Page 2431 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 7 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries has waxed lyrical about his community consultation process. He claims that he has fully consulted using a two-stage process. Let me read you some of the things the community is saying about that consultation process. I think that you will find, Mr Acting Speaker, that the community is totally disillusioned with this Government and it is reflected in their comments about the so-called consultation process. The Holder Primary School has said:
It is obvious that the copious and detailed information provided in the Holder Primary School ... submission, for one, has either not been read, or ignored.
Mr Humphries: Rubbish; that is rubbish.
MS FOLLETT: That is their wording, Mr Humphries, not mine. Let us turn then to the residents of Cook and their comments on the consultation process. Again I will quote:
The Cook Action Group believes that many issues raised by our school's submission in response to the Department of Education's Reshaping document have not been provided to the Joint Party Room for their consideration.
I think its members have taken a fairly charitable view of the thing myself. They go on, Mr Acting Speaker:
We have reached this conclusion ... after discussions with Departmental officials last week and after reading the Department's Rationale for Closure with regard to Cook ...
They then go on in a desperate attempt to get to this Government by reiterating all the points they made in the first place.
I will turn to the Weetangera school, on which even Dr Kinloch admits that there were facts which did not come to light in the Government's consideration. The spokesman for Weetangera school says:
Government sources have indicated that Cabinet may not have been aware of 4 key facts when making the decision to close Weetangera.
They had not heard of Weetangera's after school care and the 180 children ... who use it ...
They did not know about the Weetangera hearing impaired unit let alone that the children would not be allowed to move to the nominated new school with their peers.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .