Page 3401 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 13 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Wood: Yes, we know all that.
MS SZUTY: I am going through it. Taking into account the things unique to the system which may impact on its running costs, the commission determines the level of "inefficiency". Therefore, the ACT's high retention rates, which were once allowed for in calculating the relative "inefficiency" of the ACT schooling system, are now not to be taken into account, and our "inefficiency" in the education sector is increased. Likewise, the special costs incurred by the ACT in educating the children of diplomats has also not been taken into account in the 1993-94 report - an issue that Mr Cornwell has raised in this Assembly.
It appears that the Grants Commission really decided to use a standard measure for the States and Territories, but I have two concerns about this. The first is that the lowest common denominator seems to have been adopted as the standard. My second and overall concern remains that the ACT Government has decided to use the Grants Commission report as a rationale for its budget decisions. As I stated earlier, the commission itself does not pretend to dictate to governments how they spend their revenue; decisions are in the hands of the ACT Government.
I should say that I do not agree either with the Liberals' stated approach to cutting education spending - that is, sacrificing bricks and mortar. These structures, the school buildings of Canberra, are vital and energetic parts of the local community which enrich the educational life of students by allowing them to study in the community in which they live. Further, the buildings and grounds are utilised by community groups and individuals who appreciate the green space and facilities they provide. The Canberra community has made its views on school closures very clear - views that led to the promise by the current Government not to close schools in this term. However, with the reductions in staff put forward in the 1993-94 budget and the projected savings of the budget papers forward estimates, I am not confident that the community has had its voice heard. I expect that the fight to maintain our school system and to enhance the learning opportunities for our young people will continue for some time.
This brings me to what I see as the need to strategically plan for education into the future. The ACT Government needs to decide how it will fund public schooling in the future and to make this information available to the wider ACT community. As I have mentioned previously, there is much energy and commitment in the school sector - including teachers, their union, principals associations, parents and citizens associations and school boards, who I am sure would commit themselves willingly to participate in such a task. The Government also needs to recognise the value to the community in investing in education. One of the difficulties with the current debate about education is that no-one wants to decide whether we see it as an asset or investment or as expenditure. In some forums we have education seen as the saviour of our society, the way to a bright and prosperous future. Yet in much of the research which is seemingly finding its way to government it is seen as pure expenditure, with no consideration being given to the desired outcome. I will argue, and Mr Moore will argue, that public education is an asset and an investment which needs more resourcing and not less.
I feel that it is important to get this into perspective. The ACT Government has defended the need to spend large amounts of money maintaining the ACT's road system because it was a high-quality asset at the time self-government was granted to the Territory. Indeed, the Government can see roads as capital assets
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .