Page 5523 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, the position is pretty much as Mr Humphries described it. It comes down to priorities. There is a much diminished number of consultants compared with some years ago. As priorities change within education, if our assessment is that there is a need for consultancies in other areas we obviously can meet that need only by taking a consultancy from another area. If the budget conditions are such, we may simply have to remove a consultancy, although I do not think that is the case on this occasion. We simply cannot sustain expansion. I think it is fair to say that in most agencies these days, if you want to run a new program, you look at your existing program and say, "What is there of a lesser priority?". There is no doubt that I and everybody else would give a high priority to careers education, but there is a small number of other matters that have a very high priority that we must meet.
MR HUMPHRIES: I ask a supplementary question. Mr Speaker, given the concerns of organisations such as the Career Education Association and others working in this field that this is a move which is short sighted, will the Minister agree to review the decision he has made?
MR WOOD: I have had the same approaches from the Career Education Association. Yes, they would regard it as short sighted, and so would the science professional group if I removed a science consultant, and so on. There is no question about that. That is their view.
I am seeking to have an assessment from the department of how we can proceed with the Careers Expo, which is a very important annual event. I am asking whether the removal of that careers adviser will have any effect on that. The expo is run by a very large number of educators from across all sectors. The careers adviser had a role in it. I want to ensure that there has been no critical loss to the committee that runs that important Careers Expo. I was asked about a review, but at this stage that is all I would commit myself to.
Arms Exhibitions
MR COLLAERY: My question is directed to Mr Connolly as the Attorney-General. I ask the Attorney whether the direction he issued to the Natex Trust relates only to exhibitions aimed primarily at arms displays and arms sales and does not exclude the technological aspects relating to the arms trade. In fact, the direction to Natex is ambiguous and does not exclude further Aidex exhibitions, differently named, that relate to electronic and other exhibitions.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .