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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 7 Hansard (19 June) . . Page.. 1925 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

Mr Berry used some rather twisted logic. Teachers themselves have claimed in this industrial action that a lot of activity they undertake is voluntary. I will come to that later. Supporting interstate sporting teams is a voluntary act on their part. The AEU are loud in their claims that they are banning voluntary activity. Only someone with a twisted sense of logic would see a problem with sports associations and other volunteers undertaking, in a temporary capacity, activities which teachers themselves say are voluntary. What justifiable cause could anyone have to pit one lot of voluntary workers against another, particularly when they are working in the service of our children? I have had a number of talks with a number of very strong members of the AEU who are also very keen sportspeople. They indicate that there are in fact two lots of bans. In the first lot they did not see any problem with children participating in interstate sport. In another lot imposed at the end of March they took a different stand. So, taking that at its highest, there even seems to have been some difference in the bans at different periods of time during this industrial action.

Let us be very clear as to just who is missing out as a result of teachers' bans on voluntary support for interschool and interstate sport, and indeed for all other areas. It is the students, Mr Speaker. I am led to believe that there are very many teachers in our system who regret the teaching union bans and miss the opportunity to take teams interstate. It is the students, however, who are the real losers, not the teachers, certainly not any of Mr Berry's comrades and not the Government either.

I am at a loss to understand the position of teachers in this instance. If teachers are truly convinced that the activities in the area of sports coaching and management that they have imposed bans on are voluntary, then what possible difficulty could they have with other volunteers filling the gap that some of our students have found themselves stranded in? The Government has a duty. It is not our duty to do nothing, to sit on our hands or say, "Yes, those bans are in place. We must accept them, honour them, be part of them". I doubt very much whether the people opposite would be doing that if they were in the same situation. Their track record in government, when one looks back at it, would indicate that.

Mr Speaker, the students want us to act and assist where possible. I think the sad thing is that the ability of the Government to assist where possible is not very great. One area where there is actually no activity whatsoever as a result of the bans is interschool sport. A lot of kids in our system, for various reasons, do not get a chance to play sport on the weekends. It varies from school to school, but there are some schools where, I am told, for a number of reasons, 60 or 70 per cent of the kids who play interschool sport do not get the opportunity to play sport on the weekends. That is especially so in some of the schools where there are socioeconomic problems. I am told that there are a couple of schools in that category. The kids who really need those activities and really like them are missing out.

Of course, it is not just sport that is affected. There are students who spend countless hours training to represent the Territory in such things as mathematics competitions or music. Parents have invested a lot of time, money and, most importantly, emotional support in their children's activities. These people are missing out.

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