Hi everyone! I need help with my debate speech...I'm the 2nd speaker!
I want to make my speech sound as strong as possible too...
please feel free to correct my speech! Thanks for your help!
Good morning everybody and our dear opponents,
Itís no doubt that the Asian Games would bring huge expenditure. From the consultation paper released by the govít, the direct expenditure of the Asian Games is between $13.7 billion and 14.5 billion. However, the expected income is only 0.78 billion, which means the govít must suffer from a deficit of 13.3 billion. Moreover, an extra $15.6 million dollars is required for the maintenance of sports venues every year after the games, but is it worth?
The govít proposes that the Asian Games can stimulate the economic development in Hong Kong. However, the economic yield, including that brought about by tourism, is only 0.4 Ė 0.6 billion, which is simply ridiculous when we compare with the 14.5 billion direct expense. The expense is over 30 times of the economic payback. Thus we can obviously see itís not cost-effective to hold the Asian Games.
As we have proved, holding the Asian Games is not a cost-effective way to enhance sports development. But there are many better alternatives. There have been calls for building a sports institute and increasing sponsorships on sports training. These can impose support on elite athletes, encouraging them to attain better performance in international competitions, just as Asian Games can.
And if we talk about promoting sports among citizens, the govít can lower the rents of the sports facilities, or allow citizens to use the facilities for free for more days, these can receive direct and significant response from the public.
If Hong Kong wishes to become a platform for international events, and let athletes watch and learn from them, the govít should try to organize international friendly matches of different sports events separately and regularly. This is better than the one-time boost Asian Games.
These means can have better and more direct effect on HKís sports development, hence are more cost-effective. Thus the govít should definitely allocate more resources to these aspects, but not spending extravagantly on such a vanity project.
Our opponents argue that the Asian Games can enhance social cohesion. However, there is a huge discrepancy in whether to bid to host the 2023 Asian Games or not among the public. According to a survey conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, which is neutral and thus the most reliable, the supporting and opposing percentages were 46% and 48% respectively, which was very close. This shows there is still not a mainstream consensus. Since citizens cannot unite together to host the 2023 Asian Games, there can hardly be social cohesion. And this may even results in the communityís disunion, which is even worse.
I would also like to reply to our opponentsí argument on enhancing social cohesion. The effect of improving the international image of Hong Kong is based on hold the 2023 Asian Games successfully. However, just as our caption has mentioned, the natural environment limits Hong Kong from providing a good platform to athletes. First of all, the land resource is Hong Kong is scarce. Hong Kong cannot provide accommodation or facilities as large as other cities, which lowers the quality. Moreover, there are restrictions in proposing policies to solve air pollution and traffic jams in Hong Kong. Itís because Hong Kong citizens treasure freedom and economic activities a lot. Hong Kong govít cannot propose some effective policies which may cause disturbances. For instance, before the 2008 Olympic Games, the Beijing govít migrated an entire village of citizens for building sports venue, and imposed parallel transportation management system to reduce traffic jams. That is, cars with odd license plate numbers travel on a day, and those with even numbers travel on another day. But these measures are almost impossible in Hong Kong. The restrictions in resources and policies obstruct Hong Kong from holding the Asian Games successfully. Hence HK can hardly leave a good image to visitors and athletes, and can hardly improve its international image.
These are our main arguments, seeing all of the above concerns; todayís motion definitely should NOT stand. Thank you.
It's hard to assess how effective an argument against a proposition is if one has to infer the proposition from the argument.
In other words, what is the debate topic that you are arguing against? What is the actual motion that you mention in the last line?
Last edited by Raymott; 13-Dec-2010 at 17:20.