Page 4154 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Again, the rhetoric overtakes the reality. Mr De Domenico was getting terribly agitated and excited about sacking 80 teachers. Madam Speaker, no teacher will be sacked. Nobody in a school based position will be sacked. What we are saying is that the ordinary turnover that occurs within this program, which I am advised was in the order of some hundreds a year but is probably down to about 100, will ensure that nobody is sacked. Let us get this emotive nonsense about sacking teachers out of the way.
I can understand why Mr De Domenico keeps talking about sacking teachers. That is what his mates in Victoria are doing. I can understand why the Liberals keep rabbiting on about this slash and burn mentality about public education they accuse us of, because that is what in their heart of hearts they would like to do. They would love to be up there with Jeff Kennett, ripping into the system, as he is in Victoria. It percolates to the surface and emerges in their rhetoric. As I say, we ignore what the Liberals have to say because we know that it is humbug, because we know what their record was here, and because we know what their record is whenever they get their hands on the levers of government in any jurisdiction in Australia.
But the issue of concern is the assault that is mounted on the Government by the Independents. The Independents say of this Government, which they pledged to support and whose budget they pledged to support, "As a Labor government you should be looking carefully at your priorities, and you should not just slice every program of every budget by the same amount". Madam Speaker, before they said that they should have looked at their budget papers; they should have compared expenditure this year to expenditure last year. Madam Speaker, notional savings are often achieved within an actual increase in expenditure because we factor in growth. The fact is that, in dollar terms, we are spending more money this year than last year. We are striving for efficiencies, and Mr Wood is developing a program to spend that money better. Mr Moore seeks to stand on the platform and talk about a cut to the education budget. The fact is that there is not a cut to the budget. This year's budget, compared to last year's budget, will show an increase in expenditure. Mr Wood is striving to achieve efficiencies within his program, as is every Minister in this Government. Our record on delivering that stands in this Assembly, and we are happy to compare it with the Liberals' record any day.
But let us get to the reality rather than the rhetoric. Before Independent members do some deal with the Liberal Party to say that they voted against the budget that slashes education expenditure, let them look carefully and see precisely what this budget is doing. What this budget is doing is what Mr Moore, in his remarks, said we should do. It is looking at different programs. Some programs are suffering quite dramatic expenditure reductions. Actual expenditure in city services in my Urban Services portfolio, as I say, is down by about 19 per cent - a very dramatic reduction.
In some programs we are spending a bit more than last year. As I said, in community services we have an increase in recurrent expenditure of about 10 per cent. That is probably something the Liberals would not be happy with - that is, spending on the disadvantaged. We do not want any of that! I would imagine that Mr Moore and Ms Szuty would think that increasing recurrent expenditure on community services makes sense. In relation to education, the recurrent expenditure this year is up on the recurrent expenditure last year. It will be disciplined; it will be targeted more effectively.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .