Motion: This House believes that mandatory civic education should be included in the

national curriculum.
Ciivic education, also known as civics or citizenship education, is an educational discipline that
aims to promote an understanding of democratic principles, government structures, the rights
and responsibilities of citizens, and the role of individuals in society. It is designed to equip
individuals with the knowledge, skills, and values necessary to actively participate in their
communities, make informed decisions, and contribute to the betterment of society.

Civic education covers a wide range of topics, including:

1. Democratic Values: Teaching the fundamental values of democracy, such as freedom,

equality, justice, tolerance, and respect for diversity.
2. Government and Political Systems: Providing an understanding of how government
functions, the roles of different branches of government, and the electoral process.
3. Rights and Responsibilities: Educating individuals about their rights as citizens, as well
as the responsibilities that come with those rights, such as voting, paying taxes, and
obeying laws.

Pros Cons

Informed Citizens: Civic education teaches Curriculum Overload: Including mandatory

students about their rights, responsibilities,
and the workings of their government,
ensuring they become informed and engaged
citizens.
Promotes Democracy: Civic education fosters
an understanding of democratic values, the
electoral process, and the importance of
participating in governance, which
strengthens the democratic system.
Critical Thinking: Civic education encourages
critical thinking skills by discussing current
events, political issues, and societal
challenges, enabling students to analyze and
evaluate information.
Social Cohesion: Teaching civic values and
principles helps build a sense of community,
tolerance, and respect for diverse
perspectives, contributing to social harmony.
Active Participation: Mandatory civic
education can inspire young people to
actively participate in civic activities,
volunteerism, and community service,
civic education could further burden an
already crowded curriculum, potentially
reducing time for other important subjects.
Political Bias: There's a risk of political bias in
civic education materials, which could lead to
the promotion of certain ideologies or party
interests.
Limited Teacher Training: Teachers may lack
proper training to effectively teach civic
education, leading to subpar delivery of the
subject matter.
Student Apathy: Mandatory civic education
might not necessarily translate to increased
student interest or engagement, especially if
not taught effectively.
Parental Concerns: Some parents may object
to certain aspects of civic education, such as
controversial topics or values that conflict with
their beliefs.
Standardization Challenges: Developing a
standardized civic education curriculum that
 promoting a culture of engagement.
Civic Empowerment: An understanding of
civic rights and responsibilities empowers
students to address social issues, advocate
for change, and hold government
accountable.
Preventing Authoritarianism: Civic education
can serve as a safeguard against
authoritarianism by fostering a population that
is aware of its rights and can resist attempts
to undermine democracy.
Motion: This House supports lowering the voting age to 16.
Lowering the voting age to 16 refers to the proposition of allowing individuals who are 16 years
old or older to participate in the electoral process by voting in national, regional, or local
elections. Currently, in many countries, the voting age is typically set at 18.
Pros
Youth Engagement: Lowering the voting age
could encourage political engagement among
young people, fostering a habit of civic
participation early on.
Inclusion and Representation: Extending the
vote to 16- and 17-year-olds acknowledges
that they are affected by political decisions
and deserve representation in the democratic
process.
Education and Awareness: Voting at a
younger age can encourage political
education and awareness, leading to a more
informed electorate.
Social Responsibility: Allowing younger
citizens to vote emphasizes their role and
responsibility in shaping society, encouraging
them to be proactive and informed about their
communities.
Consistency with Other Rights: Many
countries already grant certain rights and
responsibilities to 16-year-olds, such as the
right to work, drive, and pay taxes, making
voting consistent with these other legal
privileges.
suits diverse cultural contexts and regions
can be challenging.
Freedom of Choice: Mandatory education
could infringe on students' freedom to choose
subjects that align with their interests and
career goals.
Resource Constraints: Implementing
mandatory civic education requires resources
for teacher training, curriculum development,
and instructional materials.
Cons
Maturity and Knowledge: Critics argue that
16-year-olds might lack the maturity, life
experience, and political knowledge
necessary to make informed voting decisions.
Manipulation and Influence: Concerns arise
about the susceptibility of younger voters to
manipulation by political campaigns and
media due to their limited experience.
Partisan Voting: Some worry that 16-year-
olds may vote based on peer pressure, family
influence, or shallow reasons rather than a
deep understanding of political issues.
Informed Decision-Making: Critics contend
that many 16-year-olds might not fully
comprehend the complexity of policy issues,
leading to uninformed decisions.
Instability of Opinions: Some argue that
opinions and beliefs at age 16 can be more
fluid and subject to change, making it
challenging to predict long-term political
preferences.
Limited Impact: The percentage of the
electorate comprised of 16- and 17-year-olds

Long-Term Engagement: Early engagement
in the political process can lead to continued
participation throughout a person's life,
increasing overall civic engagement.
might be relatively small, potentially reducing
the impact of their votes on election
outcomes.
Potential for Manipulation: Political parties
may seek to exploit the inexperience of
younger voters by focusing on emotionally
charged issues rather than substantive policy
discussions.

Legal and Ethical Considerations: Voting is a

serious responsibility, and some argue that
16-year-olds might not be legally or ethically
ready to make such decisions.

Motion: This House advocates for the implementation of a guaranteed minimum income
for unemployed youth.
A guaranteed minimum income for unemployed youth refers to a government policy that
ensures a certain level of income or financial support for young individuals who are unemployed
and do not have a stable source of income. This policy aims to alleviate poverty, provide a
safety net, and assist young people in meeting their basic needs.
Pros Cons

Poverty Reduction: A guaranteed minimum Disincentive to Work: Critics argue that a

income can help reduce poverty among
unemployed youth by providing them with a
financial safety net to cover basic necessities.
Social Welfare: The policy demonstrates a
commitment to the well-being of young
citizens, ensuring they have access to
essential resources even during periods of
unemployment.
guaranteed minimum income might
discourage some unemployed youth from
actively seeking employment or participating
in job training programs.
Economic Burden: Implementing such a
policy requires significant financial resources,
potentially straining government budgets and
leading to increased taxes or public debt.

Economic Stability: By providing financial
assistance, the policy can contribute to
economic stability by preventing the negative
effects of youth unemployment on local
economies.
Cost Inflation: Concerns arise about the
potential inflation of costs for basic goods and
services if many individuals rely on the
guaranteed income, impacting overall
affordability.

Skills Development: Unemployed youth may
have more time to invest in skills
development, education, or vocational
training, increasing their employability in the
long run.
Dependency: There's a risk that some youth
might become dependent on the guaranteed
income rather than actively seeking
opportunities for personal and professional
growth.

Reduced Inequality: A guaranteed minimum Lack of Motivation: The policy might reduce
income can help reduce income inequality by the sense of urgency for unemployed youth to
 providing support to those who need it most, find work, potentially delaying their entry into
promoting a more equitable society. the workforce.

Health and Well-being: Financial stress can
negatively impact mental and physical health.
Adequate income support can contribute to
better overall well-being.
Labor Market Flexibility: Youth may feel more
empowered to pursue meaningful career
paths or entrepreneurial endeavors without
the immediate pressure of finding any job for
survival.
Administrative Complexity: Implementing and
managing a guaranteed minimum income
program requires effective administration and
monitoring to prevent fraud and ensure
fairness.
Targeting and Eligibility: Determining who is
eligible for the income and verifying their
need can be challenging, potentially leading
to issues of fairness and inclusion.

Labor Market Dynamics: Critics argue that a

guaranteed minimum income might not
address underlying issues in the labor market
that contribute to youth unemployment.

Motion: This House believes that social media platforms should be regulated to protect
the mental health of young users.
This motion proposes that governments or regulatory bodies should establish rules and
guidelines to regulate the content, features, and practices of social media platforms with the
specific aim of safeguarding the mental health and well-being of young users. The goal is to
address potential negative effects of social media on the mental health of youth, such as
cyberbullying, comparison, and excessive screen time.
Addictive Behaviors:

Research published in the Journal of Youth Studies suggests that excessive social media use
can contribute to addictive behaviors and negatively impact mental health.
Social Comparison and Body Image:

Studies have shown that exposure to idealized body images on social media can lead to body
dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem among young users.
Disinformation and Misleading Content:

Misleading information and disinformation on social media can contribute to stress and anxiety
among users, particularly young individuals who might lack the critical skills to discern credible
sources.
Pros Cons

Mental Health Protection: Regulations can Freedom of Expression: Overregulation could

curb harmful content and practices that infringe upon the freedom of expression and
contribute to mental health issues among creativity on social media, impacting users'
young users, including cyberbullying, self- ability to share diverse opinions and artistic
esteem issues, and anxiety. content.
 Age-Appropriate Content: Regulations can
ensure that age-appropriate content is
displayed to young users, reducing exposure
to potentially distressing or inappropriate
material.
Innovation Stifling: Strict regulations might
hinder innovation by imposing burdensome
compliance requirements on platforms, and
discouraging the development of new
features.

Cyberbullying Prevention: Rules against Enforcement Challenges: It may be difficult to

cyberbullying and online harassment can effectively enforce regulations on a rapidly
create safer online environments, reducing evolving and global digital landscape, leading
the negative impact of such behaviors on to inconsistencies and gaps in
mental health. implementation.

Digital Literacy: Regulations can promote
digital literacy and critical thinking by requiring
platforms to provide accurate information,
verification tools, and resources for users to
navigate online content responsibly.
User Responsibility: Some argue that users,
especially parents, should take primary
responsibility for monitoring and managing
their own and their children's online
experiences.

Reduced Addiction: Regulations can limit Censorship Concerns: Regulations aimed at

addictive features and algorithms that
encourage excessive screen time, helping
reduce the negative effects of social media
addiction.
Transparency: Platforms could be required to
provide transparency about data collection
and algorithms, empowering users to make
informed choices and understand how their
data is used.
Parental Involvement: Regulations could
involve parental controls and monitoring tools
to help parents manage their children's online
activities and protect their mental health.
protecting mental health might inadvertently
lead to censorship or suppression of certain
content, potentially limiting free discourse.
Privacy Implications: Regulations might
require platforms to collect more user data for
compliance purposes, potentially raising
privacy concerns.
Blame Shifting: Over-reliance on regulations
might shift responsibility away from
individuals and families for managing screen
time and mental health.
Adverse Business Impact: Stricter regulations
could impact the business models of social
media platforms, potentially leading to
reduced innovation or access for users.

Motion: This House supports the inclusion of comprehensive sex education in schools.
Comprehensive sex education refers to a structured and age-appropriate educational program
taught in schools that covers a wide range of topics related to human sexuality, relationships,
sexual health, and reproductive rights. The goal is to provide students with accurate information,
promote healthy behaviors, and equip them with the knowledge and skills to make informed
decisions about their sexual and reproductive health.

Teen Pregnancy Rates:

According to the Guttmacher Institute, comprehensive sex education is associated with lower
rates of teen pregnancy and fewer unintended pregnancies.
STI Transmission:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that comprehensive sex
education programs can help reduce rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among
young people.
Pros Cons

Accurate Information: Comprehensive sex Values Conflict: Some argue that

education provides students with accurate comprehensive sex education might conflict
and evidence-based information about sexual with the moral and religious beliefs of
health, reducing the risk of misinformation students and parents.
and myths.
Age Appropriateness: Critics raise concerns
Prevention of Risky Behavior: The education about the age-appropriateness of certain
equips students with knowledge about topics, suggesting that young children might
contraceptives, sexually transmitted infections not be ready for explicit discussions.
(STIs), and safe sexual practices, helping to
prevent unintended pregnancies and the Parental Control: There are concerns about
spread of STIs. parental rights and control over what their
children are exposed to in terms of sexual
Informed Decision-Making: Students learn education.
about consent, boundaries, and the emotional
aspects of relationships, enabling them to Normalization of Behavior: Opponents worry
make informed decisions about their bodies that discussing certain topics might normalize
and relationships. behaviors that some deem inappropriate or
unacceptable.
Reduced Teen Pregnancy: Comprehensive
sex education has been shown to correlate Early Sexualization: Critics express concerns
with reduced rates of teenage pregnancy and that comprehensive sex education might lead
early parenthood. to early sexualization of children.

Gender Equality: The education addresses
issues related to gender roles, stereotypes,
and respect in relationships, promoting
gender equality and healthy communication.
Open Communication: It encourages open
and honest communication between parents,
educators, and students, fostering a
supportive environment for discussing
sensitive topics.
Empowerment: Comprehensive sex
education empowers students to make
responsible choices regarding their sexual
health and well-being.
Privacy Concerns: Some parents worry that
explicit information might be shared with
students without adequate privacy or consent.
Cultural Sensitivity: Different cultures have
varying perspectives on sexual education,
and comprehensive programs might not
consider cultural sensitivities.
Implementation Challenges: Schools may
lack trained educators and resources to
effectively implement comprehensive sex
education.
 LGBTQ+ Inclusivity: A comprehensive
approach includes information about diverse
sexual orientations and gender identities,
fostering an inclusive and supportive
environment.

Motion: This House supports incentivizing private sector companies to hire a higher
percentage of young workers.
This motion proposes the implementation of policies or incentives that encourage private sector
companies to hire a larger proportion of young individuals, typically those within a specific age
range. These incentives could include tax breaks, subsidies, grants, or other benefits that make
hiring young workers more appealing to businesses.
Pros Cons

Youth Employment: Incentivizing private Discrimination Concerns: Companies might

companies to hire more young workers can
help address youth unemployment and
underemployment issues.
Skill Development: Young workers gain
valuable experience, skills, and professional
development opportunities through
employment, setting them up for future
success.
hire young workers to take advantage of
incentives without considering their
qualifications, leading to potential age
discrimination.
Lack of Experience: Young workers might
lack experience and specific skills required for
certain jobs, leading to lower productivity or
higher training costs.

Economic Growth: Integrating more young Overlooking Older Workers: Prioritizing young
workers into the workforce can contribute to workers could lead to the neglect of older,
economic growth by expanding the labor experienced employees who may face
force and increasing productivity. challenges in finding employment.

Fresh Perspectives: Young workers bring Short-Term Focus: Companies might

fresh ideas, innovation, and a new prioritize hiring young workers for short-term
perspective to the workplace, fostering a cost savings rather than investing in their
dynamic and diverse work environment. long-term development.

Reduced Skills Mismatch: Encouraging Incentive Costs: Providing incentives could

companies to hire young workers can reduce
the skills mismatch between educational
institutions and industry needs.
Reduced Dependence: Young workers gain
financial independence and contribute to their
own well-being and that of their families.
Succession Planning: Hiring young workers
can be part of a long-term succession plan,
ensuring a talented and skilled workforce for
the future.
strain government budgets or divert
resources from other important programs.
Mismatch with Industry Needs: Encouraging
the hiring of young workers might not align
with industries that require experienced
professionals due to safety concerns or
specialized skills.
Displacement of Other Groups: Prioritizing
young workers might inadvertently displace
other vulnerable groups, such as women or
 minorities, from employment opportunities.

Reduced Benefits: Some employers might

offer fewer benefits or lower salaries to young
workers in an attempt to take advantage of
incentives

Motion: This House calls for stricter regulations on the marketing and advertising of
unhealthy foods targeting youth.
This motion proposes the implementation of more stringent regulations and restrictions on the
marketing and advertising of foods that are deemed unhealthy, especially when targeted toward
young audiences. The goal is to curb the influence of such marketing on children and
adolescents, with the aim of promoting healthier eating habits and reducing the prevalence of
diet-related health issues.
Pros Cons

Healthier Habits: Stricter regulations can Freedom of Speech: Stricter regulations

discourage the promotion of unhealthy foods
to youth, potentially leading to better eating
habits and overall health.
Obesity Prevention: Limiting the marketing of
unhealthy foods can help combat childhood
and adolescent obesity, which is often linked
to long-term health issues.
Reduced Peer Pressure: Restricting such
advertising can reduce peer pressure among
youth to consume unhealthy foods promoted
in the media.
Improved Nutritional Literacy: With fewer
unhealthy food advertisements, young people
might become more aware of and curious
about healthier food options.
Less Influence on Parents: Young people can
be influential in family purchasing decisions;
restricting marketing could reduce pressure
on parents to buy unhealthy products.
Responsibility of Industry: Stricter regulations
hold the food industry accountable for the
impact of their marketing on public health.
might be seen as infringing on freedom of
speech and expression of companies.
Impact on Industry: Restricting advertising
could have financial implications for food
companies and related industries, potentially
leading to job losses.
Parental Responsibility: Critics argue that
parents should be the primary decision-
makers regarding their children's diets, and
regulations might undermine parental control.
Consumer Choice: Some argue that
individuals should have the right to choose
what they consume, and restrictions might
limit their freedom to make choices.
Effectiveness: The impact of stricter
regulations on changing behavior might not
be as significant as expected.
Unintended Consequences: There's a risk
that restrictions could lead to the creation of
new, more subtle ways of marketing
unhealthy foods to youth.
Legal and Ethical Challenges: Determining
what constitutes "unhealthy" foods and
defining appropriate regulations can be
challenging and subjective.
 Misplaced Focus: Critics suggest that
addressing childhood obesity requires a
comprehensive approach that includes
education, lifestyle changes, and community
engagement rather than just focusing on
advertising.

Motion: This House believes that the government should provide free mental health
services for all young people.
This motion advocates for government-funded mental health services that are accessible and
free of charge to all young individuals within a specified age range. These services would
encompass a range of mental health care, including counseling, therapy, psychiatric care, and
support programs.

Global Mental Health Burden:

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), half of all mental health conditions start by
the age of 14, making early intervention crucial.
The Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development highlighted that
mental health issues are the leading cause of disability among young people worldwide.

Unmet Needs:

A study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that nearly 60% of young adults with a history of
mental illness did not receive any mental health treatment or counseling in the past year.
Impact on Education:

The American Psychological Association reports that mental health challenges can lead to
academic struggles, absenteeism, and reduced educational attainment among young people.
Pros Cons

Equitable Access: Providing free mental Financial Burden: Funding free mental health
health services ensures that all young people, services requires significant resources,
regardless of their financial status, have potentially straining government budgets and
access to essential mental health care. diverting funds from other sectors.

Early Intervention: Accessible mental health Quality of Care: Concerns may arise about
services enable early intervention and the quality of free mental health services if
support, which can prevent the escalation of they are underfunded or if there is a lack of
mental health issues in young individuals. qualified professionals.

Reduced Stigma: Government-funded Demand Outstripping Supply: Providing free

services can help reduce the stigma services could lead to overwhelming demand
associated with seeking mental health care, that exceeds the available resources,
encouraging more young people to seek help. resulting in long waiting lists.
 Improved Well-being: Adequate mental health Dependency: Critics argue that free services
care can significantly improve the overall well- might lead to dependency on government
being and quality of life for young individuals. support rather than fostering self-reliance and
personal responsibility.
Academic and Work Performance: Improved
mental health can lead to better academic Inefficiency: Government-run services might
performance, career prospects, and overall face bureaucratic inefficiencies and delays in
productivity. delivering care.

Public Health: Addressing mental health Limited Autonomy: Government-funded

issues among young people has broader
societal benefits by reducing the burden on
healthcare systems and preventing long-term
mental health challenges.
Prevention of Long-Term Issues: Timely and
effective mental health care can prevent the
development of more severe and chronic
mental health conditions.
services might come with certain regulations
or limitations on treatment options, limiting
patient autonomy.
Stigma Persistence: Despite accessible
services, the stigma surrounding mental
health might still discourage some young
people from seeking help.
Regional Disparities: Access to free mental
health services might vary based on location,
potentially leaving some young individuals
with inadequate access to care.

Motion: This House supports the establishment of youth councils in every barangay
(neighborhood) to provide platforms for youth participation in local governance.
This motion proposes the creation of official youth councils at the barangay level, which is the
smallest administrative division in the Philippines, to provide young individuals with a formal
platform to participate in local governance. These councils would enable youth to voice their
opinions, contribute to decision-making, and engage in community development activities.
Pros Cons

Youth Empowerment: Establishing youth Limited Representation: The establishment of

councils empowers young people to take an youth councils might not fully represent the
active role in their communities and influence entire youth population, potentially leaving
decisions that impact their lives. some voices unheard.

Civic Education: Youth councils provide Tokenism: There's a risk that youth councils
practical learning experiences in governance, could become tokenistic, with limited
leadership, and community engagement, influence and the appearance of participation
enhancing civic education. without meaningful impact.

Representation: Youth councils ensure that Resource Constraints: Establishing and

the perspectives and concerns of young maintaining youth councils require resources,
individuals are included in local decision- such as funding and administrative support,
making processes. which might strain local budgets.
 Policy Relevance: Engaging youth in local Inexperience: Youth council members might
governance ensures that policies and lack experience in governance and decision-
programs address the needs and aspirations making, potentially leading to inefficient or
of the younger population. ineffective outcomes.

Community Development: Youth councils can
contribute to the implementation of
community development projects that cater to
the interests of young people.
Leadership Development: Participation in
youth councils nurtures leadership skills,
fostering the growth of future community
leaders.
Transparency and Accountability: Youth
involvement promotes transparency and
accountability in local governance by
encouraging open discussions.
Social Cohesion: Youth councils promote
social cohesion by bringing together young
individuals from diverse backgrounds to work
toward common goals.
Political Manipulation: Youth councils might
be influenced or manipulated by existing local
political dynamics, impacting their autonomy.
Lack of Interest: Some young individuals
might not be interested in participating in
youth councils, potentially resulting in low
engagement.
Conflict of Priorities: The priorities of youth
might not always align with those of the larger
community, leading to potential conflicts.
Bureaucratic Challenges: Youth councils
might face bureaucratic hurdles and
challenges in coordinating with existing local
government structures.

Motion: This House believes that government scholarships should be solely based on
academic merit rather than financial need.
The motion refers to the question of whether government scholarships should be awarded
primarily or exclusively based on student's academic achievements and performance rather
than their financial circumstances or need for financial assistance. This debate centers around
the criteria used to select recipients for government-funded scholarships.
Academic Achievement:

A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that higher academic performance
is positively correlated with future earning potential and career success.
Economic Benefits:

Research conducted by the Lumina Foundation indicates that individuals with higher levels of
education are more likely to have higher earnings and contribute positively to the economy.
Efficiency and Resource Allocation:

A report by the Institute for Higher Education Policy highlights that allocating scholarships based
on academic merit can ensure that limited resources are invested in students with the greatest
potential for academic success.
Motivation and Effort:
A study published in the journal "Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis" suggests that
merit-based scholarships can motivate students to perform better academically and strive for
excellence.
Pros
Incentive for Excellence: Scholarships based
on academic merit can serve as an incentive
for students to strive for academic excellence
and put forth their best efforts in their studies.
Efficient Allocation of Resources: Awarding
scholarships based on academic merit
ensures that government resources are
invested in individuals who have
demonstrated a high level of intellectual
capability and dedication.
Recognition of Hard Work: Merit-based
scholarships recognize the effort, dedication,
and achievements of students who have
excelled in their academic pursuits.
Meritocratic Approach: Such scholarships
align with a meritocratic philosophy where
individuals are rewarded based on their
abilities and accomplishments rather than
external factors.
Competitive Advantage: A merit-based
scholarship system can attract talented and
high-achieving students, contributing to the
overall academic reputation of educational
institutions.
Equity in Access: Academic merit
scholarships can provide students from all
socio-economic backgrounds with an equal
opportunity to access financial assistance for
higher education.
Cons
Financial Inequity: A solely merit-based
system might disadvantage students from
low-income backgrounds who possess
potential but lack financial resources to
pursue higher education.
Lack of Diversity: Focusing solely on
academic merit might lead to a lack of
diversity among scholarship recipients, as it
might not consider students with unique
talents, experiences, or skills.
Unfavorable Circumstances: Students facing
challenges such as health issues, family
responsibilities, or under-resourced schools
might not perform as well academically,
disadvantaging them in a merit-only system.
Limited Evaluation Criteria: A merit-based
approach might overlook non-academic
achievements, leadership qualities,
community involvement, or other aspects that
contribute to a well-rounded individual.
Pressure and Stress: Relying solely on
academic merit can create intense pressure
on students, potentially leading to mental
health issues and burnout.
Missed Opportunities: A focus on academic
merit might discourage students from
pursuing fields that require practical skills,
creativity, or dedication to extracurricular
activities that aren't academically focused.
Perpetuating Inequalities: A merit-only
approach can perpetuate existing inequalities
by favoring students who have access to
better educational resources and preparation.
Limited Resources: Scholarships based
solely on academic merit might result in
resource allocation to individuals who might
 already have more resources available, while
those with financial needs are excluded.

Motion: This House supports the implementation of a curfew for minors to ensure their
safety and well-being.
The motion pertains to the adoption of regulations that impose a specific time by which minors
(individuals below a certain age) must be off the streets and not engage in public activities. The
goal of such curfews is to enhance the safety and well-being of young individuals by reducing
their exposure to potential risks or harm during late hours.
● The Philippine National Police (PNP) reported that youth-related crimes, such as theft,
robbery, and violence, often peak during nighttime hours.
● Reports from local law enforcement agencies highlight instances of minors becoming
victims of crimes, accidents, and incidents involving illegal substances during late hours.

Pros Cons

Crime Prevention: Curfews can contribute to Individual Freedom: Enforcing curfews might
the reduction of youth-related crime and be seen as infringing on the individual rights
delinquency during nighttime hours when and freedom of young people to move and
criminal activities are more likely to occur. engage in activities as they choose.

Safety: By enforcing a curfew, authorities can Unintended Criminalization: Curfews might

help protect minors from exposure to unfairly target law-abiding minors and result
dangerous situations, accidents, and potential in the criminalization of innocent behavior.
harm during late hours.
Lack of Effectiveness: Critics argue that
Parental Supervision: Curfews encourage curfews might not be effective in preventing
parents and guardians to take an active role crime and that they might merely displace
in monitoring their children's whereabouts youth-related activities to other times.
and ensuring their safety.
Social Exclusion: Curfews might exclude
Healthy Routine: Implementing curfews minors from engaging in educational,
encourages young individuals to maintain recreational, or social activities during
healthy sleep patterns, which are crucial for nighttime, limiting their opportunities.
their physical and mental well-being.
Enforcement Challenges: Enforcing curfews
Academic Performance: A curfew can support can be difficult, resource-intensive, and
students' academic performance by ensuring potentially strain law enforcement resources.
they get enough rest and are better prepared
for school. Disproportionate Impact: Curfews might
disproportionately impact marginalized
Prevention of Peer Pressure: A curfew can communities, contributing to social
help limit exposure to peer pressure, inequalities.
substance abuse, and other risky behaviors
that might occur during late hours. Family Dynamics: For some families,
enforcing curfews might be challenging due to
Community Order: Curfews can contribute to work schedules or other obligations.
 maintaining order and minimizing
disturbances in communities during nighttime. Youth Development: Curfews might hinder
young people's ability to develop
independence, responsibility, and decision-
making skills.

Motion: This House calls for the inclusion of climate change education in the national
curriculum.
The motion pertains to advocating for the integration of educational content related to climate
change into the official national curriculum of educational institutions. This would involve
teaching students about the science, impacts, mitigation strategies, and actions related to
climate change.

● The National Center for Science Education highlights that less than 30% of K-12 U.S.
science teachers consistently teach climate change due to various challenges.
● The National Climate Assessment states that climate change is already affecting various
aspects of society, including health, agriculture, infrastructure, and ecosystems.
● The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report
emphasizes the urgent need for global action to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-
industrial levels to avoid severe climate impacts.
Pros Cons

Awareness and Understanding: Climate Curriculum Overload: Critics argue that

change education would raise awareness and adding climate change education might lead
understanding of the causes, consequences, to an already overloaded curriculum,
and scientific aspects of climate change potentially compromising depth in other
among students. subjects.

Informed Citizens: An educated populace is
better equipped to understand the urgency of
climate action and make informed decisions
as responsible citizens.
Mitigation and Adaptation: Education can
empower students to contribute to climate
change mitigation efforts and to develop
adaptive strategies to deal with its impacts.
Behavioral Change: Climate change
education can encourage sustainable
behaviors and environmentally friendly
choices among students, contributing to a
greener society.
Interdisciplinary Learning: Integrating climate
change education can promote
Lack of Expertise: Teachers might lack the
necessary expertise to effectively teach
complex climate change concepts accurately.
Controversy and Bias: Climate change is a
politically charged topic; discussions might
lead to bias or controversy, depending on
how it's presented.
Parental Concerns: Some parents might have
concerns about the content, fearing that it
might be overly negative or influence their
children's beliefs.
Resource Constraints: Introducing climate
change education might require additional
resources for materials, teacher training, and
educational tools.
 interdisciplinary learning by connecting
science, geography, social studies, and more. Cultural Context: Climate change education
should consider local and cultural contexts to
Empowerment: Knowledge about climate ensure relevance and avoid imposing a
change can empower students to engage in Western-centric perspective.
discussions, advocate for policies, and
participate in climate-related activities. Values Conflict: Climate change education
might conflict with the beliefs of certain
Long-Term Vision: Climate change education communities, leading to opposition or
instills a sense of responsibility for the resistance.
planet's future and encourages a long-term
perspective on environmental sustainability. Age Appropriateness: Determining the
appropriate age for introducing climate
change education can be challenging due to
the complexity of the topic.

Motion: This House advocates for the expansion of vocational and technical education
options for young people.
The motion calls for the broadening of educational opportunities by increasing the availability
and access to vocational and technical education programs for young individuals. Vocational
and technical education focuses on practical skills, hands-on training, and industry-specific
knowledge to prepare students for careers in various trades, industries, and professions.

Data:
● According to the World Economic Forum, by 2030, around 15% of global job roles are
expected to be displaced due to automation and technology adoption, while 12% of new
roles will emerge in areas such as artificial intelligence, data analysis, and content
creation.
● The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that many skilled trades are experiencing
faster-than-average job growth. For example, the employment of electricians is projected
to grow by 8% from 2020 to 2030.
● A study by the International Labour Organization (ILO) highlights that well-implemented
vocational education and training programs can lead to better employment outcomes,
reduced youth unemployment, and improved labor market participation.
Pros Cons

Job Readiness: Vocational education equips Social Stigma: Vocational education might
students with practical skills and knowledge still carry a stigma as being a less prestigious
directly relevant to specific careers, option compared to traditional academic
enhancing their employability. paths.

Meeting Industry Demand: The expansion of
vocational and technical education aligns
education with the needs of industries,
helping to fill skill gaps and support economic
growth.
Limited Focus: Critics argue that vocational
education might limit students' exposure to
broader academic subjects and critical
thinking skills.

Diverse Career Paths: Offering vocational
options provides young people with a diverse
range of career paths beyond traditional
academic routes.
Reducing Unemployment: Vocational
education can reduce youth unemployment
by preparing students for in-demand jobs and
trades.
Hands-on Learning: Technical education
emphasizes hands-on learning, helping
students develop practical skills that can be
applied immediately in the workforce.
Alternative to College: Vocational education
provides an alternative to traditional college
pathways, offering a viable route to
meaningful and well-paying careers.
Entrepreneurship: Vocational education can
foster entrepreneurial skills, allowing students
to start their own businesses or become self-
employed.
Evolving Job Market: The job market is
constantly evolving; skills learned in
vocational education might become obsolete
if industries change rapidly.
Inadequate Resources: Providing quality
vocational education requires proper
infrastructure, equipment, and well-trained
instructors, which might be lacking.
Perceived Earnings: There could be a
perception that vocational careers offer lower
earning potential compared to careers that
require a traditional college degree.
Skills vs. Knowledge: Critics contend that
vocational education focuses more on
practical skills and less on broader intellectual
development.
Limited Transferability: Skills acquired
through vocational education might be highly
specialized and less transferable to other
industries.

Motion: This House believes that social media influencers should be held accountable
for promoting unrealistic beauty standards to young audiences.
The motion revolves around the question of whether individuals who are considered social
media influencers should be held responsible and answerable for endorsing or promoting
beauty standards that are unattainable or unrealistic, particularly to their young followers.

Data:
● According to a study published in the journal Body Image, exposure to idealized images
on social media can lead to body dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem, particularly
among adolescents.
● Research conducted by the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) suggests that
social media contributes to body dissatisfaction and disordered eating behaviors, with
69% of young people reporting that they feel pressure to have the "perfect" body.
● A survey by the Dove Self-Esteem Project found that 80% of girls worldwide feel
pressure to conform to beauty standards set by social media.
● A study published in JAMA Pediatrics indicates that engaging with social media
platforms for more than three hours per day is associated with a higher risk of
experiencing high levels of depressive symptoms among adolescents.
 Pros
Mental Health: Holding influencers
accountable can protect the mental health of
young audiences by reducing exposure to
content that promotes unrealistic beauty
ideals.
Positive Role Models: Accountability
encourages influencers to become positive
role models, promoting self-acceptance,
diversity, and body positivity.
Empowerment: Influencers have a unique
opportunity to empower young individuals by
promoting authentic self-expression and
confidence.
Educational Opportunities: Holding
influencers accountable can lead to
educational initiatives that raise awareness
about media manipulation and promote media
literacy among young people.
Ethical Responsibility: As public figures,
influencers have an ethical responsibility not
to contribute to harmful beauty standards that
negatively impact their audience.
Promotion of Diversity: Accountability can
encourage influencers to showcase diverse
beauty standards, reflecting a wider range of
appearances and identities.
Motion: This House supports mandatory community service for all youth as a
requirement for graduation.
The motion pertains to the debate over whether all young individuals should be required to
engage in community service as a mandatory component of their education, with successful
completion being a prerequisite for graduation from educational institutions.
Data:
Cons
Freedom of Expression: Influencers might
argue that being held accountable infringes
on their freedom to express themselves and
create content as they wish.
Subjectivity: Determining what constitutes
"unrealistic beauty standards" can be
subjective, leading to potential conflicts over
interpretation.
Personal Choice: Critics might assert that
individuals should take personal responsibility
for their own perception of beauty standards,
rather than placing the blame solely on
influencers.
Parental Guidance: Some argue that parents
and guardians should play a significant role in
guiding young people's media consumption
and helping them develop critical thinking
skills.
Impact on Creativity: Accountability might
inadvertently stifle creative expression among
influencers who fear backlash or
consequences.
Unintended Consequences: Influencers might
avoid any content related to beauty or
appearance, even if it promotes positive
ideals, due to the fear of repercussions.
Censorship Concerns: Holding influencers
accountable could raise concerns about
censorship, leading to debates over freedom
of expression and artistic representation.
 ● According to a study by the Corporation for National and Community Service, youth who
engage in community service are more likely to perform well academically, exhibit
leadership skills, and develop a strong sense of civic responsibility.
● The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health found that students who
participated in community service were more likely to have higher self-esteem, lower
levels of depression, and better mental health outcomes.
● A survey by the National Conference on Citizenship revealed that young people who
participated in community service were more likely to be engaged in voting, volunteering,
and other civic activities later in life.
● In countries like the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States, mandatory
community service or volunteering is already integrated into some education systems as
a way to foster civic engagement and character development.

Pros Cons

Civic Engagement: Mandatory community Forced Engagement: Critics argue that

service encourages young individuals to
actively participate in their communities,
fostering a sense of responsibility and
engagement.
Character Development: Participation in
community service can help young people
develop important character traits such as
empathy, compassion, and a sense of social
responsibility.
Real-World Application: Community service
provides practical experiences that
complement classroom learning and
encourage the application of theoretical
knowledge.
Social Awareness: Engaging in community
service exposes youth to social issues,
helping them gain a deeper understanding of
the challenges faced by others.
Skill Development: Community service can
facilitate the development of a wide range of
skills, including communication, teamwork,
problem-solving, and leadership.
Civic Education: Through community service,
young individuals learn about the functioning
of communities, local governance, and the
role of active citizens.
mandatory community service might lead to
insincere or reluctant participation, negating
the intended positive effects.
Time Constraints: Mandatory service might
place additional demands on students' time,
potentially affecting their academic
performance or extracurricular activities.
Lack of Choice: Forcing community service
might overlook individual circumstances,
preferences, or skills, potentially leading to
unproductive experiences.
Equity Issues: Mandatory service might
disadvantage students with disabilities or
those facing economic challenges, who might
struggle to meet the requirement.
Overburdening: Students already dealing with
heavy academic loads might find mandatory
community service overwhelming and
stressful.
Distraction from Learning: Critics suggest that
focusing on academic achievement should be
the primary goal of education, rather than
diverting attention to mandatory service.
Ethical Concerns: Making community service
mandatory could raise ethical questions about
whether genuine altruism can be achieved
Long-Term Impact: Youth who participate in through forced participation.
community service are more likely to continue
engaging in volunteerism and civic activities
as adults.