Page 729 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 24 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Anybody who goes out to the Weetangera Primary School and sees the enormous support that it has within the community would, I believe, consider the then Minister to have departed from his senses in making a recommendation like that. Anybody who knew about the cultural program, the sporting program, and in particular the hearing impaired program that is conducted at Weetangera school would consider this former Minister to have been lacking in all compassion and lacking in any vestige of commonsense in trying to close that school. That is how flexible he was.
This motion that has come before us today is the height of hypocrisy. It is an attempt at doublespeak. Members may also recall, to their horror, a statement by Mr Humphries when he was Minister for Education that in an ideal world there would be no need for public schooling. This is the true colour, Madam Speaker, of the members opposite. They have been opposed to government schooling all along. When they were given the chance in government their action in relation to government schooling was completely unilateral. It was based purely and simply on ideology and on what they regarded as budgetary imperatives. They had no regard whatsoever for the educational needs of the children who are attending those schools; they had no regard whatsoever for the community needs of the area surrounding those schools. Their record on public education in the ACT is an absolute disgrace and they paid a very high price for it. I am sure that members will be aware that it was the Liberal stand on schools which was their ultimate undoing. Now we see them trying to pull the wool over this Assembly's eyes and over the community's eyes in regard to their stand on schools. It is an absolute nonsense, Madam Speaker.
On this side of the house we will oppose their motion, for the absolute hypocrisy that is contained in it. Mr Humphries and his colleagues may have a short memory but we on this side do not. We recall all too clearly what their agenda was on public education, and flexibility had nothing to do with it.
MR LAMONT (11.38): Briefly, before the debate is closed, I suppose that this really sums up the entire debate that has been had this morning. The hypocrisy, particularly from the former Minister - I quote from Hansard of 24 November 1992 - - -
Mr Humphries: Madam Speaker, has not "hypocrisy", attributable to a member, been ruled unparliamentary in the past?
MADAM SPEAKER: I believe that it has, Mr Lamont.
MR LAMONT: I withdraw that, Madam Speaker. I refer to the different standards that he now adopts. I quote from Hansard of 24 November 1992, when Mr Humphries said:
Well, I am honest now that I am out of government.
I think that ends this debate, Madam Speaker.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .