Page 1055 - Week 06 - Thursday, 27 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I hope that what we have produced, the compromise we have put forward, is one that the Minister, Mr Dawkins, is prepared to meet halfway. I think that the cooperative model could, if the Minister were open-minded about this, allow for the ANU and the CCAE to be counted towards the models envisaged by the unified national system. If that is the case we will have achieved, I believe, some benefit for the ANU in particular and also for the CCAE.
The second reason why I think we have to accept some closer union between the institutions is the obvious need, in particular in some fields of study, for cooperation. I am thinking particularly of the comments that were given to the committee by representatives of the science faculties of both those institutions.
It was very clear in those cases that there is a problem in the ACT. For example, two schools of geology in the ACT simply do not make sense. For both institutions to have engineering faculties just does not make sense. There has to be some rationalisation of the way those things occur. I was very much convinced by what the scientists said to us and I believe that when I heard that evidence I was of the view that we had to make some movement to accommodate them. As my friend Mr Wood says, to stand still is to decline.
It is also equally true that in other fields, and I am thinking particularly here of economics and commerce, it is quite conceivable that movement to amalgamate or come closer together could be actually deleterious to the studies of those areas. I am hoping that the model we have proposed will somehow get the best of both worlds; it will somehow allow those who do not feel that closer cooperation is wise in their field to preserve their distance - their isolation, if you like - and those who feel that it would be beneficial can go ahead.
I will sum up by saying, Mr Speaker, that reading back over the report I came to the conclusion that some might feel that this report was something of a cop-out. We do say that ultimately, as far as the crucial question of the ANU and the CCAE is concerned, the two bodies should get together and talk some more. That might seem to be a little bit of evading of the main question: "We do not say yes, we do not say no, but we say they should talk about it some more".
I think it is useful, however, because there have been under the unified national system far too many shotgun weddings. I mean, far too many people have said, "You have got to go ahead, the new realities are this and you had better like them or lump them".
And what I hope we have created for the ANU and the CCAE is a chance - to use the words of Dr Kinloch, which I think make a very good analogy - to engage in a courtship, to see whether they believe they can work together on a more
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .