Page 4684 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
comprehensively failed. This is what happens when you waste money in all of those other areas, when you refuse to heed the warnings, when you say, “No, we are going to spend it because we like those things.”
Some people like those things. Some people like an arboretum. I get mixed views on the arboretum. Plenty of people say it is okay. Other people say that we do not need it. But in the end, these are the choices that this government have made. These are the choices. Imagine the $77 million they wanted to toss away by buying a hospital they did not need to buy. These are the decisions they make—the poor decisions, one after the other. Now we have a situation where Andrew Barr is saying: “Look, that is bad luck. We are not going to make those savings in other areas, but we will make kids who need more support pay.” That is a values test, and they have failed it.
I would like to commend the work of Steve Doszpot in not just bringing this motion forward but taking the lead on this issue. This is not the first time that Steve Doszpot has taken on an issue and forced at least a partial backdown from this government, and particularly from this minister. We have seen another backflip. Well done to Steve Doszpot.
The forum that we hosted in the Assembly—that Steve Doszpot hosted in the Assembly—was an opportunity to hear directly from the community. It was an opportunity that was being denied them by this government. Why wasn’t the minister having a forum like this? Why wasn’t the minister bringing these people together and hearing from them? Did the minister not care? Did he not want to hear? He could have explained many of the arguments that he has tried to mount in this chamber. He could have looked them in the eye and said it. Maybe he did not have confidence that they carried enough weight. Maybe he did not have confidence that his argument was actually right. Maybe he could not look these people in the eye and say, “We are going to cut services for your kids.”
He could not do that, so he got the department to. I am not sure if the department looked them in the eye. We had this bodgie process that they put into place. In the end the minister is responsible for that. He can hide behind the department all he likes, but this minister and this government put in place the process where they did not want to listen. They did not want to listen.
You can sometimes tell from how your friends criticise you or treat you just how badly you are getting it wrong. You only have to look at the AEU’s submission on this. Ordinarily when we quote someone in this place, the response from the government is “Well, they’re Liberal Party stooges.” I have never heard anyone say that the people in the AEU ACT branch are Liberal Party stooges, and I defy anyone to say that they are. I will quote from their submission:
The timing of the release of the proposal and the very brief timeframe in which to respond is in keeping with the standard practise of the ACT Minister for Education and Training Andrew Barr. That is, a decision is made, (some) people are notified and there is an unreasonably brief response period set aside for so-called consultation. It presents a cynical regard for consultation with all stakeholders and makes a mockery of the required consultative processes under the terms of the DET Teaching Staff Enterprise Agreement …
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video