Page 1987 - Week 05 - Thursday, 3 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
These are the things she has voted for on the record. Ms Gallagher has voted for what is effectively a very hostile form of language towards non-government schools and towards educational choice. This is a hostile form of language which the Canberra Liberals condemn and do not support in any way.
Ms Gallagher could have come out at any time in the last few years and said: “I was wrong. That was divisive and that was not respecting parental choice. It was not respecting the wonderful contribution that has been made by Catholic and independent schools in Canberra.” She has had that opportunity. She has chosen not to do so. We can only speculate as to why she has allowed that sentiment to stand. As the leader of the Labor Party in this place, she will be held to what she does—not just in the Assembly but at Labor Party conferences too, because if the Labor Party conference changes its policy that has implications for the ACT, particularly when the Labor Party is in government. It has serious implications for the non-government sector.
Ms Gallagher can jump up and down all she likes but, in the end, it is an aggressive and hostile sentiment that has been expressed by her and a number of her colleagues towards non-government education in the ACT. Non-government education is not divisive. It is not fragmenting Australians or Canberrans along ethnic and religious lines. It is a legitimate choice that should be celebrated. It is a legitimate choice which actually has a lot of other public benefits as well, of course, because by people contributing some of their own money to non-government education it frees up more government money across the board.
We know that years ago back in Goulburn that very point was made, which is why we started to see funding from the government for Catholic schools and independent schools. The point was made: “If we can’t afford to educate them, you can educate them all and the burden on the taxpayer will be great.” So we should be celebrating that choice. We should be celebrating the fact that we can invest in our public system and we should invest heavily in that system to make it an excellent system. Likewise, we should not be at all hostile to those who choose a different path, who choose to put some of their own funds directly into their child’s education. We should also be supporting them in that choice. Ms Gallagher has been on the record as being hostile to that and hostile to that sector.
I would make one other point before I finish. When it comes to education, Ms Gallagher has not shown herself to be honest on questions around what the government will do. When they come out before this coming election and Ms Gallagher says, “We won’t be defunding non-government schools,” we should take that with a grain of salt because it was Ms Gallagher who said before the 2004 election that she would not be closing any schools. She went to the electorate and she told porkies. We believe it is unacceptable right before an election to say there will be no school closures and then, weeks after the election, change your mind and completely renege on that promise. When we go to this next election we should have account of the Chief Minister’s record when it comes to promises on education and a whole range of other areas.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ms Le Couteur): The time for this discussion has expired.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video