Rigged

How else would you describe a debate that has a sudden increase in the number of people supporting the Malaysian government's ideas? This shows that even in Australia, the long scary arm of Malaysia still lurks behind shadows.

The MASCA Annual Debate had a good motive behind it. Unfortunately when discussing motions involving government policies, a debate is not the best solution. People have varying views on the topic at hand; some fully support the policy, others fully oppose the policy, and there are many who fall somewhere in between the two extremes. A debate, being fully black and white in having "For" and "Against" teams, does not work well to support the full spectrum of views. Hence, I say that a good idea was tripped up by its execution.

I have other reasons to view the debate as flawed. Bad imagery on the program booklet and advertisements - are we really all monkeys living in trees? Not the best imagery I'd say. Furthermore, regarding the program booklet handed out, there is nothing inside regarding any of the 6 speakers or the moderator. No credentials, no photos, no details about what makes them suitable candidates for the debate. And why aren't there any engineers on either of the debating teams? Something to think about there, since some people say that "Engineers make the world go round, politicians come and stuff things up".

As for the handling of the debate itself, the moderator was not subtle when it came to reminding debaters about their time limits. Visual cues should have been given, or a less intrusive ringing bell would have worked.

On the debate itself, the participants had weak points overall. A single government policy does not always directly cause something, especially since you need to trace all the policies to get to the root cause of something. How do you know that the NEP directly assisted the progress of Malaysia?

Also, when it came to defining progress, I feel that the speakers could have used the following analogy: Progress is an upward-sloping line. It's not a flat line.
Thus, if you're anywhere below that line, then there is not enough progress. Really, we should be looking at natural progress as well as assisted progress. None of the speakers took into account natural progress, which would have been more meaningful.

Overall, I feel that the opposition speakers of the day are still making excuses for the Malaysian government, such as "We are still a young nation" [Young? Pfft.], "We don't want to be lapdogs of the USA" [Um. How do you progress if you don't want learn from the best?] and "If you aim for the stars and you miss, at least you still land on the moon" [Very comforting, I know, but useless when you look at the "cold hard facts", as their own speakers put it].

NB: The topic of the debate was "Malaysia has failed to progress since the inception of the NEP". Opposition speakers on the topic think that we have progressed, government speakers think that we have failed to progress.