Page 2933 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 20 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The government were silent through 2005. Why was there no mention in 2005 that there might be a need to commence a school closures program? It is because they did not think about it. There was no strategic analysis or decision made to do something about rationalising schools. Instead, the Costello review came along. Costello said, “Government, you are in deep doggy doo-doo. There is a need to rationalise quickly. There is a need to save money. You need to find capital somewhere. Perhaps you might start looking at closing schools rapidly. Perhaps you might need to start selling the land on which those schools sit to collect the revenue that you need for your Iemma-style 2008 Stanhope war chest to try and retain government.” Is that how Mr Stanhope was inspired to create the next election war chest?
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Pratt, direct your comments through the chair. Members will cease interjecting.
Mr Barr: A bit like the Goward-style preselection.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Barr, that includes you.
MR PRATT: I have asked the question here. Mrs Dunne has asked the question here. Dr Foskey has asked the question here and in estimates. Where is the funding that you have set aside to maintain the closed schools? Minister, what have you allocated in the TAMS budget to secure and maintain the 39 schools that you will be closing? We cannot ever get an answer.
The education minister was not able to tell me in estimates or in this place what amount of money the government, in its governance role, might set aside to maintain and secure those closed schools. Certainly the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, who would be the custodian of that budget, is unable to tell us. He cannot quantify what would be required to secure and maintain the schools that the government decides to close.
Why is that? That is deeply suspicious. One has to ask: why are they unable to quantify the dollars set aside? It is because they are going to sell at least some of those schools. The driving motivation for this school closures program is to find assets and resources and to sell and to gain revenue. Is that not so, minister? You can sit there looking a bit loopy, but we understand why. This is very, very sad. This is a crass, jump through your backside, jump through hoops, last-minute panic, knee-jerk reaction—
Mr Hargreaves: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. I think Mr Pratt just used unparliamentary language. I ask him to withdraw it.
MR PRATT: Mr Speaker, I withdraw. I apologise to the gallery and to my colleagues.
The fact that no funding has been identified really undermines the government’s case for their so-called rationalisation program. The government is about gathering revenue, and schools are simply assets. Schools no longer are institutions where we might develop our
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .