Page 3232 - Week 10 - Thursday, 16 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The apparent retention rate in ACT government schools to Year 12 in 1991 was 115 per cent compared with a national average of 67 per cent ... Some 60-65 per cent in the difference in costs between the ACT system and those of the rest of Australia is attributable to the higher proportion of students in the post-compulsory years of schooling.
There is no slacking off, I suggest, in the non-core subjects in that area. I concede that there may be some opportunity within the colleges to rationalise and consolidate small classes. I have no problem with that. I do not think anybody has any problem with it. In fact, it is happening in some of the colleges. But the reality is that the high retention rate that we enjoy here in the ACT - and we would certainly not wish to see it cut back in any way - does involve increased costs.
I would like to go further in addressing this suggestion that all the cuts are going to be in the colleges. It is not realistic to suggest that; nor, I suggest to you, is it possible. I have said that it is not realistic because of the higher retention rates, but just pause for a moment and consider whether it is possible or not. There are nine colleges. If you are going to take the 80 teachers out of those colleges, each college is going to lose 8.8 teachers - almost nine teachers per college. That is impossible. It would represent an 11 to 13 per cent drop in the number of teachers at each college, and it is patently absurd.
The truth is, of course, that it will not happen. The cuts will apply across the board, across all three sectors of education. They have been calculated as follows: 3.8 positions at a college, two positions at each high school and 10 per cent of a teacher at a small primary school. As I prefer to calculate them, they will represent 0.84 per cent of a teacher per school. Effectively, one teacher will be lost from every government school in the ACT. Well might Rosemary Richards, the president of the Australian Education Union, ACT branch, state:
The Government has failed to demonstrate a commitment to public education.
Mr De Domenico: Is she a member of the Liberal Party?
MR CORNWELL: She is certainly not. Well may she say that the Follett Labor Government has failed to demonstrate a commitment to ACT public education. Where, therefore, does Mr Wood's comment stand? I quote again:
Most of the reduction will be achieved through economies in operating costs which will not affect the level of service to schools ...
Of course the reductions are going to have an effect. The effect will be that the overall provision of services will be reduced. I mentioned the problem of staffing new schools, such as Conder, coming on line next year. What about new initiatives such as reading recovery? According to The Literacy Challenge, a report by a Commonwealth committee, we are dealing with only 11 per cent of the reading recovery needs of an estimated 19 per cent of people in our school system. Do you believe that cutting 80 teachers out of the government system is going to assist in making up that difference between the 11 per cent being treated now and the 19 per cent who need assistance? I think not.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .