Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Liberal Party Hypocricy? Surely Not!
I've been having all sorts of flashbacks recently with the ACT's current difficult fiscal situation and the talk of closing 39 schools. You see, I went to three schools between primary school and the end of year 12, and all of them are now closed. (The uni I went to is still open, so my curse is ended.)
So I was a bit pissed when I read this article, which contains a "scathing attack" by Federal Education Minister Julie Bishop (who?) on the ACT government.
It goes as follows:
"It is a disgrace that parents and students and teachers were not notified that 39 schools are being closed in the ACT," she said. (Funny, I thought that's what we were talking about!)
"I want to know how Jon Stanhope intends to account to the Commonwealth taxpayers for the $7.5 million that's already been paid in recent months under our investing in schools programs, to schools he intends to close."
I have an inherrent suspicion at the figure quoted - politicians love to quote facts out of context. Was the $7.5 the total allocation to the ACT government? She's implying that was the share that went to the proposed closure schools. And even if it was, was it spent on essential maintenance to keep the schools open for another year? Salaries? Consumables such as paper, or cleaning? Would you suggest we dump all of that?
But what shits me more about that quote is that I remember being in high school when the local Liberal party was in government. They announced they were going to close schools but not which ones (hypocricy point number one).
And I had my experience, which I've blogged about before, of being personally lied to by Gary Humphries, a local government minister of the day. What was he lying about? The fact that a brand new computer lab in a school means that it has a better chance of not being closed on account of the associated capital expenditure.
How much did that lab - which wasn't teacher's salaries, consumables or building maintenance - cost, hmm?
So I was a bit pissed when I read this article, which contains a "scathing attack" by Federal Education Minister Julie Bishop (who?) on the ACT government.
It goes as follows:
"It is a disgrace that parents and students and teachers were not notified that 39 schools are being closed in the ACT," she said. (Funny, I thought that's what we were talking about!)
"I want to know how Jon Stanhope intends to account to the Commonwealth taxpayers for the $7.5 million that's already been paid in recent months under our investing in schools programs, to schools he intends to close."
I have an inherrent suspicion at the figure quoted - politicians love to quote facts out of context. Was the $7.5 the total allocation to the ACT government? She's implying that was the share that went to the proposed closure schools. And even if it was, was it spent on essential maintenance to keep the schools open for another year? Salaries? Consumables such as paper, or cleaning? Would you suggest we dump all of that?
But what shits me more about that quote is that I remember being in high school when the local Liberal party was in government. They announced they were going to close schools but not which ones (hypocricy point number one).
And I had my experience, which I've blogged about before, of being personally lied to by Gary Humphries, a local government minister of the day. What was he lying about? The fact that a brand new computer lab in a school means that it has a better chance of not being closed on account of the associated capital expenditure.
How much did that lab - which wasn't teacher's salaries, consumables or building maintenance - cost, hmm?
// posted by Cass @ 1:46 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
It's a bullshit question from Bishop anyway. That money is going towards schools in operation for this year. When they will close they will not be in operation. The money will be re-directed.
Stupid taking advantage mol.
I actually read the budget speech from Stanhope. Because of aging population and less school students we are at 75% occupancy in schools.
So of course it makes sense to rationalise.
Frikkin Liberals.
He's taking a hit on the chin because of something that will happen not in the next election cycle but in 20 years.
What other politician is willing to cop a battering to do what needs to be done now to prevent fiscal disaster in 20 years time.
Not Howard's government that's for sure.
Stupid taking advantage mol.
I actually read the budget speech from Stanhope. Because of aging population and less school students we are at 75% occupancy in schools.
So of course it makes sense to rationalise.
Frikkin Liberals.
He's taking a hit on the chin because of something that will happen not in the next election cycle but in 20 years.
What other politician is willing to cop a battering to do what needs to be done now to prevent fiscal disaster in 20 years time.
Not Howard's government that's for sure.
Mort, they talk about schools being the "heart of a community" and the difficulty parents and students will face because of the longer commute and bigger class sizes.
I don't like that they are closing the schools, but I can understand why it's necessary.
Post a Comment
I don't like that they are closing the schools, but I can understand why it's necessary.
<< Home
