EO&E..............................................................................................................................................................

 

 

It’s great to be here at Citipointe Christian College. I want to thank Pastor Ron Woolley and his team for making Ross Vasta and myself so welcome. This is obviously a marvellous school. It’s a very large, it’s a very dynamic school and from my perspective today, the really good thing about this school is that they have a very vigorous language programme, a very vigorous language programme that includes Asian languages such as Mandarin and very importantly, it starts right at the beginning of a child’s school life.

 

Today, Ross and I witnessed kids in prep already speaking Mandarin and this is exactly what our country needs to see more of and that’s why I was so very keen to commit the Coalition as I did in my Budget Reply to getting our country as quickly as we reasonably can to a situation where 40 percent of school leavers are taking a foreign language. If we are serious about engagement with the rest of the world, if we are serious about fully participating in the Asian century, we’ve got to boost our language skills and a government which is focussed on the future and not just focussed on tomorrow’s headline would take language training in our schools seriously. 

 

I want to congratulate Pastor Ron for the work here at the school. I’m going to ask him to say a few words, then I’m going to ask Ross to say a few words and then if you’ve got some questions on languages, we’ll take them, then I might say a few words about some of the political ramifications of the day. Ron?

 

 

Well, I was delighted just to have the opportunity to have a look out our children and it’s no doubt that at that age, they have a great capacity to learn and so for the school, language – foreign language and particularly an Asian foreign language - has been a wonderful thing. I was in that classroom this morning and the teachers are very dynamic, but those children are very responsive and I think the earlier the better when it comes to languages.

 

 

Well, thank you very much. It was great to have the Leader of the Opposition in the electorate today because I wanted to show him how important it is for prep students to learn a language and master it when they’re very young. Then we went to see the year four students and they had progressed exponentially and that’s what the programme is all about. We need to have these young students learning a foreign language at a very young age, because they are able to absorb the language and master it in that time, but I just wanted to let you also know that we’ve been getting a lot of questions about the high cost of living and about the carbon tax especially in this area. This is a mortgage belt area and I really wanted Tony to come here and just see exactly what the people are saying and I know that we’ve got a few things to say about that.

 

 

The government has begun a $70 million cash splash on carbon tax advertising, only this is the tax which dare not speak its name. The government is spending $70 million of taxpayers’ money on political propaganda and it’s too scared to actually mention the carbon tax in its carbon tax ads. Now, this is a government that just doesn’t get it. It doesn’t understand that the public are sick of dishonesty from governments; they’re sick of dishonesty from political leaders and I think these carbon tax ads are going to blow up big time in the government’s face. 

 

Another area where the government just doesn’t get it is on the continued scandal of the Health Services Union and the Health Services Union’s Member of Parliament. This is a tainted government relying on a tainted vote. The only person in the country now who doesn’t understand this is the Prime Minister. The ACTU understands it - that’s why the Health Services Union scandal is going to dominate the first day of the ACTU national conference. The only person who will try to get through the conference without mentioning the Health Services Union, without mentioning Craig Thomson, is in fact the Prime Minister herself. She just doesn’t get it and as long as this Prime Minister is in office, it seems that she will be struggling to defend the indefensible. That’s why not only is she a Prime Minister living on borrowed money, she’s a Prime Minister who’s now on borrowed time.

 

 

Have you had any more thoughts about the costs of funding for the foreign language programme? 

 

Look, I certainly think that it’s something that is affordable, particularly over the next decade, because let’s face it, if we invest more in foreign languages, if we get more Australians who can speak foreign languages, there will be a return; there will be a substantial economic return for our country. So, I think this is the kind of modest spending which will generate a long term budgetary return to our country.

 

Is it an advantage as well having a politician, in particular maybe a Foreign Minister that speaks, say, Mandarin?

 

Look, one of the things that I always admired about Kevin Rudd was his ability to speak Mandarin and it was quite an accomplishment, just as Alexander Downer’s ability to speak French was quite an accomplishment. I think it’s very important that more Australians have a mastery of a foreign language. That’s why I’m determined that the next Coalition Government will, within a decade, get the number of school leavers taking a foreign language back up to 40 per cent.

 

Where are the teachers going to come from?

 

Well, you know, we have the global village in this country. There are lots and lots of native speakers of  foreign languages in our country and we should be able to make better use of them in our schools. Now, obviously, to have them teaching at a senior level, they need to have teaching qualifications but the whole point is that we shouldn’t wait until secondary education for language training and for language learning to start and that’s where I think we have a great natural resource in this country which is not being properly exploited right now.

 

They'd need qualifications to teach at any level.

 

Well, if you look at a pre-school, one of the things that my wife is hoping to do - if I might be personal for a moment - one of the things that Margie is hoping to do in her occasional care centre is recruit members of staff who are fluent in foreign languages, so that they can talk to the kids in foreign languages because at that age it’s amazing what youngsters can pick up and if you start young, your mastery of the language is always going to be greater than if you don’t start until you’re 12 or 13.

 

Christopher Pyne’s told the Fin Review that you will press Parliament on privilege grounds to examine Craig Thomson’s funding of lawyers. Can you confirm that that’s something you’re looking at?

 

Look, I certainly think this is a very serious issue. It seems that the Labor Party was paying for Craig Thomson’s lawyers, even as the Prime Minister was dumping him from the caucus and that’s why I say that there are enormous issues here for the Prime Minister. Was the story that Craig Thomson gave the rest of us on the weekend the story that he told the Prime Minister? Did the Prime Minister believe this story? If she didn’t, why did she continue to express confidence in Craig Thomson? If she did, what was it about the way he told her which was different from the way he told the rest of us?

 

 

So, it that a yes? You will press Parliament to look at that?

 

 

Look, there are enormous questions here that the Prime Minister and the Labor Party need to answer. Why has the Prime Minister been running a protection racket for Craig Thomson for many months now?

 

 

It seems that the voters are a bit more impressed with the Budget than perhaps yourself?

 

Look, opinion polls come and go. What never seems to change is the fact that this is a dishonest and incompetent government.

 

 

Does it worry you, though, about potentially winding back some of the payments going out in terms of the reaction to the Budget from that poll?

 

Well, I make two points. The first point is that the Coalition has always supported an educational payment that is linked to genuine educational spending. What we haven’t supported is another cash splash with borrowed money. The other point I make is that I appreciate that the forgotten families of Australia are doing it tough right now and they are going to be hit with the carbon tax in about six weeks time: their power bills are going to go up by ten per cent on day one, their gas bills by nine per cent from day one. So, I’m not going to begrudge them that extra money but, in the long term, the best thing we can do for these families is to get rid of the carbon tax.

 

 

Do you think that the Federal Government needs to intervene in the Italian sisters issue?

 

 

Look, this is a case which is either before the courts or about to be before the courts. It’s a very difficult case. I have enormous sympathy for everyone involved because it’s a very, very difficult case and I think the best thing I can do is avoid prejudicing any proceedings that might be taking place or about to take place.

 

 

The girls have explicitly said that the don’t want to leave the country, they want to stay with their mother, but they're supposed to be on a plane by midnight tonight. 

 

 

And that’s why this is something which needs to be left to the appropriate legal proceedings to sort out. It’s a very difficult case. I can understand why a lot of people feel very strongly about this. I think all of us bleed for everyone involved but we’ve got to accept that there is a process here and it needs to be followed.

 

 

Giving payments to parents when they do have children at school age, wouldn’t that make it more likely the money is going to be spent on the kids, than say giving them money when the kids are born?

 

 

Look, the whole point about the education payment that the Coalition has always supported is that it had to be spent on education - it was a reimbursement for money spent on education. Now, the Coalition has always supported that, it does support that. What we don’t support is a payment under false pretences and that’s what this is. It’s just a cash splash. That’s all it is: a cash splash on borrowed money.

 

 

So, you still don't see the similarities to that end to the Baby Bonus?

 

 

There is a world of difference between the educational payments that we have always supported - which was a reimbursement for educational expense - and this current payment which is just handing out borrowed money to people as disguised carbon tax compensation.

 

 

But is there a world of difference between this payment and the Baby Bonus?

 

 

Look, I think we're going round and round the mulberry bush but if there are other questions I’ll take them.

 

Thank you.

 

[ends]