Page 2349 - Week 06 - Friday, 27 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Of course we do need to reflect once again on what we were told prior to the last election. And that was very clear; it was unequivocal. We were told “no school closures in the next term of government”. We were told that; we were told that in the Canberra Times. People believed that; people who voted Labor believed that they were voting for a party that, in government, would not close schools. For all the talk from the minister about consultation, about how they went out to all the school communities and talked to them about their plans or their proposals to close their schools, when you go to an election and you promise not to close schools, you simply cannot be taken seriously at any consultations you have afterwards.
Saturday, 28 June 2008
MR SESELJA: Now, as we are going through the consultation on what to do with some of these sites—and I am paraphrasing here as it has been reported to me; so if I get the details wrong I am sure Minister Barr or Ms Gallagher can correct me—I understand the most recent comments from Ms Gallagher on this issue were that, if a decision has not been taken before the caretaker period or an announcement has not been made, certainly an announcement would be made prior to the election. Mr Barr might be able to correct me if I am wrong. But once again, how are people going to believe whatever is said before the election on what is going to be done with these sites, given what we have seen from this government in relation to honesty on its plans for schools?
Prior to the last election—it cannot be forgotten; it shall not be forgotten—this government said it would not be closing any schools in this term of government. And we heard the quite extraordinary admission from Katy Gallagher some time ago in this place that, on 30 November 2004, she made the decision to breach that fundamental promise—six weeks after the election. You go to an election asking for four years in government, with education as one of the fundamental planks of your platform, and, on that basis, on education, you make a fundamental promise not to close schools. And this government and these ministers believe that it is indeed reasonable to break that promise, to decide to break that promise, six weeks after the election—six weeks into a four-year parliamentary term. They had just been returned for a four-year term and, six weeks later, they believed they can throw that promise out.
It must be said that, going forward, any promises made by this government in any area, particularly in the area of education, will be looked at with great scepticism by the electorate, given how they have been treated in relation to school closures. Given the fundamental breach of faith that that represents, people are naturally cynical about governments generally but they are particularly cynical when they so blatantly mislead at an election, when they blatantly take promises to an election which they have no intention of keeping and which they did not keep. And that is what has happened in education; that is what has happened under this government. As I said, Lyons was simply an example, simply the end result, of a very poorly thought out process, a rushed process, but fundamentally a process which was about a breach of faith with the community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .