Page 4892 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR KAINE: I withdraw that, Mr Speaker. It was a misinterpretation of the truth.
Mr Berry: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: It has to be withdrawn unequivocally.
MR SPEAKER: That is a qualified withdrawal, Mr Kaine. Just withdraw.
MR KAINE: If he does not like being told that what he said was not true, then I will withdraw it. But it is on the record and he knows that it is true anyway. I withdraw it.
It is interesting that it is not until Mr Humphries, with the support of the other members of the Opposition, forces upon the Government an inquiry to determine what the situation really is with our hospital beds that the Government does anything about it. They talk about it and they stand on their dignity, but they will not act until they are forced to.
Here is another case. The simple fact is that, despite Mr Wood's defence of his leader, the Chief Minister was approached by Mr Humphries eight weeks ago on this matter and she agreed that she would look into it. Mr Wood accuses us of not taking any further initiative. We were waiting for the Chief Minister to respond. All she had to do was to come back and say "In principle, we agree; just give us your terms of reference", and this would have been off the table. She did not do that. In fact, on only the last sitting day she withdrew her agreement and said, "We will not do it". This is the first sitting day on which we could put forward this proposal. We find once again that it is only when they have their backs to the wall and are forced by the opinion of this Assembly, backed by public opinion, that they are prepared to undertake such a study.
When you look at the terms of reference, how could any government that has a claim to equity reject any of the terms of reference of this inquiry? There is nothing there that could be deemed to be inequitable or interpreted as being inequitable in any way. We want an inquiry to look into the relationship between the funding levels of government and non-government schools; the planning and provision of capital resources, including debt servicing; the practicability and cost-effectiveness of greater cooperative resources sharing between government and non-government schools; and alternative options for government funding which reflect equity and facilitate the exercise of parental choice. Where in there is there anything inequitable? This Government claims to be a social justice government, but they have to be forced into doing something about it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .