Page 3631 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 20 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Connolly: So you are opposed to Lanyon High School? The kids at Lanyon should not have their school; is that right?
MR HUMPHRIES: My party is clear in this respect. We do not believe that we can, in all conscience, cut classroom teaching when there are savings to be made in the area of public infrastructure - and I am not talking about new buildings. Of course Lanyon High School should go ahead, Mr Connolly.
Madam Speaker, I think that the link between the distance a child travels to school and the quality of education that child obtains in that school has not been established in this debate. My view is that we should continue to ask for, and demand, some honesty from the education sector about what they believe is the better option. I think any honest parent in this debate, if asked the question, "What would you rather see cut?", would in all honesty have to say that they would rather preserve the quality of classroom teaching. That would have to be the honest answer to give.
Mr Wood maintains that we are not actually talking about cutting classroom quality because we can maintain teacher numbers despite these 80 positions being cut. His answer to the question that was put to him in another place was that these cuts could be sustained entirely through cuts in administrative positions.
Mr Wood: No, I did not say that.
MR HUMPHRIES: You did say that.
Mr Wood: No.
MR HUMPHRIES: You did say that. You said that you believed that there was nothing inevitable about these cuts affecting any teachers at all.
Mr Wood: Affecting classes, Mr Humphries.
MR HUMPHRIES: Classroom teaching is what we are talking about.
Mr Wood: No; I am talking about classes.
MR HUMPHRIES: No. You said "teacher numbers", Mr Wood. If you examine the record you will see that that is the case. Of course, that comment was utter garbage. There is no way that 80 positions can be taken from schools, particularly when schools themselves are to make the decision about where those cuts come from, and that schools can at the same time sustain classroom teacher numbers at the present levels. They cannot do so.
Is this important? Is it important to retain classroom teacher numbers? The answer, of course, is yes; and I cite as my authority for that proposition the Minister for Education himself, who in releasing the ALP policy document on education in February 1989 said - this is a promise:
The size of classes at all levels is an important determinant of the quality of education. An ALP Government will aim to reduce class size, particularly in primary schools.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .