Page 2119 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 June 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
this year? And who are the learning professionals that the government will employ—teachers, teacher aides, learning support workers, social workers, people in teaching admin or people in the myriad of other roles that are associated with educating our children? As I said before, the devil is always in the detail. While the minister is quick to spruik this boost, she has conveniently left out the detail.
Mr Steel’s motion talks of the history of investment in schools, and it is indeed a history. I am not sure whether I should be sad or glad that for the first time in five years Belconnen High School does not rate a specific line mention as a work in progress. Its latest completion date, February 2019, as listed in the 2017-18 budget, will be no doubt met with great anticipation for the long-suffering students, and parents and families, many of whom have completed their education without ever experiencing the upgrade that was promised time and time again.
Mr Steel’s motion talks about investment in new government schools, but again it is in the never-never. The new Molonglo primary school will not be ready till well after the next election, on the most optimistic of estimates. And where is the detail about new investment in our older schools?
Last year there was allocation under the better schools for our kids public school infrastructure upgrades program, with nearly $6 million last year and a similar amount in the forthcoming financial year. Where is that money this year? Or is this part of the $31 million the budget suggests is “re-profiled”? I am no economist, nor are the majority of Canberrans, but in layman’s terms I think that is making new announcements using previously promised moneys.
On comparing the budget papers for education from last year to this year, there is, cleverly, little continuity in program delivery but consistently slick headings on glossy paper. Last year every budget allocation was branded “better schools”. This year it is branded “more schools, better schools”. Repeating headlines and a bunch of numbers does not necessarily deliver the results.
Since taking on the education portfolio, I have been constantly amazed at the haphazard approach to so much in the portfolio. We see independent assessments from agencies such as the Auditor-General’s that show that our students are tracking okay but going backwards. When the minister is questioned about this, she attacks the testing and suggests that NAPLAN and newspapers are to blame.
The directorate’s own census data has shown that there are considerable inconsistencies in school enrolments across Canberra, but when the minister is asked what she would do about it she remains in denial. She was quoted in a recent interview as saying:
… their local school should be incentive enough because every one of our schools is great.
In other words: “Nothing to see here.”
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video