Page 4145 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
ACT administration. It is a very modest target; it is an achievable target; and it is a target which will maintain the quality of the service that is being delivered to the community, unlike the Liberals' agenda of reducing the community's resources by 25 per cent.
Where the Liberals have not been totally honest, of course, is in acknowledging that if you close 25 schools you must reduce teacher numbers. Madam Speaker, why, if you had 25 fewer schools, would you have 25 principals who were not principals of schools? They are all school based positions.
Mr Humphries: They are not teachers.
MS FOLLETT: They are not plumbers. Why would you have 25 assistant principals? Madam Speaker, I think we are seeing a demonstration of just what I say - a disingenuous approach by the Liberals to this question. You would undoubtedly lose 25 principals' positions, school based positions. You would undoubtedly lose probably 25 assistant principals' positions. You may lose janitors; you may lose schools assistants; and you may lose all of the other school based positions. My view is that if you close 25 schools you will easily be wiping out 80 school based positions, at the same time reducing the community's school resources by 25 per cent.
Madam Speaker, I reject the Liberals' approach to education. The people of Victoria are facing incredible hardship under a Liberal government in that State. They are seeing over 200 schools close in their community. Madam Speaker, I would never countenance that kind of approach for this Territory, because people here place a high priority on education and on the neighbourhood school system. It is an inherent part of Canberra that children have a school that is close to home, that they identify with and that builds a sense of community, not just for the children but for the people who live there as well - for the shopkeepers and for the residents and so on. Madam Speaker, I totally reject the Liberals' approach.
What I believe is achievable and is a responsible approach is the kind of modest savings that we are looking at today. These savings are consistent with what is required across other program areas and they represent, as I say, only around a 2 per cent efficiency saving for this area. As I have said before, spending on education services is about a fifth of the Territory's overall budget. When you are looking at a program of that size you simply cannot quarantine it from the savings that are necessary in the light of the dramatically reduced funding that we have had from the Federal Government; nor can you do it in the light of the certain knowledge that our funding will reduce further over the coming years. Members know that. It is irresponsible simply to ignore that fact. It is a known fact.
Madam Speaker, the savings that have been developed have been developed on the basis of having a minimum impact on classroom teaching services, and we have heard that from the Minister. In fact, over half of these savings are to be achieved from non-school based services within education. The savings also differentiate between the various school sectors, and I believe that that ensures that these savings are fair, that they are equitable and that they are sustainable.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .