Page 3499 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 19 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The school's income is predominantly from fees. It has no received wealth or no endowment wealth from which huge sums come. Of course, it also has funds from government and territorial grants. These, of course, are liable to be somewhat smaller in future than they are at the moment, although that, I think, has yet to be determined. Again I stress that there is no large endowment fund.
In order to stress that point, I would like to say that there is a small foundation - the Gabriel Foundation - at the Girls Grammar School, which offers grants and funds for children in cases where the parents are no longer able to afford the fees or where perhaps a home has broken up or where there is a single parent - perhaps a father or mother has died or something of that kind. That fund enables a child to remain at the school. In other words, the school can in no way be described as wealthy or rich in those kinds of broad sweeping terms. It is dependent, really, on the parents themselves.
I do hope that in this discussion of the question of that piece of land - and I am not entering into that - we will think kindly, thoughtfully and lovingly of this excellent school.
School Closures
MR JENSEN (5.10): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to go down one path in relation to an issue in the MPI that was not traversed today. It relates to suggestions that clearly indicate that Mr Wood is not fully aware of the true circumstances in relation to planning aspects of the proposal that was discussed in the MPI today, or in relation to the valuation matters.
Making comments in this area shows how easy it is for him to get it wrong, just as he did in his comments about the 200 per cent betterment tax during the school restructuring debate. Of course, we never received a direct answer to the question as to whether he would apply the same policy to those schools if he were in government. That was conveniently missed out of his discussion.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the planning for the block prior to the draft proposal for public comment - - -
Mr Connolly: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have listened to one matter on the adjournment debate which was clearly traversing the MPI this afternoon. We are now halfway through another. The rules in relation to the adjournment debate do say that it is not to be used to re-traverse an issue that has appeared on the notice paper. Dr Kinloch continued to traverse the issues of the MPI today.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Which standing order do you - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .