ANU Easters 2027 Bid Q&A - Responses

	A	B	C	D
1	Theme	What is your question?	Responding Team	Response

2	Accommodation	Given the large proportion of novice debaters who are younger university students and therefore live in on-campus housing, a substantial share of ANU's contingent would otherwise be required to pay for accommodation they neither need nor use, while continuing to pay for their existing housing. Unlike past tournaments in cities like Sydney or Melbourne—where centralised accommodation can be more convenient for some participants—ANU residents already have housing that is both paid for and closer to all debate venues, meaning the standard model would impose a clear and unnecessary financial and logistical disadvantage. Will a discounted “no accommodation” registration option be offered for ANU students who already live on campus?	Org Comm	Unfortunately, as per previous years, the tournament accommodation could only be secured at such a competitive and cheaper rate because we secured large group bookings. Were the numbers to decrease, we would lose the ability to use these discounts, and the cost for Easters would rise for everyone. These bookings and prices are also so good because they are confirmed a long way out from the tournament - whereas if we offered a discounted 'no accommodation' option, we would not be able to confirm numbers until very close to the tournament, and would lose our discounted group rates. So, unfortunately, like has been the case when this has been discussed for previous Easters, we also will not be able to offer a 'no accommodation' rego option. If people think it would be better/easier during the tournament for them to remain at college or their house instead of checking into the hostel, we have no problem with that.
3	Accommodation	How will accommodation be allocated between participants given that two different options are being used (The Little Drifter and the Canberra Accommodation Centre), which differ significantly in distance from campus? In particular, what criteria will be used to determine which participants are assigned to each location, and how will the organising committee ensure that this process is fair and transparent, given that one option is notably less convenient and this split-accommodation model has not typically been used in previous tournaments?	Org Comm	Having two accommodation venues is unideal, but was made to ensure that the cost of the tournament was kept low. We have booked out the entirety of Little Drifter, which does not fit the entire tournament. The Canberra Accommodation Centre (Old Fenner Hall) would be big enough for the whole tournament, although it would be substantially more expensive to host everyone there. To be clear, we think both are convenient and have their own pros and cons. Little Drifter is a ~15-minute walk to ANU, while Old Fenner is a 5-to-10-minute Light Rail (depending on wait) and 10-minute walk, or alternatively a 30-minute walk. Old Fenner is right next to the Break Night venue (literally a 1-minute walk), while Little Drifter is a 5-minute walk and 5-to-10-minute Light Rail. Old Fenner has twin-share rooms, while Little Drifter has larger sharing rooms. Noting that the majority of the tournament will be at Little Drifter, we are very cognisant of the effect that the split could have. Some senior members of the circuit and our Bid Advisors have already expressed how this could potentially isolate certain contingents, so we are definitely aware of this concern. Our current decision-making process is as follows (in order of prioritisation): 1) Adhering to any accessibility requirements; 2) Contingent Sizes - we need to put the precisely correct numbers of people in each accommodation, without splitting contingents 3) Contingents' preferences - we'll look to honour as many preferences expressed by contingents as is possible. We will also reach out to those with experience with split accommodations (e.g. organisers of previous WUDCs), to see if they have any wisdom regarding making such designations.
4	Bid Staff	Could the organising committee outline the process and criteria used to appoint the Co-Chief Equity Director for this tournament? Given the significantly larger scale and intensity of Easters compared to smaller competitions (e.g. week-long duration, substantially higher participant numbers, and a greater volume and complexity of equity matters), it would be helpful to understand what level and type of experience is considered appropriate for such a role. Additionally, as this is an internally appointed position rather than one subject to broader community input (e.g. nominations or character references), how does the committee ensure that appointments to senior equity roles are sufficiently vetted and reflect community confidence?	Org Comm	There were a number of factors we considered for choosing our whole bid team. Some of the factors included: past relevant experience, diversity (WGM, POC, institutional, state), contributions to institutions and the circuit at-large (both in past experience and future intentions). With this in mind, we built an Easter bid that we think is both eminently qualified and representative of the circuit. All candidates were vetted based on advice from our formal bid advisors, discussions with those who gave us informal advice, and other conversations with people on the circuit. We believe all appointed candidates have the requisite experience for their roles and all bring something different, both in their experience and perspectives. Yani and Janneke are two people who are both experienced with Equity matters, whose character was strongly endorsed by those whom we spoke to about them, and who will contribute invaluably to the planning, organisation, and execution of an Easters that is as safe, fair, and accessible as possible. We are incredibly confident in their ability to select and appoint Equity Officer/s and deliver another Easters that is safe and equitable
5	Budget	Could the organising committee explain how the registration fee of $500 was set relative to the estimated breakeven cost per participant ($486.67), and what considerations informed the resulting surplus (approximately $3,900)? In particular, how does the committee balance (i) ensuring adequate funding for tournament quality and welfare (including food provision and equity support), against (ii) avoiding overcharging participants, especially given that accommodation and operating costs in Canberra are generally lower than in major cities like Sydney or Melbourne? This question is also informed by concerns raised at previous tournaments (e.g. Sydney Easters), where insufficient provisioning created welfare issues. How does the committee ensure that higher registration fees translate into improved participant experience rather than simply increased surplus?	Org Comm	Around 2 days before the bid was published, one of our accommodation providers agreed to give us a substantially lower price than we had initially thought. Thus, the costs to run the tournament went down greatly at the last minute. There was serious concern from our bid advisors before this reduction that our tournament was operating on incredibly tight margins - and that consequently, the rego fee should be increased to increase the margins the bid operates on. The present budget gives us the confidence that the tournament can run effectively - and that we can hopefully keep rego at $500, even if fewer than 75 teams register. We would also note that prices for food, housing, and transport in Canberra tend to be similar to cities like Sydney or Melbourne. It is worth noting that a $500 registration fee is a ~1% increase from 2026 (while inflation remains higher than that), and this $500 fee roughly tracks the inflation rate based on the proposed $390 fee for the ANU Easters 2020 Bid. This is despite our 2027 planning being for a tournament that is ~25% smaller than 2019, which had lower per-person costs due to the huge size of pre-COVID Easters. Regarding sufficient food provision, our cost estimates are informed by our previous experience with running ANU ABPDC 2025, where food was frequently leftover after socials and meals; our philosophy at ABPDC was to over-cater rather than under-cater, which we bring with us into the Easters bid. Our budget provides breakfasts, lunches and afternoon teas every day, dinners on N1 and 2, plus a 2-course sit-down meal on Break Night. We agree that this is important for welfare issues when alcohol is provided, which is why we will consult the Sydney Easters equity team for advice on ensuring participant welfare. Regarding accommodation in Canberra, ANU actually held off bidding for Easters for quite a while due to a lack of available providers and concerns about the costs of hosting at one of the very few options. Noting we've booked out all of the only hostel in the Canberra CBD, Lauren has done a fantastic job negotiating prices with both providers, which has allowed us to provide such solid budget lines for food, socials, IAs, and bar tabs. Finally, surplus for Easters is never retained by any society; rather, it is rolled over to be used for future editions. We have absolutely no interest in profiting off ANU Easters - there are no payments to the Convenors or the ANU Debating Society. We understand that it is a norm that Easters operates on about a $2k–$5k "profit" (rollover).
6	Motions	Sydney Easters was given guidance to avoid sensitive issues as an adjcore — will ANU Easters operate under similar constraints?	Org Comm & Adj Core	We are confident this will not be a concern. We understand that the request in 2026 came from the USU. Our bid is not as closely associated with the ANU Students' Association (as the closest equivalent org), so we don't think this will be an issue they could raise with us. No event we have run as an affiliated club has attracted such a concern.
7	Misc	tbc i think all tournaments have been convened excellently the past two years. I will say however the merch game has dropped off since Queensland Easters (where a tote bad, stickers, and a nice hard plastic lanyard was printed) — these have been cool momentors throughout the years would be nice to bring back some good merch!	Org Comm	We agree that merch is a really cool thing to have and we have budgeted approximately $2000. This definitely includes things like lanyards and stickers! We are hopeful that we can also provide tote bags within this amount, so that everyone gets to take home a memento of ANU Easters.
8	Misc	There were some issues with the availability of bathrooms at anu abpdc - many were locked. Will there be more bathrooms at Easter’s? Great bid!!	Org Comm	The bathroom issue was mostly with ABPDC operating over a long weekend. Because Easters is across 4 weekdays, the bathrooms will all be unlocked. There will be available bathrooms in 3/4 corners of the quadrangle we plan to use for debate rooms, on all levels of the other building for debate rooms, and on all levels of the briefing hall building.
9	Misc	How can ANU students get involved in helping to run the tournament?	Org Comm	Once we are ratified and get the ball rolling on Easters, there will be plenty of opportunities for ANU students to help! There will be plenty of ways you can help us out both before the tournament and also during the week (even if you are simultaneously participating). Easters takes a village and keen ANU members can get involved in making sure visitors have the best time in the most amazing place! If organising tournaments is something you're interested in, we encourage you to apply for Equity, Tab, and DCA opportunities once these become available.
10	Misc	Jade is so cool :)	Whole Bid minus Jade	We agree! :)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100