Page 4896 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


MRS NOLAN (4.14): I am going to be very brief in this debate. I think we have heard several, probably nearly all, political speeches, and I am not sure that that will give the issue of the relationship between the funding of government schools and the funding of non-government schools any credibility whatsoever. I think it is important that the inquiry be held. The crucial issue, though, in relation to the motion put by Mr Humphries this afternoon, is that the Government should agree to suspend the proposed cuts to the three non-government schools, pending the outcome of the inquiry. We can look at where we go from there.

Mr Wood: You are prejudging the inquiry.

MRS NOLAN: I suggest to Mr Wood that the issue has been about not only reducing funding for those three schools but also reducing it very abruptly. They were not consulted; they were not told what was going to happen. Like all non-government schools, they have to do their planning some considerable time in advance. That has not happened in this case. They were not able to do that. They found out one or two days after the media had broached the issue that this was going to happen in the budget. It was totally inappropriate. In the view of many people, it could have been handled a lot better. I am sure that that is part of the problem.

It is an issue that has been around for some considerable time. I am the parent of two children who go to non-government schools. I am the first one to declare my interest in this issue. I am very aware of the problems that non-government schools in this Territory have been having for some considerable length of time. I have been involved in those schools for some years, and I will continue to be involved for some years to come. It is a very significant issue. The crucial part of this motion relates to suspending the funding cuts and then next year making sure that the people are advised about what is going to happen to their funding. It should not be something that is done one day and put in place on 1 January next year.

We can talk at length about the issues involved, such as categorisation. The ACT is the only State or Territory that abides by the Commonwealth guidelines, as Mr Humphries mentioned earlier. That is another issue that needs to be addressed, and there are others. I point out to Dr Kinloch that I have concerns about how wide this inquiry should go. Either it is about funding or it is about all sorts of other things. I happen to believe that the non-government schools should have as much autonomy as possible, just as I believe that the government schools should have as much autonomy as possible.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .