Unfortunately, the debate kicked off late as Vince Cable was stuck in traffic, and with a compensated line up as Conservative MP, The Right Honourable Alan Duncan, and former Labour MP for Glasgow, George Galloway were absent.

Alex Forzani, a third year history undergraduate, opened for the proposition by outlining the causes and consequences of the “financial tsunami”. Rachel Reeves, the current Shadow Pensions Minister and former Bank of England economist, was right to comment on Forzani’s “staggering complacency,” as he calmly delivered the apparent facts and figures. Devoid of passion or empathy he claimed that “the Government understands how difficult cuts are,” and explained that sensible cuts, such as scrapping the ‘Caribbean Board’ and ‘British Waterways’, helped to make public sector spending more efficient.    Rachel Reeves, whose early departure somewhat skewed the debate as she was unable to answer questions from the floor or respond to Cable’s claim that he could list “a whole page” of factual errors,  called for cuts “based on facts and not on Greek myths.” Reeves argued that cuts were made too far and too fast owing to media “scare mongering” by applying Greece’s very different economic situation to  Britain. She appealed to her youthful audience stressing the importance of rectifying the terrifying youth unemployment figures; 40% of dole claimants are between sixteen and twenty-four.

Matthew Sinclair, Director of the Taxpayer’s Alliance, continued the proposition’s “scare mongering,” claiming that “if you are in debt you are not free,” and thus fiscal consolidation was necessary for England to still maintain control over their own policies. He  put forward the moral argument that freedom will be obtained through cuts rather than additional taxing. He also claimed that taxing the rich would make us too reliant on them. Daniel Zeichner, the National Political Officer of Britain’s largest public sector trade union, humoured and flattered the audience’s intelligence. He said politics had interfered with economic policy because the coalition blamed Labour’s loose fiscal policy for the crisis but that it is clearly ridiculous to endow Labour with the power to cause a global economic crisis. He remarked that Cable had wrongly “sold out” of his Liberal Democrat manifesto to deliver stimulus packages.

Cable, however, pointed out that all parties’ had proposed cuts, highlighting that the debate was concerned with the nature of cuts rather than their necessity. Cable blamed greed for the current financial situation, through claiming that he placed economic practicality before ideology, skilfully circumnavigated the very issues he addressed. Cable poignantly remarked that if there was a Marxist in the room a “crisis of Capitalism” would be declared. Addressing Cable as “comrade”, Adam Booth, chair of Cambridge’s Marxism Discussion Group was a fountain of extremist and  ideological, arguments (perhaps on account of his charismatic passionate delivery) for why the 99% of British should not pay for the crisis when 1%, the bankers, have profited from artificially inflating the market with excess credit for consumption.

Perhaps aware of the controversy he was causing, Booth then rejected any points of information, remarking tersely “Sorry, I don’t have time I have to explain all the contradictions of capitalism in ten minutes.” This year’s London riots sprung to mind as Booth warned of the dangers of Capitalism when “inevitably” workers will no longer be able afford the products they make.  Booth’s audacity or ideological polemics perhaps won the opposition’s victory as a country in financial slump run by the media and Etonians will certainly provoke a passionate socialist reaction.