Page 677 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 22 February 2012

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

Sadly for the government and the non-government education sector in the ACT you stand for nothing, based on what we have talked about today. You seem to understand even less about our debate here today. I thank you for the biased history lesson, but you have totally misunderstood a very simple motion. It is hard to understand how you could not understand it as you had time to get better advice and a better script for this motion; it is not as immediate as question time when you are put on the spot. But you still seem to have missed the point totally.

I re-issue my challenge, Dr Bourke, to both you and the Greens to actually join with us in supporting the motion that we have put forward so that we, as government, opposition and crossbench, can go forward and push your negotiations—because you will be the one doing the negotiations with the government. You will have the crossbench and the opposition behind you should you wish to support the motion we have before the Assembly. It is what you have been talking about.

I think Ms Hunter also touched on quite a few of the things that we wanted to achieve out of this motion. Personally, I cannot see what would make this so hard for the government to agree to—apart from the fact that anything the Liberals put forward is deemed not acceptable. I would have thought that Ms Hunter, with her slightly more forensic look at the Gonski review, would have had no problem with the motion that I have put before the Assembly today. The challenge is there again, Ms Hunter.

I am very happy to accept Dr Bourke’s amendment as point (c) in my motion. I cannot vote against standing up for all ACT schools in their negotiations with the commonwealth. I cannot not agree with providing certainty for parents, students and schools in the non-government sector also that they will not be worse off in real terms as a result of the proposed changes. I think we have covered this from all angles. All that remains is for you to say, “Yes, we’ll get together with you and we’ll have a tri-party agreement on the way forward.” So with that Don Quixote-like statement I will finish with my call for unity and let the vote speak for itself.

Question put:

That Dr Bourke’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video