Great debates
A look back through the history of debating at Ormond reveals a lot about the preoccupations and moods of previous eras.
Tuesday 30 June 2026 • 5 minute read
Since the late 1800s, debating clubs and competitions have been part of Ormond life. Debating culture at Ormond (then a college with only male residents) was especially strong in the 1920s.In a 1924 debate on the topic of ‘Woman’s Place in Modern Life’, a Mr Borland argued that ‘the history of the position of women through the ages was a sad one, and emancipation had been slow.’ But a Mr Morrison argued that ‘although women have fought hard for emancipation, they have not yet justified their claims in the hard actualities of life.’
A 1928 topic, ‘Americanisation: Its Effect on Australia’ reflected uneasiness with the rising power and cultural influence of the United States. A Mr Latham employed some cheap tactics, ridiculing American accents (‘it [is] unnatural to use the nose as an organ of speech’) while Mr McKay declared that America was both ‘lawless’ and ‘mentally naked’. In the same year, in a discussion about ‘Morality in International Relations’ it seems Ormondians were feeling optimistic about the League of Nations and its capacity to maintain peace after World War I. The League of Nations was described as ‘the greatest advance yet made in international morality’.
By the 1930s with fascism on the rise, the American economy in freefall and an arms race threatening peace in Europe, the mood was less optimistic. Ormond Debating Club topics included that ‘Disarmament is the next step in international policy' and that ‘the time is ripe for the reorganisation of the social order'. Speaking at the conclusion of the second debate, the Master concluded that ‘the present state of Europe was so bad as to necessitate some radical change’.Extra-curricular activities were a low priority during the 1940s, but intercollegiate debating regained strength during the 1950s. Students crossed the crescent to tackle motions including ‘that we envy Robinson Crusoe’ and ‘that censorship of films and literature is desirable’. By 1959 the space-race was ramping up between the USSR and the US and debate topics turned cosmic. An internal Ormond debate tackled the motion, ‘that man's conquest of space is the greatest boy meets girl story of the twentieth century’. It was a wide-ranging discussion, apparently. ‘On the affirmative side, Barton Stott spoke in an insinuating voice that earned him high marks, Gordon Goldberg discussed sex, boy scouts, atheists and the wolves of India, and Rod Home drooped and talked science.’
Whimsy reigned throughout much of the 1960s, with debate topics including, ‘that a clear soup is more important than a clear conscience’. In 1969, Ormond students took inspiration from John Lennon, debating the statement, ‘happiness is a warm gun’.By the 1970s, things had become unhinged. Ormond students tackled the motion ‘that teddy bears should in fact go on picnics’ in 1972.
Perhaps this was taking things too far, because by 1978, debating participation and attendance was poor, leading David Miller, chair of the students committee to bemoan the absence of enthusiasm for intellectual pursuits at College and across Australian society more broadly. Writing in The Chronicle, he asked, ‘Are we Australians just too apathetic to care about anything more than when and where our next beer will eventuate and the prospects of Malcolm Blight in the Brownlow ?’
In 1986, the Students’ Club reinvigorated debating culture with a new competition, the ‘Amy Perpetual Bowl’. Amy was a beloved College dog and the companion of groundsman and Ormond icon George Mounsey. The bowl was originally a real aluminium dog bowl, but it was later replaced with a silver-plated trophy.In 1993, following sweeping reforms to higher education during the Dawkins era, Ormond students took the negative against Trinity in the intercollegiate semi-finals on the topic ‘that our politicians are failing us’. Debating captain Joanna Masel reported, ‘We argued that politicians were by definition cheap lowlife scum who wheeled and dealed for personal gain, and who were therefore doing an excellent job.’The Ormond team won a lot of laughs even if, according to the Chronicle report, ‘there may not have been much substance to our arguments’.Ormond debaters hit the world stage at the turn of the millennium, with Sarah Norman and Dave McCann travelling to the University of Sydney in 2000 to compete in the World Universities Debating Championship (WUDC). In 2010, there were multi-generational Ormond debates (including a Mother’s Day debate) on sexism and student-club quotas. There was a resurgence of desperate tactics, too, with some debaters insulting the socks of their opponents.
In 2013, Ormond won the intercollegiate debating competition, beating Janet Clarke Hall in the finals. What happened in debating at Ormond in 2014? It’s unclear. Cryptically, the Debating Subcommittee chose that year to file their report for The Chronicle in the form of an acrostic poem.
Debating is still going strong in the 2020s. The Debating Subcommittee has been experimenting with ‘speed debating’ formats. In 2024, Ormond staff took on students arguing for the motion that ‘current university students face greater adversity than prior generations did’. Unbelievably, the staff team won.Undeterred, in 2025 a group of students challenged Ormond alumnus and celebrated philosopher Peter Singer to a debate in the SCR on the topic, ‘that we should all be effective altruists’. Singer is the founder of the effective altruism movement and a formidable debater. The student team carried the day!