Page 3537 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 12 October 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: Certainly. I would begin by saying that I am not sure that it is a blurred vision so much as a totally impaired vision. Mrs Carnell has been very careful to spell out Liberal policy. She has done it in this article. She did it in a much more detailed way in a speech, which she distributed later, to the Institute of Education Administration. She has been, I imagine, proudly expressing this view.
The Government has great concerns about this, as we care for the system of education that we are currently running well. It is interesting to note that it is Kate Carnell running this issue. Where is Mr Cornwell? Where was Mr Cornwell? Where was Mr Cornwell in April, I think it was, when Mrs Carnell presented Liberal education policy to the association that I mentioned? This seems to me to be a very strong vote of no confidence in the education spokesperson; but there is nothing different about that, because it is the same vote of no confidence that this leader gives to all members of the Liberal Party.
Mr Stefaniak: I take a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think it is my first in this Assembly. Madam Speaker, you made a ruling that the Minister answer the question and refer to his own portfolio. So far all he has done is refer to Mrs Carnell and Mr Cornwell. I would ask you to ask him to get to the point.
MADAM SPEAKER: I call Mr Wood.
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, the key issue is the issue that has been promoted on two occasions now. It seems to be official Liberal policy, if Mrs Carnell speaks for the Liberals, that per capita funding of ACT government schools is the way to go. It is not the system of funding that we have at the moment.
For the information of members, I would indicate that all schools are staffed on a basic entitlement, regardless of size. After that, staffing is built up in terms of enrolment. Mrs Carnell wants to change that to per capita funding. If she did that - if our school system, of which I am the Minister, suffered that - the impact would be the death knell of small schools. On that basis, there would be enormous pressures on those schools; they would lose staff and they would have impossible burdens that they could not carry; and inevitably closures would follow. That is the impact on our school system of this policy. It is the Gary Humphries "Close 25 schools" philosophy re-emerging.
In both documents that I have referred to, Mrs Carnell spells out very clearly and very carefully her pupil based recurrent funding on enrolments. I think this community needs to understand fully the impact of per capita funding. There was a report that came out after the change of government some three to four years ago, and it had a recommendation - - -
Mr Kaine: On a point of order, Madam Speaker - and I come back to the point: The Minister is talking about the Liberal Party's policy. The Liberal Party will explain it; we do not need Mr Wood to give his opinion on it when it has not yet been properly spelt out. He is merely speculating, Madam Speaker, and he is speculating about something that is not his property. I again ask you to call him to order and tell him to stick to his business, not ours.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .