Page 782 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 24 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am pleased to note, therefore, that the importance of reading recovery has been recognised in the ACT and that more teachers - nine in 1992, as reported, and another eight this year, 1993 - are being trained for this special needs program. I might add that, following the tabling of "The Literacy Challenge", I suggested that another initiative might be to try to obtain volunteers to assist in this reading recovery program. One of the obvious places to tap into, Minister, would be retired teachers. I do not know whether you are looking at that; you might care to do so if you are not.
I also welcome the attention given to the learning assistance program in high schools, which is mentioned at page 32 and again at page 35 of the annual report. While welcoming this program and recognising that there always will be a need for learning assistance in high schools, I believe, going back to the reading recovery program, that the primary level of education is essential because it can and will help minimise learning assistance needs at the next tier of education. Unfortunately, funds to address this basic, essential requirement to assist some of the 62,000 students within our dual system will simply not be available unless the Government addresses the thorny question of surplus spaces and, inevitably, surplus schools within the system.
We have a couple of brief, almost coy, references in the annual report to Cook and Lyons primary schools - elite schools by any standards in the ACT government school system. Despite their expectations of increased patronage to a total of about 185 pupils each this year, 1993 - the census figures for this year are not yet available - the fact remains that Gordon and Conder primaries now are being built for some 750 pupils. One must wonder whether the people in those areas of Tuggeranong would have had to bear such high peak enrolments of 750 pupils if the Government had not given in to the selfish, strident demands of the Cook and Lyons parents, with the extra costs the reopening of these schools necessarily entailed; and let there be no doubt that there were extra costs.
This Assembly last year debated a censure motion which suggested that, if the real figures of the per pupil cost of reopening these two privileged schools were calculated, it would have been over $7,000 per pupil at opening time, on one estimation. It was certainly calculated on at least an additional $500 per pupil, and that $500 extra per pupil for Cook and Lyons came out of some other government school's budget. Let us make no mistake about that.
I do not want to canvass that debate any further, but I would like to draw attention to this ACT Labor Government's fundamental mistake in its decision not to address the question of school closures at all within this, hopefully, its last three-year term of office. As you would be aware, this morning we debated at some length the question of Griffith Primary, which finally closed with some 34 pupils. The school clearly was not educationally viable, yet the Government stubbornly refused to accept the reality and was prepared to deny these 34 students, or the students of all other schools in the government system, because that really is the stark choice, the resources required for an acceptable education. Fortunately, the school did close, but it was no thanks to this Labor Government.
With over 10,000 surplus spaces, and that is a 1992 figure, the Government simply cannot continue to ignore the crippling costs of maintaining unviable schools, despite its attempts to fill the empty spaces with non-school tenants. This is quite remarkable. Lest anyone doubt my accusations, let me refer them to page 83 of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .