Junior Chamber Debate

Chronicle (Levin), 23 July 1948, Page 4

Junior Chamber Debate

N. J

THORNLEY,

(To the Editor) Sir;+^-Inija published report of a recent debate between a team from the Wellington £2 Club and a team from the Levin Junior Cham'ber of Commerce it is stated that through its insistencq' that compulsory ipilitary servjce was not in the best interests of New Zealand, the Levin team won the debate. ^ Your published report has unfor-tung-tely given rise to an impression that this represents the yiews of this Chamber. This is entirely contrary to fact.

The purpose of these debates is to train piembers of our organisation in the art of public speaking, and it is quite possible that in the course of the year many of our memhers will be asked to debate against their own convictions. Therefore, any eonclusion that they are expressing their own views in any of the subjects under debate may be ' quite erroneous, as it has been in this instance. The subject of the debate, "That Compulsory Military Service is in x the best i-nterests of New Zealand" ] WciS chosen by the Wellington team, .who decided to affirm the proposition, leaving the Levin team no option but to negate it. Opinions expressed and arguments used in a debate such as this cannot be taken as the opinion of the individual, much less that of the organisation to which he belongs, and. 'for. this reason it is regretted,"'that\ such an .impressiofi should have been. conveyed. Yours ptr..

President, Junior. Chamber.

Levin, July 22.

It is difficult to understand how 'the article concerned could give rjse to any misunderstanding. It clearly stated that the occasion was merely a debate between the two organisations, and neither said nor inferred that the discussion was on policies. The Junior Chamber, with the , negative side, had no option but to insist that compulsory military service was not in the best interests of New Zealand if it was to be successful in the contest. No reference is made in the article which could giye the impression that bfecause argument put forward was insisted fpr d,ebating purpoges, it represented the considered opinion of the Junior Chamber as a body or of its individual members. — Editor.