Mr GUNNER - 2013-08-27
One of the things parents want most for their child’s education is individual attention from their teacher. Cuts to teachers and support staff can only reduce this. Another factor is teachers having to deal with students with extreme behaviours. According to documents from estimates, you are cutting extreme behaviour grants to schools by around 20%.
Why are you cutting funding for grants to schools to deal with extreme behaviour?
ANSWER
Again, I go back to the way schools are run with the resources provided. If a principal working with their school council wants particular programs run within their schools, they have two options. The first is to fund it out of existing resources they have within the school. The second option is to negotiate with the Education department, as they have done for many years, even when you were the government …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question is about the cuts which have been made to the grants available to schools. The grants that deal with extreme behaviours available to schools have been cut, which makes it much harder for a school to deal with extreme behaviours.
Mr CHANDLER: In a perfect world, and this is where I would like to head into the future, each school would be given one bucket of money. I find it increasingly frustrating within education and with the partnerships we have with the federal government that so many different funding lines exist today all commencing and stopping at different times. It makes it very difficult to provide an ongoing program.
In the future, I would like to see one bucket of money handed to a school and allowing the principals and schools councils autonomy to introduce the programs they may wish.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. This is not musings about what he may like to see in the future. This is about what is happening today. You have cut the challenging behaviour grants bucket to schools by 20%. This is having a consequential cut at the schools. Minister, will you answer the question?
Mr GILES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! This is not a place for a debate on a point of order. You make a point of order, and then you sit down. We will respond to it quite appropriately, but it is not for statements.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not see that as a point of order. Minister, please continue your answer.
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition want us to sign up to a Gonski model of education that is going to have us hand over control of our schools to Canberra. They want to provide 1000 extra bureaucrats in Canberra …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was not about Gonski. The question was about the fact the minister has cut the funding for extreme behaviours grants available to schools. Can he explain why he cut this grant funding?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, continue.
Mr CHANDLER: This comes down to the very nub of what the question is. It is about resources and funding and how we can afford, as a government, to provide the best we can, given the fiscal position the previous government left us.
There have been some saving measures made right across the board, not only in Education but in Health, Parks and Wildlife, and many of our departments. There had to be saving measures made. Why? Because of the fiscal position left us by the previous Labor government which overspent and wanted to rob our children for years to come.
They would prefer we signed up to a model of education that provides 1000 more bureaucrats in Canberra, taking more money away from classrooms.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Why is he cutting the funding to the extreme behaviour unit?
Mr CHANDLER: I have just told you!
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, you have 50 seconds to answer the question.
Mr CHANDLER: The nub of it comes down to resources. I can give you this commitment. As the Minister for Education, I will take the fight to my Cabinet colleagues, just as they do in the Cabinet room, to fight for our fair share of the pie when it comes to resources in the Northern Territory. The reality is, and I say it again, we have to, as a community and a government, live within our means. If we do not, we are robbing the children we are educating today; we are robbing their future.
Do we want to go back and talk about how much money this government has spent in education? More than you ever did.
Into the future, we will have additional spending in education. Why? Because we are a growing economy. When more people and families move to the Territory we will need more teachers and more schools - more teachers, more schools from a Country Liberals government.
Why are you cutting funding for grants to schools to deal with extreme behaviour?
ANSWER
Again, I go back to the way schools are run with the resources provided. If a principal working with their school council wants particular programs run within their schools, they have two options. The first is to fund it out of existing resources they have within the school. The second option is to negotiate with the Education department, as they have done for many years, even when you were the government …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question is about the cuts which have been made to the grants available to schools. The grants that deal with extreme behaviours available to schools have been cut, which makes it much harder for a school to deal with extreme behaviours.
Mr CHANDLER: In a perfect world, and this is where I would like to head into the future, each school would be given one bucket of money. I find it increasingly frustrating within education and with the partnerships we have with the federal government that so many different funding lines exist today all commencing and stopping at different times. It makes it very difficult to provide an ongoing program.
In the future, I would like to see one bucket of money handed to a school and allowing the principals and schools councils autonomy to introduce the programs they may wish.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. This is not musings about what he may like to see in the future. This is about what is happening today. You have cut the challenging behaviour grants bucket to schools by 20%. This is having a consequential cut at the schools. Minister, will you answer the question?
Mr GILES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! This is not a place for a debate on a point of order. You make a point of order, and then you sit down. We will respond to it quite appropriately, but it is not for statements.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not see that as a point of order. Minister, please continue your answer.
Mr CHANDLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition want us to sign up to a Gonski model of education that is going to have us hand over control of our schools to Canberra. They want to provide 1000 extra bureaucrats in Canberra …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The question was not about Gonski. The question was about the fact the minister has cut the funding for extreme behaviours grants available to schools. Can he explain why he cut this grant funding?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, continue.
Mr CHANDLER: This comes down to the very nub of what the question is. It is about resources and funding and how we can afford, as a government, to provide the best we can, given the fiscal position the previous government left us.
There have been some saving measures made right across the board, not only in Education but in Health, Parks and Wildlife, and many of our departments. There had to be saving measures made. Why? Because of the fiscal position left us by the previous Labor government which overspent and wanted to rob our children for years to come.
They would prefer we signed up to a model of education that provides 1000 more bureaucrats in Canberra, taking more money away from classrooms.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. Why is he cutting the funding to the extreme behaviour unit?
Mr CHANDLER: I have just told you!
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, you have 50 seconds to answer the question.
Mr CHANDLER: The nub of it comes down to resources. I can give you this commitment. As the Minister for Education, I will take the fight to my Cabinet colleagues, just as they do in the Cabinet room, to fight for our fair share of the pie when it comes to resources in the Northern Territory. The reality is, and I say it again, we have to, as a community and a government, live within our means. If we do not, we are robbing the children we are educating today; we are robbing their future.
Do we want to go back and talk about how much money this government has spent in education? More than you ever did.
Into the future, we will have additional spending in education. Why? Because we are a growing economy. When more people and families move to the Territory we will need more teachers and more schools - more teachers, more schools from a Country Liberals government.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016