EARLY EDUCATION
I MUST respond to Senator Helen Polley (The Examiner, August 23), who has presented a misinformed view about government investment in early learning.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The state government has committed more than an additional $100 million from 2018-19 to early learning in Tasmania. This means more play-based education for our young people, more teachers in our schools, infrastructure upgrades where required and more teacher assistants in prep.
This bigger question here, is why Labor and the Greens oppose such a large investment in early years education? Lowering the starting age for prep by six months will give every Tasmanian child access to two years of quality, play-based, enquiry led learning before they start formal schooling in Year 1.
Quite simply, we will not improve our education outcomes and match or better other states if we are satisfied that our children start their education later and finish it earlier than their interstate peers.
There are many people and groups support the non-compulsory change, including the Tasmanian Association of State School Organisations, the Tasmanian Principals Association, the Children’s Commissioner and the TCCI.
We gave Tasmanians a commitment that we would consult widely on the Education Act review and we have – we have consulted for almost two years. We recognise that every child is different and by making this non-compulsory we are giving parents a choice, but giving our children the best start in education will be life-changing for future generations and we cannot shirk this responsibility.
This is about equity for every Tasmanian child regardless of the financial capacity of their parents to pay for childcare. Those that support the values and objectives of Gonski, as the state government does should be embracing this change.
So while we understand that some groups will continue to vocally oppose it, everybody should be putting Tasmanian children first.
Jeremy Rockliff, Minister for Education.
Marriage Equality
PAT Gartlan (Letters, August 24) believes the Australian people should be given a say in whether people of the same sex who love each other should be allowed to marry. She supports a plebiscite, the prospect of which is sending shudders of fear through Tasmania’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community because they know it would be a divisive debate, where opponents of marriage equality feel free to depict their lives, their loves, their desire for equal treatment as illegitimate.
What business is it of Ms Gartlan or anybody else whether two consenting adults who love each other should be allowed to marry? Why should Australians who will not be impacted in any way by marriage equality be given the right to sit in judgment of loving same sex couples?
The Australian people weren’t asked by plebiscite what they thought of former Prime Minister Mr John Howard’s changes to the Marriage Act that defined marriage as only legal between a man and a woman.
Members of Parliament are elected to represent their communities, exercise their conscience and enact legislation. Instead of spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on a divisive and damaging plebiscite which a number of right-wing MPs have said they’ll ignore anyway, there should be a free vote on marriage equality in the Parliament.
Andrea Dawkins, MP, Trevallyn.
Boomer harvey
With regards to North Melbourne terminating "Boomer'' Harvey's playing career with the club at the end of this season, I would like to suggest that a more appropriate alternative would be to terminate the positions of all those who made this ridiculous decision and let the champ play on for as long as he can keep producing the stellar form he displayed this year.