House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time School Closures SCHOOL CLOSURES Mr PISONI House of Assembly Unley SCHOOL CLOSURES Mr PISONI (Unley) (15:17): My question is to the Minister for Education for the pagans of Semaphore. Is the policy of closing or amalgamating small schools an 'announce and defend' policy or a 'consult and consider' policy? The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly Cheltenham Minister for Education Minister for Early Childhood Development SCHOOL CLOSURES The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Education, Minister for Early Childhood Development) (15:18): It is very hard to follow the member for Unley. In particular, this morning, when we were— The Hon. P.F. Conlon interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Transport. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Just to clarify for those opposite so that they do not get too carried away with this idea of forced amalgamations, no school will close under this policy. No piece of land will be sold under this policy. It simply applies to those schools that are collocated. There is this anomaly at the moment. Some schools are resourced as if they are two separate schools and other schools are resourced as if they are one school. So, it is an anomaly, and when you are looking for ways to make economies and savings, it is rational for you to do that. I was very interested to hear the member for Unley's comments today on radio when he was criticising this number, which I have just mentioned, when talking about the $203 million extra resources into education. He suggested that a large sum of that was comprised of capital works spending. I have to say— Mr Pisoni interjecting: The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I read it carefully. You were seeking to suggest that I was spinning it by saying that there is an extra $203 million in the budget on a recurrent basis for education by suggesting the lion's share of that was comprised of capital expenditure. I have to say that, on the day when the Leader of the Opposition is seeking to respond to the budget, to have one of her frontbenchers not understand the basic distinction between 'operating' and 'investing' within the budget is a complete joke. All other members who are interested in the member for Unley's career, I would advise them to look at this piece of transcript—a complete inability to come to terms with the basic issue of the distinction between recurrent and capital expenditure. There is an additional $203 million of recurrent expenditure in this budget for education. That is a Labor budget and we are proud of it.