Page 3976 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 23 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would also like to comment briefly on some of the comments other speakers have made during this debate. The Minister for Education began by saying that this is a very serious motion. It is a very serious motion. It is being treated seriously by, I believe, all the participants in this debate. The Chief Minister - Mr Stevenson referred to this particular comment by the Chief Minister - said that Government policy is being carried out by the Minister for Education, Mr Wood. What Government policy? Certainly not the Government policy which identifies education as its highest priority. The Chief Minister also referred to necessary adjustments in the budget and said that education represented one-fifth of the size of the total budget and cannot be quarantined. Again, I ask you: How does that equate with your commitment to education being the highest priority in your administration in the ACT?
There was also a comment about the level of detail that my colleague Mr Moore had presented in terms of the information that we have received about the impact of these budget cuts. It is not up to Mr Moore. It is not up to me to come to this Assembly and to identify for you where the impact of the cuts in teaching positions will occur. That is your responsibility. That is your job. We have not been convinced, on the information that we have received from you so far, that what you are doing is the right thing to do. Mrs Carnell quite rightly referred to the Chief Minister, in her capacity as Treasurer, being equally as responsible as the Minister for Education for these teaching cuts, and moved an appropriate amendment to this motion.
Mr Connolly asked a question about whether it was absurd to spend money on education. I can assure you, Mr Connolly, that I do not think it is absurd for us to spend more money on education. You mentioned the word "absurd".
Mr Connolly: No. Withdraw that. Come on! I never said that it was absurd to spend money on education. I said that what you were saying was absurd; that what Mr Moore was saying was absurd.
MS SZUTY: Well, I was named. You could have been referring to me, Mr Connolly. I would have to take issue with what Mr Cornwell said in the debate, which is probably not surprising. Mr Cornwell is opposed to the cutting of teacher numbers and will support this motion. However, he is not necessarily opposed to education cuts. Mr Moore and I have said that we are opposed to education cuts. In particular, we are opposed to these teaching cuts. Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to reiterate that it gives me no joy to support this motion on this day. (Extension of time granted)
Thank you. Given that this debate has gone on for quite some time, I do not intend to take very long. I take no joy in supporting this motion which is before us today. However, I indicated some weeks ago that this course of action would be contemplated if the Minister for Education did not respond to the motion passed in this Assembly last month. This is what has occurred and this is why this motion is being debated today. I would like to conclude, Madam Speaker, by saying that, if the Government is concerned about the passage of this motion, all it needs to do is to change the decision that it has made on the cutting of 80 school based positions in the ACT. That is what this Assembly is waiting for in terms of the actions of the Government.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .