Debating Speech

Tomorrow is the first formal debate of the year for me. I am really looking forward to it, our team is prepared, and our argument is sound. It's our first debate of an interschool competition, so it is quite important, and a slightly scary prospect, because we don't know what the standard is and what to expect. We haven't had much experience, especially formally, and it's actually our third speaker's first ever debate. I would really like to get involved in debating more, on a higher level, so all I can do currently is practice and practice, get the experiecne behind me, and deveop my skills.
The moot is: The council should fund recycling in schools and businesses
We are the negative team, and I am the second speaker.
The time limit is 8 minutes, which is a rather long period of time. You get points deducted if you talk for under 7 minutes.
After some research this weekend past, I found out that it's common to rebutt for 3 minutes, and then make your speech for the remaining 5.
Rebuttals are quite a frightening prospect as well, because it is impromptu, and you can only prpare to a very minor extent, because you don't know what they are going to say until they say it.
But it is going to be a lot of fun, and the only way to get better, as I mentioned, is to practice.
This is my speech.

If you were offered free waste disposal would you become more aware of the consequences of your waste, and try to limit it as much as possible, or would you become ignorant, uncaring towards the amount of waste you were producing. If someone else was paying, why bother? it’s not our problem. Our team here believes that that would be the subsequent results of a council funded recycling scheme.

The council should not fund recycling in schools and businesses.
Not funding recycling will encourage, and, to a degree, compel, those organisations to become more environmentally friendly. The moot is not supporting efficient resource use, what it is suggesting would allow schools and businesses to produce as much waste as they pleased, without any consequences for them. Is that sustainable?

On the contrary, if recycling was not funded, and if they have to pay the costs of recycling and waster disposal, we strongly believe that it would make businesses and schools more aware to the costs and penalties of their waste. It would not be supporting corporate responsibility, something that our environment is in dire need of.
Schools and businesses should aim to be limiting their waste altogether, and a fully funded recycling system would not be encouraging that.

If the council wants to promote environment awareness, a compost heap could be easily implemented. Food scraps make up a large amount of waste produced by schools, and would not need to be dealt with by a recycling service. A compost heap would have many benefits, such as a practical education concerning biology, and the soil it produces, which could be used to plant trees. Better yet, it has little to no cost. Environmental awareness does not need to cost, it needs no funding, it only needs effort and initiative.

Technology. It is constantly advancing, replacing systems and methods of the past. Schools and businesses, especially businesses, need to keep up with the latest equipment to ensure survival. Keeping up to date in terms of technology is necessary for a business to ensure their survival. It also helps to certify that they are producing the best product that they can, or offering a top-quality service, whether it be education or other. It’s fair to say that a school without computers, using chalk and black boards and encyclopaedias from 1967 would not be offering the best education, and they would not be a favourable option for students. Technology. How many of you have sent an email today? How many of you have created a report without even putting pen and paper together?

Technology. Computers and email are gradually limiting the use of paper and other sources as it becomes more widely used. Frankly, I think that’s great. Schools and businesses should be using this technology available to them to preserve our district, to keep it clean and green. And as our first speaker, Ashwin mentioned, it has numerous benefits for businesses and every member of the school system. Technology should be used to help our environment, and replace crude and devastating methods of the past. And slowly, it is happening in situations such as schools and businesses. Each year more technology is created, and integrated into these organisations. Thus, limiting their waste, especially of recyclable material such as paper. Instead of wasting money funding a cause that is lessening in logic and necessity each year, why not fund the future?

A council-funded recycling scheme would be supporting ignorance towards waste disposal. If businesses and schools had to go into their own pockets to pay for recycling, it would get them thinking about ways to limit their waste, and eventually compel them to eliminate a need for a service such as recycling in the future. With the incredible possibilities of technology, this is a completely realistic prospect.

I thought we were trying to limit waste. We should be encouraging alternatives and resourcefulness, and trying to limit waste of money and precious resources on the whole.
A recycling service means an increase of rates, or a waste of money that could be used for a more important cause. A more efficient, sustainable cause.