Page 3948 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 23 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore, you may correct me if you wish. Despite my invitations and the way that I will facilitate any member going into a school, I do not know when you last visited a school or how frequently you do it. You can answer. If you get a right of reply, if you come back into this, you can tell me how often you have been into our schools. I can tell you that I have been into schools frequently in the last two months, since the budget, and I was well received when I was there. Mr Moore has not taken up the question of education in the public domain, and there has been ample opportunity for him to do so.
From March, from the time the ACT Government, with the Treasurer, Rosemary Follett, was examining our budget, examining the difficult times and the thrust of the $78m reduction from the Commonwealth Government, I was raising a public debate. I was doing it. In fact I think I was a little more than forthcoming. I tried to talk to the P and C Council and the Education Union, but they did not want to get their hands dirty in dealing with matters like reductions, the inevitability of reductions. They did not want to know about it; nor did Mr Moore.
I was going out publicly time after time. The media was interested; it suited my purpose. They kept asking me questions and I was remarkably open. I said in this Assembly once before that there was a very revealing front-page story in the Canberra Times. It was very open. There it was. I was spelling out the problem, and it was not hidden on a back page. It was the lead story and it was fairly detailed. Mr Moore did not join in then. He did not see a problem that he had to respond to. What better opportunity did he have than on that day? I had given notice of what was happening. He did not respond then. Why does he respond now? Well, he does not have that interest. It is not a priority of his.
Of course, he could not have responded then. He missed that debate. This is what makes me angry: While I was here in the winter, agonising over the budget, working hard day and night, scrutinising every item, searching for every avenue, putting in long, hard hours, where was Mr Moore? He was wintering in the tropics. He was on his seven-week annual sojourn, away from the rigours of Canberra's winter and away from the rigours of dealing with local politics. He comes back and wants to tell me that I have no spine, that I am neglecting education. So do not blame me for getting angry about that.
Then he addresses an assembly across the way there and says that I have slunk off to my room. Well, where has he been? So you can understand my point of view. I grind away here, doing the best that is possible, and he comes back posturing as a defender of education. I will not accept that without becoming extremely angry and outspoken about it. He has no claim as a defender of education. He has no credibility and no honour. He came back looking for an issue. I believe that he made a fool of himself on the ABC, and everything has flowed from that. It was quiet. He did not object to the budget until that day. That is what sparked it. Thanks very much, Mr Abraham. Now Mr Moore is trying to remove the egg from his face.
It gets worse, in my view. Mr Moore was here for a few weeks and then, legitimately, he went away again, to what I would see as a very important and fruitful conference. He came back, and the day he got back he moved a no-confidence motion on me. I had been grinding away doing the hard work in this place. Mr Moore is entitled to go away and he is entitled to come back and talk about what he has been doing while away, but he is not entitled to make
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .