process for electing judges?
  • Would it be more democratic to elect judges? Is democracy always good?
  • What sort of judges do we want? What sort of judges would we get if they were elected?
  • Would judges behave differently (say, in sentencing criminals or interpreting charters of rights) if they were elected?

Links

Round 5 - That we should deny smokers access to Medicare

The Australian Government provides free healthcare for all Australian citizens through the Medicare program. Consequently, the level of funding provided by the Government tends to determine the effectiveness of healthcare (reflected in, for example, hospital waiting lists). Funding for healthcare, then, is a limited resource, and this leads some to question whether "self-inflicted" illnesses should be covered by Medicare, particularly when treatment is very costly.

Smoking tends to be viewed in two distinct ways: one view holds that smokers make a conscious choice to smoke, and could stop easily if they wished to - and that a deterrent like having to pay for healthcare would encourage them to do so. Others believe that the addictive nature of cigarettes and other social factors make quitting very difficult or impractical.

—MC

Questions:

  • To what extent is it appropriate for the Government to suggest or enforce lifestyle choices?
  • If this proposal were enacted, how do you think most smokers would behave?
  • Is smoking different from other medically-adverse activities that might be considered "self-inflicted" (e.g., drinking alcohol, being obese, skydiving)?

Links: