17 April 1991 ASSEMBLY 1313
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Wednesday, 17 April 1991 ASSEMBLY 1313 Wednesday, 17 April 1991 The SPEAKER (Hon. Ken Coghill) took the chair at 10.34 a.m. and read the prayer. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE SELECTION OF SCHOOL STAFF Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition) - Will the Premier instruct the Minister for Education and Training to provide school principals with the authority to select staff and thereby restore the management of education to the professionals rather than leaving it in the hands of the bureaucracy and union officials? Ms KIRNER (Premier) - I am delighted the Leader of the Opposition has now discovered education, although I am disappointed that he released his half-education policy to a Liberal Party lunch rather than to the education community. However, after reading it I was not surprised because the policy is actually a fraud. Mr McNamara - It's excellent. Ms KIRNER - It is difficult to tell which is the ventriloquist's doll here, isn't it? The community should decide what happens in education. The principal is an important part of education decision making but I find it strange that, despite the opposition saying that it wants to give parents a real say in education, all it is prepared to do is to back our policy, that is, that parents will have a say in selecting principals. We put that policy into effect after taking office; the Liberal Party was not prepared to put that into effect when it was in government! Mr Coleman - That's not right. Ms KIRNER - Oh yes it is, because I know who lobbied for it. We took the action to get parents involved in selecting principals. The opposition now thinks it is doing parents a favour by excluding them from choosing anyone else in the school. How is that for a half-education policy? How is that for a fraud on parents? The government is prepared to say parents ought to have a real say in education. We gave them the ability to help choose school principals. We gave them the ability to determine school policies. We gave them the responsibility for school budgets. What does the opposition's half-education policy want to do? It wants to turn back the clock and exclude parents from a real say in education and give that power only to the principal. 77825/91-43 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 1314 ASSEMBLY Wednesday, 17 April 1991 I should have thought rural members of the opposition would have some concerns because two issues are involved. The first is participation, which is important not only for principals but also for all the players in education. The second is the question of equity. Recently in New Zealand, which has the policy the opposition has copied, there was tremendous opposition to the education policies of the government not only because of the participation issue but, more importantly, because of equity. In addition to the proposal that the principal should choose the teacher is the opposition proposal that the school should be able to offer incentives to get teachers. Now that goes right back to the 1970s when schools had to fund $1 for $1 their education improvements. What happened? What happened was that the school that could raise the dollars got the good equipment. The opposition wants to extend that policy to teachers. It says that schools that have the dollars can get the good teachers. How is that for equity? Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party) - On a point of order, Mr Speaker, it is very difficult to hear the Premier with the background noise coming from the government backbench. Obviously the backbench members of the government are not listening to the Premier and are engaged in private conversations. I ask you to assist us in listening to the Premier by urging the backbench members of the government to keep silent while the Premier is making her reply. The SPEAKER - Order! I must say that at the time the honourable member raised his point of order a high level of audible conversation was not apparent to the Chair. However, I remind all honourable members that they should remain silent while the Premier is answering the question. Ms KIRNER (Premier) - I am not surprised that the Leader of the National Party wants to distract me while I give a reply to the question because it is yet another disagreement between the Liberal and National parties. There is no way equity in education can be delivered by having an incentive policy for teachers based on school wealth because that would be going back to the dark days of the 1960s under Liberal governments when those schools that had money could get what they wanted and those schools that did not have money - the rural schools and inner suburban schools - would not get the quality teachers. I am happy to lead an attack on that policy and I believe I will be leading it with the parents in country schools. I have done it before and I shall do it again. There is no standing for an opposition that is prepared to say that the quality of education should be based on incentives that are available only to those schools that can pay. SAVINGS IN EDUCATION Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party) - I direct the attention of the Premier to comments made by the former Director of Policy and Research in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, the most senior Labor Party adviser position in the government, Mr Mike Richards, that savings of $300 million could be made in the QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Wednesday, 17 April 1991 ASSEMBLY 1315 education portfolio, and I ask: will the Premier ensure that the Minister for Education and Training reorganises the administration of his Ministry to achieve those savings? Ms KIRNER (Premier) - It is certainly the responsibility of government to ensure that departments operate within expenditure constraints. I was fascinated to see that the Leader of the Opposition's half-policy release on education indicated he was prepared to put in some of his ideas, or I should say some of the ideas of some of his ideologues in the back room, and he did not put any costings in. Wasn't that interesting! An opposition puts up an education policy without any costings for that policy! I am not surprised because the Leader of the National Party wants to know if the government is prepared to cut $300 million out of the education budget. Indeed, the shadow Minister for . Education, who knows so much about education that they have not even let him ask a question on education in this House, said recently at an education conference in a rural area of the State that he thought it might just be possible to cut $400 million off education. Mr Hayward interjected. Ms KIRNER - Not my advisers; $400 million out of education - is that what the opposition wants? Mr McNamara - Three hundred million. Ms KIRNER - All right, $300 million. Let US look at what it would mean if $300 million was cut out of the education portfolio. When I was the Minister for Education I had a look at the structure of education and I determined, along with people like the honourable member for Ballarat North, that there was too much fat in the middle management area, which was inappropriate and as Minister for Education -- Mr McNamara interjected. Ms KIRNER - The issue is the National Party wants $300 million cut out of education. Mr McNamara interjected. Ms KIRNER - Mr Richards is certainly not my adviser; maybe you have not caught up with that! The opposition wants $300 million cut ou~ of education. I want to know where they believe it should be cut from because even if the whole of middle management in education is wiped out -- Mr McNamara - That is not what I am saying; that is what your adviser says! Ms KIRNER - He is not my adviser. The SPEAKER - Order! The Leader of the National Party has asked his question. I ask him to remain silent and also to cease waving around a piece of paper. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 1316 ASSEMBLY Wednesday, 17 April 1991 Ms KIRNER - I suppose he has to wave around a piece of paper. He appears to need a number of props to ask questions these days. Certainly he needs a piece of paper because he has not worked out how he will cut $300 million from education. Even if all of middle management were cut out of education - all those people that honourable members opposite write to me about people in the support centres that the opposition does not want cut back; people who manage WorkCare, who the opposition do not want cut back; and the curriculum experts who the opposition does not want cut back-- Mr HAYWARD (Prahran) - On a point of order, Mr Speaker, the question was specific. It referred to a comment by a former senior adviser to the government who talked about cutting costs without cutting quality. There is no question about cutting quality, but it is about cutting costs. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to bring the Premier back to the question and ask her to address it. The SPEAKER - Order! The question was asked in general terms about whether the Premier would direct a cut of $300 million in education. The Premier is indicating in her view the consequences of taking such an action. There is no point of order. Ms KIRNER (Premier) - Even if all middle management were taken out - Mr McNamara interjected. Ms KIRNER - You should not ask questions that are an absolute gift to the government, should you? The Liberal opposition should not have policies it has not costed.