Page 1293 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 16 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The 1990 school closures have split this community down the middle. There is a clear political divide. There is the Follett Labor promise that those schools will be reopened and there is the mealy-mouthed Residents Rally policy which gets implemented as a Liberal Party school closure. The community has a clear choice at the next election, and it has had that choice since the Labor Party made its statement of policy; that is, a vote for the Australian Labor Party will mean that these schools can be reopened and a vote for one of the various odds and sods of parties that form the Alliance will mean that the schools will remain closed. That is a decision that ought to be before - - -
Mr Collaery: The people will not trust your party. Your party has lost its credibility.
MR CONNOLLY: Mr Collaery says that people will not trust the Labor Party. As I say, this is the man whose party has this admirable policy on school closures. What happened to the admirable policy on school closures? It disappeared into the Liberal Party agenda for the price of a ministerial car. Mr Speaker, we are quite content to be judged on the issue of trustworthiness by the people of Canberra. The Follett Labor Government promised not to close schools, and it did not. The Residents Rally promised not to close schools, and it did. We will let the people make the decision on that. Mr Speaker, we have consistently said that we will fight this decision. We have consistently said that this is a decision that, at the end of the day, is for the people of Canberra.
It was interesting yesterday that Mr Jensen declined to debate this issue on the basis that he had a conflict of interest - so the ABC told the people of Canberra - between his role as chair of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee and Executive Deputy Assisting the Chief Minister on Planning, Environment, Heritage and Leasehold Management. A public servant was left to justify this decision on morning talk-back radio, and he took some pains to point out that this was a decision initiated by the Planning Authority, not a decision directed by the Government. Well, the Chief Minister clearly said in question time that this was directed by the Government. In his final remarks this afternoon, in response to the fact that I have lodged a request for a statement of reasons for this decision under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act, he said, "I will tell Mr Connolly the reasons why we are rezoning the school; it is because it is government policy". That clears the air on this matter.
It is apparent that this is not a planning-driven decision. This is not a decision on planning constraints. That is not surprising, because when the Interim Territory Planning Authority was involved in making remarks and contributions to the Hudson report it was pretty clear that it maintains the longstanding policy of planners in the Territory in relation to the importance of neighbourhood schools.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .