Debating Matters

Assisted dying should be legalised

Updated 2025

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

Physician-assisted dying is a term encompassing both assisted suicide and euthanasia. Assisted suicide is the practice of allowing doctors to prescribe life-ending drugs to be administered by individuals who want to die to avoid further suffering. Euthanasia is where someone else – usually a doctor – administers the lethal drug.

The past few decades have seen an international trend of legalising this practice, sometimes for just the terminally ill, sometimes the chronically ill, and sometimes even people whose body is healthy but whose mental illness is so extreme that their suffering is thought to justify the procedure. As this has happened in several liberal societies, many questions have been raised. Can someone ever rationally justify taking their own life, or is it a simple, reasonable choice to make for those who are suffering? What are the wider implications for a society that accepts that sometimes life isn’t worth living? Does the medical profession suffer when the role of the doctor is extended from life-preserver to include life-taker, or is it better that the option to die is put into the hands of professionals?

Technological progress will not solve society’s environmental issues

updated 2025

INTRODUCTION

Arguably, climate change, and the environmental problems that will occur as a result, are the most pressing issues that humankind faces. The outcome of the COP21 climate talks in Paris in 2015 was hailed as a momentous deal, in which countries pledged, among other things, to cap emissions, and seek to limit temperature rises to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and below the two degrees which many scientists believe would be disastrous for the planet [Ref: Guardian].

Yet a decade later, progress has been slow. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from 400 parts per million (ppm) at the time of the Paris talks to 425 ppm at the end of 2024 [ref: Climate.gov]. Global CO₂emissions from fossil fuels and industry rose from 35.4 billion tonnes in 2015 to 37.8 billion tonnes in 2023 [ref: Our World in Data]. In February 2025, it was revealed that just 13 of the 195 parties to the Paris agreement had submitted ‘nationally determined contributions’ – five-yearly plans setting out what countries will do to cut emissions – by the latest deadline [ref: Carbon Brief]. One of the first acts of Donald Trump’s second term as US president was to pull out of the Paris agreement – again [ref: Guardian].

Tech companies should act to stop online misinformation and hate speech

Updated: February 2025

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

There has long been concern that social-media giants have allowed the spread of ‘misinformation’ and ‘hate speech’ online and that they should do more to combat it. This has led to the big tech companies like Meta (which owns Facebook and Instagram), X and Alphabet (Google’s parent company) employing armies of fact-checkers and deploying algorithms to remove misleading or offensive posts. But as a result, many worry about the power this gives them, arguing that these companies have become a near-oligopoly on what can be seen and shared online and have the potential to shape the narrative and how we see the world.

However, in a twist to the trend in recent years, it seems that Meta has accepted some of these concerns. In January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, announced that the company would reduce the use of fact-checkers, who he said were ‘too politically biased’ and would ‘get rid of a bunch of restrictions on topics like immigration and gender that are just out of touch with mainstream discourse’. [Ref:Guardian] In place of fact-checkers, Meta will be introducing a system similar to X’s Community Notes, where users can append clarifying or corrective information to a post. This has proven to be both trusted across the political spectrum and to have had a dampening effect on the spread of misinformation [Ref:BBC].

The capacity of social media to affect events seemed to be illustrated by the public disorder in the UK in the summer of 2024. In July, a lone attacker walked into a children’s dance class in Southport, killing three young girls and injuring another 10. Directly following the attack, rumours circulated online about the killer’s identity and motivation, which then incited protests and riots across the UK. Many of the attacks violently targeted Muslims, mosques, refugee and asylum seekers.

We should build on the green belt

Updated 2025

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

The Royal Town Planning Institute describes green belts as ‘areas around certain towns, cities and large built-up areas where the aim is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping the land permanently undeveloped. ‘ [ref: RTPI] But in recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about the merits of the green belt in the UK, with supporters and critics clashing over its relevance and necessity in the twenty-first century.

For years, housebuilding has run well below targets and demand has increased. One think tank suggests that the UK has now got a shortfall of over four million homes. [Ref: Centre for Cities] As a result, house prices are now so high that it is almost impossible for most first-time buyers to get on the ‘housing ladder’ in many parts of the country. According to official figures, in England in 2023, the average house price was £298,000, while average annual disposable household income was £35,000. In other words, average prices were equivalent to 8.6 times average income. (The disposable household income ratios were 5.8 in Wales, 5.6 in Scotland and 5.0 in Northern Ireland.) In the most in-demand areas, in London and south-east England, the price-to-income ratio is even higher – perhaps 12 to 15. [Ref: ONS]

Responding to this housing crisis, the Labour government elected in July 2024 has announced ambitious plans to increase supply by cutting back on planning rules and forcing local authorities to accept housebuilding targets. One particular focus has been on plans to build on ‘grey belt’ land – land in the green belt that is of ‘poor quality’. [Ref: BBC News]

DM Transatlantic: Tech companies should act to stop online misinformation

Published: December 2024

Debating Matters Transatlantic is a partnership project between Bill of Rights Institute and Ideas Matter

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

On 24 August 2024, Pavel Durov, founder and CEO of instant messaging and platform service Telegram, was arrested at Le Bouge Airport on the outskirts of Paris, France. The charges were seemingly related to a lack of moderation on his platform and accusations that Telegram is complicit in cases linked to drug trafficking, support for terrorism and cyberstalking [Ref: Le Monde]. Durov was subsequently charged with 12 crimes in connection with Telegram’s failure to remove certain content at the request of the authorities.

Durov’s arrest is a world first, signifying a growing concern among Western governments about the spread of online misinformation and a move towards regarding social media platforms as publishers of user-generated content, thereby holding their owners responsible for that content. The only comparable case to the Durov arrest was in 2016, when a Brazilian judged ordered the arrest of a senior Facebook executive who was briefly jailed for refusing to hand over private WhatsApp messages to assist in a drug-trafficking case [Ref: Guardian]. However, he was quickly released, and many commentators branded the decision ‘hurried’, ‘unlawful’ and ‘extreme’ [Ref: Spiked].

The Durov incident is the latest in a long line of concerns over ‘misinformation’, ‘disinformation’, ‘hate speech’ and ‘fake news’ online. This concern has prompted a series of laws, from the EU’s Digital Services Act [Ref: European Commission] to the UK’s Online Safety Act [Ref: Gov.UK], as well as a range of investigations, task forces, court rulings, social-media bans and legislation around the world – all deemed to be tackling online misinformation [Ref: Poynter].

Transatlantic DM: We should accept the risk inherent in contact sports

Published: October 2024

Please note, this is a Transatlantic Topic Guide, and the term ‘football’ generally refers to what is known in the US as ‘soccer’ and ‘American football’ is used when referring to what North Americans call ‘football’ (sometimes, internationally, known as ‘gridiron football’). When debating, students should use whichever term they prefer. This Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

In April 2023, former Wales and British & Lions rugby wing, Dafydd James, revealed he had been diagnosed with onset dementia at the age of 47, with the possibility he also has a degenerative brain disease, chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), which can only be discovered posthumously [Ref: The Times]. The former rugby player is the latest high-profile sports star to join the growing class-action lawsuit against rugby’s governing bodies, World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union (RFU) and Welsh Rugby Union (WRU). He joins some 200 professional and amateur sportsmen and sportswomen who are suing the professional bodies for failing to take protective action against the risks caused by concussion [Ref: BBC Sport].

This was the first legal move of its kind in world rugby, with some comparing it to the class action against the NFL in the US, which began in 2011. The NFL Concussion case now has over 20,000 retired players accusing the league of not warning about, and hiding, brain injuries associated with the sport [Ref: NFL Concussion Settlement]. Moreover, in 2024, the Washington Post revealed that many more cases have been hidden from sight, arguing, ‘the settlement routinely fails to deliver money and medical care to former players suffering from dementia and CTE… saving the NFL hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more’ [Ref: The Washington Post / Forbes].

DM Transatlantic: Smartphones should be banned in the classroom

Published: September 2024

Debating Matters Transatlantic is a partnership project between Bill of Rights Institute and Ideas Matter

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

According to recent studies, the majority of young people in both the UK and US own a smartphone. Research by the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom found that smartphone ownership among 12- to 15-year-olds is above 95 per cent, with nearly a quarter of three- and four-year-olds owning a device. The research also showed that half of children aged three to 12 use at least one social-media app, despite the minimum age requirement being 13 (Ref: Guardian). In the US, a 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that 95 per cent of American teens have access to a cellphone with 58 per cent of them reporting using TikTok daily (Ref: Pew Research Center).

Smartphone use has been linked to a wide range of poor educational and mental-health problems, particularly in relation to social-media use (Ref: TES). The use of smartphones by under-16s has, therefore, become the subject of widespread debate in both countries. From failing eyesight, insomnia and poor concentration to self-harm, anorexia, anxiety and addiction, social media is held to be responsible for an array of problems relating to mental health and wellbeing in children. This has led many to call for an outright ban, or for usage to be at least severely restricted, for those under 16, particularly in school (Ref: Spectator).

DM Transatlantic: Monuments to controversial historical figures should remain

Published: September 2024

Debating Matters Transatlantic is a partnership project between Bill of Rights Institute and Ideas Matter

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

In June 2020, in a response to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, people in Bristol, UK, vandalised and then toppled a statue of Edward Colston [Ref: BBC]. In the United States, heated debates also occurred over the existence of monuments to controversial figures. For example, in Richmond, Virginia, the city removed three statues of Confederate leaders on ‘Monument Avenue’ in 2020, with the state removing the last one in 2021. Many other cities in the southern US also removed statues of Confederate figures.

In the UK, the toppling of the Colston statue prompted the Mayor of London to set up the Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm [Ref: Wikipedia] with the aim of ensuring London’s monuments, plaques and street names reflect the diversity of the city today [ref: London.gov.uk]. Reviews of statues are being planned in other UK cities, too, including Cardiff, Leeds, Manchester and Newcastle [Ref: Sky News]. Edinburgh City Council has convened a review group to look at public monuments, street names and building names that have links to slavery and colonialism [Ref: Edinburgh Evening News].

DM Transatlantic: Populism is a threat to democracy

Published: September 2024

Debating Matters Transatlantic is a partnership project between Bill of Rights Institute and Ideas Matter

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

Populism is the political buzzword of the day – with commentators, political theorists and politicians all debating its meaning and the merits of its apparent rise in recent years. Examples of populism abound: from Brexit and Trump, which dominated discussion in 2016, to more recent examples such as the 2023 election of Javier Milei in Argentina [Ref: Populism Studies], the Europe-wide farmers’ protests [Ref: Financial Times], the rise of the Reform Party in the UK [Ref: The Week] or, most strikingly, the overwhelming rejection by referendum in Ireland of a proposed constitutional change [Ref: Guardian]. Whilst many discuss populism as a right-wing phenomenon, it has a long history on the left as well, with recent examples of Syriza in Greece [Ref: New Statesman] and Podemos in Spain [Ref: BBC News].

But particular alarm is caused today by its right-wing variety. Some insist it is dangerous for democracy and liberal values, going so far as to suggest that it has echoes of the emergence of fascism in the 1930s and 1940s [Ref: Guardian]. Such fears seemed to be confirmed when news broke in Germany of an alleged meeting between members of a leading far-right populist party, Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), and neo-Nazi groups. This led to widespread public protests and even calls to ban the AfD [Ref: Guardian]. The call to ban a political party, supported by a large number of Germans, gets to the heart of the debate about populism: is populism a reflection of widespread anger and disillusionment with the mainstream, or is it a dangerous force which justifies suspending the democratic process in order to contain it?

DM Transatlantic: Cancel culture is a threat to freedom of speech

published: September 2024

Debating Matters Transatlantic is a partnership project between Bill of Rights Institute and Ideas Matter

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

INTRODUCTION

Cancel culture is one of the buzzwords of the social-media age. It describes the view that there is a new assault on freedom of expression and belief, beyond traditional free-speech controversies like ‘de-platforming’. Cancel culture is a form of boycott where a person who has shared a controversial opinion, expressed an ‘inappropriate’ viewpoint or whose actions are perceived as offensive is called out and then ‘cancelled’ for their errant behaviour.

It seems there is an example of a celebrity getting ‘canceled’ or claiming to have been canceled every week. Author JK Rowling, rapper Kanye West, television host Ellen DeGeneres, comedian Dave Chappelle and actor Mel Gibson are just a few who have been fired and lost endorsements or work for expressing their views. But it’s not just limited to the world of celebrity. Harper’s Magazine published a joint letter from a diverse range of 153 prominent writers, including Salman Rushdie and Margaret Atwood, concerned more generally that ‘the free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted’ [Ref: Harper’s Magazine].

But plenty of commentators think this is no threat to freedom of expression, arguing call-outs are the natural consequence of voicing prejudiced and bigoted opinions, and those who complain that they are held accountable are the ones really trying to crack down on freedom of speech [Ref: Varsity]. So, does this new culture stifle debate and jeopardise free speech, or is it merely what fair and open debate looks like in the social-media age?