Page 3239 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
religious reasons; some do it because they see something different in the non-government sector. Most non-government parents do not do it because they think the government sector is in any way terrible; they make their choices, and we respect those choices.
This is a government whose record on non-government education has been an extraordinarily poor one. It has been a government and a party—the Labor Party in the ACT—who are fundamentally hostile to the funding of non-government schools and giving them adequate funding. They say, “We are into fair funding.” What is fair funding? Fair funding under this mob is lagging well behind the rest of the country in terms of funding for non-government schools. It goes to the fact that many of them do not believe that it is even legitimate that there be any funding for non-government schools—that there be any government funding. They believe that they should be totally self-funded.
It was the Liberal Party nationally that, with opposition, made the decision to fund church-run schools initially. We had that debate a long time ago. The Labor Party at the federal level claims to have left this battle behind, but we know that, if it rages anywhere within political parties today, it certainly rages in the ACT Labor Party. Ask Ms Gallagher what she thinks about funding for non-government schools. Ask Mr Corbell what he thinks about funding for non-government schools. In their minds, they would like to see as little funding as possible—preferably none. The only reason they do not do it is that politically they know they cannot get away with it.
We believe fundamentally that we want to see a strong government sector and we want to see a strong non-government sector. We believe in reasonable and decent levels of funding, because we fundamentally believe in their right to exist. When, like many members of the Labor Party, you do not believe in their right to any funding, you will always look for ways to underfund. You will not respect the work that is done within these schools.
From the reports we get, we know about some of the comments that Mr Barr makes in private about non-government schools. He is hostile to non-government schools. He can pretend now that he is not, because the right of the ALP more broadly has not been as hostile as the left on this issue. He can pretend that that is the case, but we know the truth. In the end, they will be judged fundamentally on their funding and what kind of support they give to the non-government sector. Because of this deep-seated hostility to funding for non-government schools which exists within large elements of the Labor Party, I fear that we will see this funding decrease in real terms.
Mr Barr can scoff when we say this, but we do not have to go back very far to go to an ALP conference where it was a tied vote.
Mr Barr: It wasn’t a tied vote.
MR SESELJA: It was a tied vote. The first vote was, I think, 89-all. I think it barely got voted down in the end. Roughly half of the Labor Party in the ACT supported this motion, which is fundamentally hostile to the funding of non-government schools.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .