Page 4151 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The second point is that the Chief Minister, in ensuring that education is not given the highest priority, said that education cannot be quarantined. Education expenditure represents a certain percentage of the budget, and of course here in the ACT and almost everywhere else in Australia it has suffered cut after cut after cut. When the teachers went out on strike to express their dissatisfaction with this, they did not go out on strike for any benefit to themselves. That contrasts greatly with the greed that we see from the VMOs at the moment. By going out on strike they are putting people's health at risk purely for their own selfish interests. Not so the teachers. They went out on strike and lost money. They did that on behalf of the students because they recognised that these cuts were going to have a significant impact on the students. They realised what was going to happen.
It was fair enough for us to ask the Minister for Education in the estimates process, "Where are these cuts going to be made? What is going to be the impact?". The Chief Minister earlier said, "It is going to be fair; it is going to be equitable; it is going to be sustainable". But the truth is that they do not know that. They still do not know where the cuts are coming from, other than that they are coming from schools. The evidence presented here on Tuesday makes it very clear that the areas from which the cuts are coming call into question Labor's commitment to social justice. The cuts are coming from areas such as languages other than English; they are coming from learning areas; they are coming from career advisory areas. It is the areas in which those who are least likely to enjoy school, particularly high school, are having the most difficulty that are being cut. The academic kids will manage, even in very big schools. Many of us sitting here had very big classes and we managed.
Mr Cornwell: But not in supplementation, though, Mr Moore.
MR MOORE: But we managed. But what was happening to the rest of the kids who were not managing? Many of them are still illiterate. You have all seen the illiteracy figures in Australia. They are something that shocks all of us. The Chief Minister has been saying to us that there has been the widest possible consultation on these cuts. How was it achieved? She pointed to the Liberals and said, "You just said that you were going to cut schools and then you started the consultation process". What is the difference? You cut teachers and then you start the consultation process. What is the difference in terms of the process? There has been no consultation at all, and it is a great shame on you.
This Minister could have said to this house, to the Estimates Committee or to the public, "We are going to make cuts. They are going to be in these areas, in these schools, and therefore there will not be a problem". Then we would have been able to say, "Okay. We can look at this issue and we can see why it is that you have been able to get efficiencies within education". My argument would be that if you can sustain efficiencies in education, as indeed the Auditor-General suggests, then that should be of great benefit to the students. That is a way in which we can improve the education system, not by counting beans, changing dollars and saving some money in the overall budget by cutting education yet again. And it has not stopped. Look at what we are expecting to see over the next two years - another 80 teachers or the equivalent and, after that, another 60 to 80 teachers or the equivalent. Since when have Labor managed to show that they put a high priority on education? They have not. It is a pretence.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .