Page 1824 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 30 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
community would like us to take. As I said before, there are social realities involved in setting priorities. We have to look at whether quarantining the education vote would ensure that the impact of our parlous financial situation fell in other social equity areas.
I want to read something into the record. It was written by a great economist, Fred Hirsch, in Social Limits to Growth, a marvellous book of the 1970s which is true today. I have had it since it was published. At page 117 of his text, he said this:
Social limits to growth, analysed in the preceding chapters are the problem - or problems - of success. The vast increase in material productivity has pushed the frontier of mass demand into terrain where there is no longer more for all. Once again, as in the pregrowth era, one man's gain is often another's loss; and both may lose from the struggle. This class of problem is at points exacerbated by the institutional mechanism of the market economy, as it has emerged under the drive of capitalist development as modified by a liberal-democratic state. But the essence of the problem has been seen to reside in a rather general influence, in the response by the economic mechanism or by political controllers to demands registered by individuals looking to their own immediate situation.
Surely that sums up this debate. The ALP and Mr Moore have chosen to get onto the band wagon on a sectional side of the debate in this society. Not once in their speeches - and I have no doubt that Mr Berry is clawing in his mind for words - did they mention the real social justice imperatives of this issue.
There is a solid debate going on in the Government. There is no split between the Rally and the Liberals on this issue. I want to put down that myth as well. Mr Humphries wrote to all the party leaders on 8 May, outlining the discussion paper the Government had approved for release and calling for comments within the ministry. That is really consultative. No little caucus rules here. We have been invited, Minister by Minister, to comment. I am happy to table that letter as an example of the effective, constructive debate. There are no splits. Those are just mythical devices that the Opposition is pushing up, hoping to get back into government. Are responses coming from Ministers? Certainly they are. I wrote on Monday to Mr Humphries, seeking his support for the ongoing success of the outside school hours care services in the ACT. (Extension of time granted)
It is all very well for the Opposition to pillory some of us at school meetings. It is tremendous to get a roll on for an unintelligible argument that Labor has had from day one - that we just continue as we are and sail the Territory into bankruptcy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .