❓ A parliamentary question addresses a teachers' strike, teacher shortages, and alleged bureaucratic bloat in the Department of Education. The Premier responds by criticising the strike, defending the government's pay offer, and highlighting the union's internal divisions.
AnsweredQoN 21Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
TEACHERS’ STRIKE
Before I put my question to the Premier, on behalf of the member for Warren-Blackwood, I acknowledge in the gallery, in those wonderful bright orange shirts, the students from the Northcliffe District High School I refer to the strike action being taken today by teachers that is disrupting parents and students across the state. (1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
Before I put my question to the Premier, on behalf of the member for Warren-Blackwood, I acknowledge in the gallery, in those wonderful bright orange shirts, the students from the Northcliffe District High School I refer to the strike action being taken today by teachers that is disrupting parents and students across the state. (1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I refer to the strike action being taken today by teachers that is disrupting parents and students across the state. (1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I refer to the strike action being taken today by teachers that is disrupting parents and students across the state. (1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(1) Is the Premier aware that figures from his government show a projected shortfall of 3 000 teachers within the next five years? (2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(2) Will the Premier explain why, despite this, he still decided to increase the number of bureaucrats at the Department of Education and Training’s central office by 48 per cent between 2004 and 2007? (3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(3) Has the Premier been giving the current failing Minister for Education and Training the benefit of his wisdom as the previous failed education minister, given that he presided over the last teachers’ strike in this state, which I believe was in September 2003? (4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(4) Does the Premier understand how his failure to use the proceeds from this economic boom to build a decent education system for our children is driving teachers out of classrooms and children into private schools? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
(1)-(4) I thank the member for the question. It is most regrettable that the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia executive directed its members to take strike action today in defiance of the Industrial Relations Commission’s recommendation. There are some militant unions in Western Australia that very rarely, if ever, defy the Industrial Relations Commission. It is an act of gross irresponsibility that the teachers’ union defied the Industrial Relations Commission. However, I am heartened by the report from the Department of Education and Training on the number of teachers who turned up for work today at schools. I understand it was about 70 per cent, which says something pretty profound. Most teachers who are in the union abide by the direction of the teachers’ union executive. Quite frankly, that is part and parcel of being in a union: if the executive says that they must do something, they are obliged to do it. On this occasion a vast number of people have not abided by the direction from their union’s executive. Nevertheless, we do have this issue. I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 — Mr M. McGowan : Now less than 40. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I urge the teachers’ union to move forward. The offer that was put to the teachers’ union late last year by the department and the minister was a very good offer, which would have seen, for example, senior teachers, level 2—of which there are about 5 000 in Western Australia, and it is an almost automatic progression to that level—earning, by the end of the proposed agreement, $84 000 a year, making them the highest paid teachers in Australia at that level. The teachers in Western Australia reach their pay increments more rapidly than in New South Wales. The teachers’ union is currently comparing the salaries for level 9 teachers in New South Wales with salaries for level 7 teachers in Western Australia, and that is neither an accurate nor a legitimate comparison. The offer that was made was a very good offer. It reflects our concern that we need to keep more people in the teaching profession and attract more to it. That $84 000 figure is not what would have been available to teachers in hard-to-staff schools and remote schools. Teachers at senior level 2 in those locations would have been earning, by the end of the agreement, in excess of $100 000 a year. It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
It was not too long ago that Michael Chaney, in his role as head of the Business Council of Australia, was advocating that our best paid teachers earn $100 000 a year. In Western Australia, they could. In fact, last year’s teacher of the year won $100 000 on top of his salary for being the best teacher in the system, judged by the mechanism that provided that result. We have responded and we will continue to respond to what is clearly an issue; that is, keeping more people in teaching and attracting more people to teaching. The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
The proposed salary on offer to our graduates is extremely attractive and it is very unfortunate that the teachers’ union decided not to accept the offer. EBA negotiations are rough and tumble, and that is a fact of life, but eventually this matter will be finalised one way or the other. It will be disappointing if this matter has to go to arbitration. There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
There is an internal problem in the union executive, and everybody who is observing knows it. They find it very difficult to come to an agreement on anything because there are strongly opposed groups of people in that executive. They should all think outside that and think about what is in the best interest of, as the Leader of the Opposition said, public education. The teachers’ union predicted we would be something like 600 teachers short at the beginning of this year. It went totally silent when we were about 45 —
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : There is a big difference between a scaremongering 600 and 40. Let us be objective, let us be sensible and let us set aside emotive and irrational tactics and think about what is in the best interests of our students. I agree to some extent with the proposition that was put by the Leader of the Opposition that the current attitude of the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union will encourage parents to take their children out of government schools. It will discourage people from going into the profession per se, and particularly into the public sector, and that is against the best interests of the union’s members and everybody. I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
I have been a passionate advocate of public education. I believe in it. I believe it is the crucible in which the quintessential Australian character is born, where the rich and the poor, the bright and the not so bright, immigrant children and Aboriginal children—everybody—can come together. It is absolutely critical that we have a strong, healthy public education system. I urge the executive of the State School Teachers’ Union to think about what is in the best interests of the children of this state and put aside the completely unnecessary and unwarranted tactics that it is pursuing at the moment.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.