Page 4152 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We are all seeking a high quality of education within the government system. We have had a system that we can be proud of. That does not mean to say that there are not efficiencies that can be made. Of course, no matter how well we do something, we can all look to see how we can improve on what we are doing and what we are delivering. You cannot do it by cutting teachers. The inevitable result - and it shows very clearly in the evidence presented here on Tuesday - is going to be an increase in class sizes. Such are the ramifications of not only this cut this year but the cuts that you propose for next year and the year after - and who knows about the years after that?
How can we maintain a quality system, how can we run the best education system in Australia, how can we be the smartest Territory, how can we be the smartest jurisdiction, if we keep cutting education back? What has happened to your sense of social justice? The trouble is that you have been convinced by Treasury officials and the Treasurer that you cannot quarantine education. Why are you letting the Grants Commission set your priorities?
Mr Connolly: Because they give us the money.
MR MOORE: Mr Connolly interjects, "Because they give us the money". Yes, they give us the money, but they do not tell us how to spend it. You have that choice. If you were really interested in priorities you would be starting to make some changes. We have not seen a major change in emphasis from the first budget in 1989, which was based on the budget of the previous year done under the Federal Government and public servants. We have not seen you set your priorities and live by the priorities you told the people of Canberra when you went to the election. Your priorities were clearly set out. They were clearly in favour of education, as indeed were the priorities of Ms Szuty and me. Basically, the truth of the matter is that you are reneging. With this budget you are reneging on that priority, and you are now caught up in the bureaucratic advice so much that you cannot set your own priorities; you are doing what you are told. It is time that you did set your priorities, and it is time that we saw a much more significant and a much better approach to education.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (12.14): Madam Speaker, the Government is under assault this morning on two fronts. One is easily disposed of because it is essentially humbug. The Liberal Party now stand up and purport to be the champions of public education, saying, "We are attacking you, Labor Government. We would do wonderful things for the public education system". Their record in office stands. As the Chief Minister indicated, they attempted to shut down 25 schools and destroy the neighbourhood school concept. Mr Moore knows that well because he played a prominent part in that debate. Madam Speaker, you only have to look at the way the Liberal Party deals with public education whenever they manage to get themselves into office in any jurisdiction in Australia to see the humbug in what the Liberal Party are saying. It did occur to me, when I saw Mr Cornwell haranguing the students at a public education rally the other day and purporting to be the champion of public education, that if any of the students actually believed what Mr Cornwell was saying it would indicate that our public education system is fundamentally failing. I am sure that they did not.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .