Mr SETTER - 1996-08-15
Can the minister advise how the education component of the 1996-97 Northern Territory budget compares with other jurisdictions?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, there is no comparison anywhere. In budget terms, the education component is 50% above that in the nearest state.
Mr Bailey: The budget papers refer to 2.7 times the amount to deliver the same level of services.
Mr FINCH: Does the member for Wanguri - financial genius that he is - think it is better that we spend $6301 per student in primary schools, as we do, compared with the $4048 national average? That is some $1700 more than the expenditure in the nearest state, Western Australia? Does he think that the $8860 we spend per student in high schools is a little better than $5876? The economic genius opposite would suggest that we should match this nonsensical proportion of total outlay that he has in his mind and increase our education budget by 30%. He wants to spend $82m extra on top of the $250m we spend already. What
Page 1491
would that do to the manageable level of debt for the Northern Territory? Every year there would be an accumulation of $82m extra debt. Perhaps the member for Wanguri would find his $82m extra for education by removing it from the health budget. Perhaps it could come from the police budget or the aged pensioners concession area or the roads program. He would not know where to take it from. As far as financial responsibility is concerned, the opposition is a sham.
If we went back the other way and spent what the states spend per student - an irrelevant figure - we would probably save $88m. Is that what the opposition would have us do instead? Why not compare it with the gross state product?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The minister will resume his seat. The member for Wanguri has plenty of opportunity for debate in this House. Question Time is not a time for debate. It is not a time for cross-Chamber interjection at length. Short, sharp, pertinent interjections are acceptable, but the sort of interjection coming from the member for Wanguri is unacceptable. It is the type of thing that complaints were made about yesterday. I ask members to refrain from that kind of interjection.
Mr FINCH: Mr Speaker, there are many different measures that can be used, but what the Northern Territory CLP government has done consistently for years is outspend every state by 50%. Despite that healthy base, we have had a positive growth of 18%, in real dollar terms, for the last 5 years. We have had 28% increase in dollars of the day and an increase again this year of about 4.6% in comparative terms. The trend shows that - and I will table this for the benefit of members - since 1992, the gross outlay on education in the Northern Territory at the hands of the CLP government is extremely healthy. Thank goodness Territorians never have been, nor are ever likely to be, exposed to the economic and financial vandalism, irresponsibility, naivety, or whatever other term you care to use, of members of the Labor Party opposite.
Page 1492
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, there is no comparison anywhere. In budget terms, the education component is 50% above that in the nearest state.
Mr Bailey: The budget papers refer to 2.7 times the amount to deliver the same level of services.
Mr FINCH: Does the member for Wanguri - financial genius that he is - think it is better that we spend $6301 per student in primary schools, as we do, compared with the $4048 national average? That is some $1700 more than the expenditure in the nearest state, Western Australia? Does he think that the $8860 we spend per student in high schools is a little better than $5876? The economic genius opposite would suggest that we should match this nonsensical proportion of total outlay that he has in his mind and increase our education budget by 30%. He wants to spend $82m extra on top of the $250m we spend already. What
Page 1491
would that do to the manageable level of debt for the Northern Territory? Every year there would be an accumulation of $82m extra debt. Perhaps the member for Wanguri would find his $82m extra for education by removing it from the health budget. Perhaps it could come from the police budget or the aged pensioners concession area or the roads program. He would not know where to take it from. As far as financial responsibility is concerned, the opposition is a sham.
If we went back the other way and spent what the states spend per student - an irrelevant figure - we would probably save $88m. Is that what the opposition would have us do instead? Why not compare it with the gross state product?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The minister will resume his seat. The member for Wanguri has plenty of opportunity for debate in this House. Question Time is not a time for debate. It is not a time for cross-Chamber interjection at length. Short, sharp, pertinent interjections are acceptable, but the sort of interjection coming from the member for Wanguri is unacceptable. It is the type of thing that complaints were made about yesterday. I ask members to refrain from that kind of interjection.
Mr FINCH: Mr Speaker, there are many different measures that can be used, but what the Northern Territory CLP government has done consistently for years is outspend every state by 50%. Despite that healthy base, we have had a positive growth of 18%, in real dollar terms, for the last 5 years. We have had 28% increase in dollars of the day and an increase again this year of about 4.6% in comparative terms. The trend shows that - and I will table this for the benefit of members - since 1992, the gross outlay on education in the Northern Territory at the hands of the CLP government is extremely healthy. Thank goodness Territorians never have been, nor are ever likely to be, exposed to the economic and financial vandalism, irresponsibility, naivety, or whatever other term you care to use, of members of the Labor Party opposite.
Page 1492
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016