Page 2618 - Week 12 - Thursday, 16 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: You obviously were not listening to her, Bernard.
MR COLLAERY: The fact is, Mr Speaker, that we have seen Mr Berry and Mrs Grassby speak very trenchantly on some recent issues affecting immigration and refugees. They have been emotive remarks that we support in principle, but the language, the rhetoric and the timing of them make us in the Rally ranks, at least, wonder whether they are really genuine comments.
We know that Mr Berry was at the Soviet Embassy recently. I have witnessed how the Soviet Government endlessly rakes over the coals of the Holocaust for its own reasons. I just had that funny feeling that here I am again hearing this timed statement. If you are genuine about the Holocaust I will accept it. I do not know; I have not passed judgment. But I do not think we need to start, around Soviet national day, with the same statements; we heard them again.
Julian Disney of ACOSS is a voice in the wilderness for the Hawke Government. He has never received proper recognition. I believe that the Hawke Government, in its last few months, should listen to him and see what it can do now about the poor in the community.
DR KINLOCH (11.20): On a personal note, all three members of the Residents Rally have offspring now in tertiary training, so we have a very keen interest in that part of the coalition package which deals with that area. I have spent many, many years involved with this area of tertiary education, especially in the time I was dean of students. It is a matter of very great worry and concern, of course, to students.
At the moment we have this higher education levy under the present Government. I have always had great difficulties with that. The levy looks like a good idea. In accountancy terms and budget terms maybe it could be seen as a good idea, but it begins to impact on young graduates when they are beginning to earn their first reasonable pay packets. I have always thought of that as an unfortunate way to go, and I would much prefer the form of tertiary fees suggested in the coalition tax package.
I also have some criticisms of that package, however. There are strong arguments for such straight fees. Enrolments in universities cease to be shadowy. In the past with no fees there were many so-called students who were on the rolls for reasons other than their education. I also think the present system takes care of that. Having straight fees obviously also takes care of it because usually it is parents who pay.
The coalition amount of $1,200, I think, is relatively moderate and is paid straight up-front. If anything, I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .