Page 3960 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 23 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEVENSON: I have studied a bit of it. I could agree with some of the things they say. There are, however, some others that I do not agree with.
If we agree to a no-confidence motion in a Minister and that Minister does not resign, we must go further to hold the Government accountable. The obvious next action is a want of confidence in the Chief Minister, in our case. In most parliaments it would be against the government. That is not appropriate in this case. Perhaps it would not happen, what is more. Though it is a serious matter, it is not a fraud to suggest that the people of Canberra and this Assembly should not have confidence in a Minister who has already been directed by a motion of this house, by this ACT parliament, to not go down that line. Unfortunately, that was ignored. This was a direction. It was not an ask; it was a direction. The majority of the members in this parliament gave that direction and it was ignored. So the motion is not a fraud by any means, and the members are duly concerned that the will of this Assembly, the will of this parliament, strongly supported by the will of people in Canberra, is heard.
I believe that a censure motion, taking into account what members have said in this Assembly, will have a very similar effect. It will give the Government the indication that we mean business and that we will not accept teacher positions being cut. I seek leave to move the amendment circulated in my name which would delete the words "a lack of confidence" and insert the word "censure".
Leave granted.
MR STEVENSON: Thank you, members. I move:
Omit "a lack of confidence", substitute "censure".
I make the point again on behalf of all members and the vast majority of people in Canberra: It is not acceptable to cut teaching positions. The mere fact of keeping teaching positions at a current level can work as a cut in a growing community. When you actually say that they are going to be cut, that is not acceptable. The community will not stand for it and something has to be done about it.
MR CORNWELL (4.30): Madam Speaker, I would like to bring this debate back to the motion moved by Mr Moore and the amendment just moved by Mr Stevenson. We are talking about proposed cuts to teacher positions. Mr Connolly went on at great length about the need for across-the-board cuts. He accused this side of the house of being populists. Well, I do not resile from that. I do not resile from being populist. Certainly, I do not resile from the need for cuts. The issue we are debating, however, is teacher cuts in education. We have no objection, Chief Minister, if you feel the need to make cuts in education, but we are opposed to you cutting teacher numbers. So are the majority of parents. So are the majority of teachers and so are the majority of students in the government school system, including 200 students from Narrabundah whom Mr Connolly called Trotskyists. I can assure you that they are not, but I shall be only too pleased to pass your views forward to those students at Narrabundah College.
We are in a situation here where it appears to me that the Government really does not know what it is doing. We have had conflicting remarks even today in this debate from Government members. For example, Ms Follett, in her comments, said that the neighbourhood school concept would be protected. Well, at page 221 of the Estimates Committee transcript we have the Minister for Education saying:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .