Page 4381 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The fact that these new rules would not apply to independent schools and would in fact only apply to public and Catholic schools also speaks to the sloppiness of the drafting effort, but in Mr Doszpot’s defence my understanding is that the original amendments that were circulated by the Liberal Party yesterday, or prior to their party room meeting, were not as ridiculous as the ones that ended up being put forward at the last minute. So I do not believe that this actually represents Mr Doszpot’s view; in fact it might have been pushed by his party room in a direction that has left him somewhat exposed in the context of this debate.
Fundamentally, if the Liberal Party do as they have signalled, as it would appear that the Greens will not support them, when these amendments are defeated and then they vote against the bill as a whole, they will have, as Mr Doszpot indicated, first voted for the bill and then later voted against it. They will then have to go and explain to all of those parents, to the Principals Association, to the Catholic Education Office and to all of those organisations why it is that before lunch they had a particular position on this legislation and then after lunch—
Mr Hanson: Maybe you could write them a letter.
MR BARR: I am quite happy to send them a copy of Hansard. That will be all that will be necessary in relation to the flip-flopping of the Liberal Party on this matter. The fundamental issues of principle, Madam Assistant Speaker, if you will excuse the pun in the context of these debates, is whether greater flexibility will be given to our school principals, what level of greater flexibility and what support mechanisms will be in place. The Liberal Party’s amendments go further than the Catholic Education Office and the Principals Association are comfortable with, and go further than the government is prepared to go.
Mr Hanson: You’re being obstinate.
MR BARR: The government does not support the policy position that the Liberal Party has put forward. It is as simple as that.
Mr Hanson: But it is not exactly your position—
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ms Burch): Mr Hanson, please.
MR BARR: It is as simple as that. So we are not going to support it. The Liberal Party’s position is that they support in principle what the government is intending to do; they have just argued that it does not go far enough. So they are prepared, in the context of the final vote on this bill, it would appear, to not make any advance on the agenda that they themselves articulate.
Mr Hanson: Because you’re not supporting the amendments.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Hanson!
MR BARR: That is their business.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .