Page 2828 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
a sensible decision. They know that the alternatives are more damaging to the quality of education than are closures.
I refer, for example, to the sacking of teachers. Ms Follett made some reference to the staff being ignored. Staff have not been ignored. We have not sacked staff. Sacking staff is the only alternative, in a system like this, to closing schools. You either cut the infrastructure or you cut the providers of the services. That is a decision this Government was not prepared to make and that is why it is closing schools. To suggest, as members opposite suggested, that we are wasting the resources of schools that are closing is simply not true. Those resources can and will be moved across to new schools and I am confident that those people at those new schools will vigorously pursue the interests of their new schools and make sure they work as viable entities.
School Closures
MR CONNOLLY (9.57): Mr Acting Speaker, it is utter nonsense to come into this place and try to justify the Government's decision to close schools by talking about what happened in 1988 - under the Federal Government. Members of this party, both in and out of the Federal Parliament, were opposed to that decision. It was taken by the national Government by national members and not by members here. At the time a clear statement was made that the figures would justify no further closure of schools for five years, but you ignore that.
Earlier tonight, Mr Humphries said that the Opposition had a lack of understanding about what this place is about. Well, we say it is Mr Humphries who lacks understanding. He has consistently and persistently, as pointed out tonight by Ms Follett, Mr Berry and Mr Wood, refused to answer the basic questions about why he is inflicting school closures on the community. He is treating the parliament, and through it the community, with contempt.
Instead of debating these issues and getting the substance of this important matter before the community, we spend the entire evening tonight debating ministerial statements. Mr Jensen is very keen to refer to the green book and I think he is an expert. He should look at page 561 which sets out the clear practice on ministerial statements, which is that a Minister makes them and a member of the Opposition responds and occasionally another member may respond. Instead, this Government prefers every member to take up 10 or 15 minutes talking about the same issue, so as to avoid getting on to these issues of school closures - so as to avoid answering the questions that we want answered.
It is not just this Opposition that wants them answered; it is the community of Canberra that wants them answered. But
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .