Page 672 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I am disappointed—but not, unfortunately, surprised—by the quick and predictable politicking of this issue by the Liberals. Straightaway we see the wedging, the name calling, the fear mongering. The report’s recommendations may have some flaws or may not be fully embraced by all groups but, for the most part, those who know the current system and those who see every day the needs being unmet are calling for action, and action now.
The report attempts to streamline and clarify an incredibly complex funding system. While I acknowledge that there are budget considerations and details to be worked out, the ACT Greens, like the vast majority of researchers, academics, commentators and other stakeholders, want to see the recommendations turned into action, commitments and time frames.
I make no apologies for repeating so much of the Gonski report and the Gonski findings in my speech today. The issues at hand stand a very real risk of being stymied by politics and therefore becoming another wasted opportunity. The Greens are loudly calling for action. As always, we are ready to start work on the important issues of ensuring equity in educational outcomes for all our children and young people, regardless of their school setting.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (5.42): I commend Mr Doszpot for bringing this matter forward. It is, I think, a reflection of the fact that the Canberra Liberals are the only party in the Assembly who support both sectors of education in the ACT. Only the Canberra Liberals back the public sector and only the Canberra Liberals are also strong supporters of choice for parents when it comes to education.
We only have to go back to our commitment to the public sector with our class sizes policy at the last election, which the Labor Party, I think, sought to have as its own. About their only education policy at the last election was to get a lesser version of the Liberal Party’s lower class sizes policy. We showed our commitment to the public sector. But we have also had a longstanding commitment, in stark contrast to our opponents, to the non-government sector and to proper support for non-government students and for non-government schools. And that is in absolute contrast to the Labor Party and the Greens.
Let us go through the record. That is why people are immediately asking whether or not Gonski will be used as a cover to strip funding from non-government schools, because we know what the Labor Party and the Greens believe. Let us look at what the Labor Party believes. We know that Katy Gallagher, Simon Corbell, Wayne Berry at the time, Mick Gentleman, who is now running again, and the entire left faction of the Labor Party, and presumably that includes Dr Bourke—I imagine he voted on this particular motion in the ALP as well—believe that it is not the role of Labor governments to promote private education; instead it is incumbent on all Labor parties and governments to unashamedly support, promote and fund public education. Further, these members of the Labor Party, including the Chief Minister, believe the growth of private education is facilitating the fragmentation of Australia’s children along ethnic, cultural and, particularly, religious lines. It is a disgraceful, divisive comment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video