Page 3644 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Mrs Dunne asked everybody to be quiet when that side was making a point. All I have heard is a series of interjections. For exactly the same reason Mrs Dunne asked for a bit of silence, could I ask you to ask these people to be a bit quiet too?
MR SPEAKER: Yes, Mr Hargreaves, you make a fair point.
MR BARR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I wrote back and made a suggestion to Mr Doszpot, following his letter to me yesterday, that the way to clarify the uncertainty around this issue would be for him to issue a statement on behalf of the Liberal Party clarifying their position on this matter. I even suggested a form of words for Mr Doszpot. He could say, “The Liberal Party rules out using the Human Rights Act 2004 as a way of the government taking over non-government school teaching and curriculum.” If he issues that statement, the debate is over; there is no confusion over Liberal Party policy. I have even suggested the words he could use. It is up to him, of course, to make a statement. He can do that.
Any examination of the facts, as I said, shows the statements I have made about Liberal Party policy are entirely accurate and fair. The question that the Assembly really must consider is this: why are we having this debate this morning? It would be too easy for a neutral observer to dismiss this argument as mere politics. But there is more going on here than the usual Liberal doctrine of opposition for opposition’s sake. This is a serious policy debate, and there is a serious political contest underway. As I have said before in this place on numerous occasions, the old public versus private debate in education is over. That represents a great opportunity for children in all schools, and we are seeing the benefits of that now—new classrooms, new computers and new libraries in all schools. We can see the benefits to come.
Mrs Dunne: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I draw your attention to the substance of the motion. It is about performance and the fact that the minister misled. This is not an opportunity to rehash what the minister thinks the ACT government’s achievements in education are. It is about his performance.
Mr Corbell: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: when a minister is being censured in this place, it has been accepted in this place that the minister can defend himself in whatever form he believes is necessary to address the issues before him. There is a general convention in this place that the minister is able to do so however he believes it is appropriate to address the issues before him. This is a serious motion being moved by the Liberal Party; the minister is entitled to defend himself as he sees fit.
MR SPEAKER: When a minister is being censured, I think he has the latitude to make his case. His performance is being questioned. I counsel Mr Barr to remain broadly relevant to the education portfolio and the specific issues. Mr Barr, the floor is yours again.
MR BARR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was, in fact, talking about the heart of this debate around education. As I was saying, the fact that the old public-private debate is over does represent a great opportunity for all schools in the territory. As I said, we
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .