Page 4902 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The terms of reference we have before us are entirely appropriate. No-one has taken issue with them in any serious way. They are important and touch on the meat of this issue. There was a suggestion from my friends in the Residents Rally that there is a danger in some of these terms of reference. I am not sure quite what they are getting at. These issues were raised with me and Dr Kinloch in a discussion on the appropriate course for this matter, and I do not recall any concerns being raised then - or at least none that were not resolved - about the way in which the terms of reference should be worded. So, I am not clear what the point is.
Mr Connolly: You cannot even agree amongst yourselves. You keep changing the grounds.
MR HUMPHRIES: We will have agreement on this motion, Mr Connolly; do not worry. We have a motion that covers the issues appropriately. It will lead to an inquiry, if the Government takes it up, which will get to the heart of the issue, and that is the equity or non-equity in non-government school funding over the last few years. Our consultation with the non-government school community, which stands in stark contrast to the lack of consultation by this Government on that question, will lead us to a satisfactory outcome.
Finally, let me say that the ALP Opposition said during the debate on school closures last year that this was a contentious issue. They said at the time that the school closures debate was dividing our community. I believe that that was the expression they used last year in the school closures debate. What has the Government done in this debate if not divide the community? Is that not what it has achieved by this debate? Is not that divisiveness exactly the product of this debate? Is that not the intended consequence of this debate? Was that not exactly what this Government wanted? It wanted to be seen to be taking on the "rich schools" but not the "poor schools", so-called. That was its object in this exercise, and it was a callous, calculated and dishonourable thing to do.
This Government stands condemned for that course of action. I believe that this inquiry, if it is properly conducted under terms of reference similar to these, will produce a message such as that. I commend this motion to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .