Page 4376 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 21 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Minister talks about one school or another being 6 per cent or 8 per cent above the average cost for the system, if there is $100,000 or so, it makes a significant difference to that school. When the eight or nine schools were listed here and costs attached to it, it was a damning piece of evidence. Yet it was wrong. So, for that reason, if no other, the case against Lyons should be thrown over.
Lyons also showed the case for establishing a decent rental policy. I think it is a criticism of all previous administrations that we have not done more in the way of demanding adequate rents from non-community bodies that may occupy our schools. I think this debate has been beneficial if for no other reason than that it has shown that we can do a great deal more for rents. That the Commonwealth body can rent at a net loss to the ACT Government a good wing of a school is really a nonsense. At least I think that will be stopped from now on. That is also, of course, the case with Hackett where we actually lose on the rent that is charged because of the money that we contribute to heating, to cleaning, to maintenance and even to watering of the neighbouring ovals. Frances Perkins, whose advice many people in this community accept, points out - - -
Mr Jensen: Not Hudson.
MR WOOD: I know that you do not and I know that Mr Hudson did not in every respect. She points out that, of all the decisions, Lyons is the one that will actually cost the Government money over the years. As circumstances require, when you have to reassess the future of Lyons, when they are still in their own school next year, I think you would do well to go back and look at this whole range of factors and make the sensible decision to keep Lyons school open.
I can make arguments as strong for Hackett school, for Cook school and for Holder primary and high schools; but I am aware of the time. I want this debate to be concluded today, so I will stop at that point. I simply note, in closing, that so much has been shown to be wrong in this debate and it is still wrong to close these good schools. Do not close them. Keep them open. The whole aim that you established when you set out on this exercise now has been demolished, so let us complete the exercise and keep all these fine schools open.
MR HUMPHRIES (Minister for Health, Education and the Arts) (11.48): Mr Speaker, once again we get to the treadmill, talking about these issues as if nothing has happened in the last two or three months in that area. If I were the Labor Party I would be embarrassed about some of the things in the Hudson report and I would ignore them as well.
The fact is that it is impossible to rely on this document to any extent unless you acknowledge some very salient features of the report. Those salient features are that there are substantial sums of money to be saved through the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .