Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 2 Hansard (27 February) . . Page.. 307 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

non-government schooling area, an area that looks after 33 per cent of students in the ACT, we restored the one per cent funding cut that had been put in place by the previous Government. We restored the one per cent across-the-board funding cut for 30 per cent of students in the ACT that had been made by the previous Government. We are also maintaining funding for those schools in real terms.

I think that it is really wrong to have a look at education in the ACT without having a look at the non-government schools. They have 30 per cent of our students. In terms of educational outcomes, they are important as well. Certainly, they are perceived to be so by this Government, unlike the previous Government. Whether it is a Liberal government, a Labor government or Michael Moore as Chief Minister, what we have to do in education is find how we can do more, how we can get better educational outcomes for the money that the Commonwealth is willing to give us and the people of Canberra are willing to give us.

It is lovely to be able to sit in this place and say, "We just need more money - more money for health, more money for education". We would love to be able to do that, but the reality is that health and education make up more than 50 per cent of our budget. We are already taxing the people of the ACT at the same levels as other States are. The Commonwealth is reducing funding to the ACT every year for at least the next two years. Therefore, there is a real reduction in the amount of money that any government - Labor, Liberal or Callithumpian - have to deal with in this place. Certainly, our approach should not be to cut the guts out of education, health or whatever else. Any government in power, if they are responsible, will attempt to do their best to get the best from the resources they have at their disposal.

The whole basis of school-based management is to make sure that schools can exact a better return on the quite substantial capital investments that this city has in those schools and use that return, that revenue, themselves to improve the lot of their students. That simply has to be the way we go. It is ridiculous to have school gyms and a large amount of space in our schools not being used to maximum capacity. An Assembly committee I was on suggested exactly the same thing. Unlike the previous Government, we believe that the schools themselves should get benefits from utilising their facilities better. The benefit should go back into the community. But let us be fair. The capital is there to serve.

That is what we are trying to do. Certainly, it has not happened as quickly as we would like it to, nor have the reforms in health, nor have the reforms in a lot of other areas. Why have they not happened as quickly as possible? It is because we are talking to the players. We are attempting to bring the people who will be affected by these changes along with us. That is what Mr Stefaniak has done in this case. Certainly, it would have been easier just to say, "Bang, we will do it". But the people involved said, "We would like a little bit more time. Yes, on the whole we support your approach, Government; but we need a little bit more time to change the way we do things and to have proper training on the ground to make sure that it can be done properly". I think that shows a responsible approach to any innovation in government. That is the approach we have taken in this area. It is also the approach we have taken in health and in other areas where significant changes are needed in this city.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .