Page 2808 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
$67 million has been set aside for new schools in the territory to meet the growing demands in the Gungahlin region and to seek to rejuvenate public education in west Belconnen. It is important that the government seek to invest money in those areas.
I note that Mr Mulcahy, in his comments, homed in on the drift from the public system to the private system. That is clearly an issue the government is seeking to address, but it is not the only factor. We do have to address the demographic changes that are occurring in the city. An issue that I have raised in question time as well is the equitable distribution of resources across the public education system. It is the case at the moment that there are some schools that attract a subsidy, an additional amount, and it can often be a 40 or 50 per cent loading on top of what some other schools receive simply because they are small; not because there are particular educational needs or there is an area of socioeconomic disadvantage, but simply because they are small.
Given that we do have limited resources—all governments have limited resources—to apply to solving some of the major issues that we need to solve, I think it is important that we take a critical look at where our resources go on education. It does concern me that there are some students who miss out on high-quality education simply because we are not able to channel the resources to their needs under the way the system is working at the moment. There is a pretty compelling case, I think, for reform. There are so many reasons that we need to do that that we need to undertake this significant change and need to do it now.
It is, again, disappointing that through most of the speeches from the opposition there has not been a positive contribution. I would like to acknowledge at this point that Dr Foskey did, in her speech, put forward some interesting ideas for potential use of school sites and some interesting ideas about how we might rejuvenate some of the government schools that are struggling at the moment to attract enrolments. I note that many of those ideas have been raised with me already in the consultation period. I certainly appreciate that Dr Foskey is also, obviously, speaking to some of the school communities. We have a real opportunity in this consultation process to have some fantastic ideas come forward for our public education system.
I acknowledge that those opposite will be cynical until the conclusion of the consultation process, and possibly beyond, but what will count in the end is what the government does. If the consultation process continues in the constructive manner in which it has proceeded so far, I am confident that, once the time for the politics and game playing that those opposite have been engaging in passes and the time for some serious discussion kicks in, we will see some really positive outcomes.
I am certainly very committed to ensuring that our public education system is strengthened. It is a fantastic thing that we have $90 million to refurbish schools. I have indicated that there is a range of glaring needs within some of our schools and that infrastructure has been run down over many years. We do have an opportunity through this budget to address that. That is a really important thing. It is with great disappointment that those opposite do not support such an investment in public education.
Question put:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .