Page 3549 - Week 13 - Thursday, 26 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: Boards or councils. I take great care in so doing and I believe that they stand up to the greatest possible scrutiny. You are welcome to do so, because we appoint, on my recommendation, only the highest calibre people. The record is there for that to be seen. Mr Cornwell made some comment about the new sum of money before ministerial consent is required. Comparison is made with ACTEW and the Milk Authority. I think they are appropriate bodies with which to make the comparison.
Mr Cornwell also spoke about employment prospects, suggesting that simply educating people - I am using my words here - does not necessarily guarantee jobs, and I note that. But let us understand the way of Canberra. One of the great attractions of Canberra, and one of the selling points we use around Australia for prospective employers, is our quality education system; the fact that we have graduates of very high quality from all our institutions. We must maintain our edge in that in order to continue to attract people to Canberra, especially in that area of technology in which we are so interested. So, I do claim that providing better educated people will provide jobs, because it makes Canberra a better place for employers to come into.
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Berry: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
CANBERRA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
Debate resumed.
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, in view of the general agreement we had during this debate, I will not take up the political side of things. I will not develop some of the openings that were made available to me by making a comparison of the policies of the Keating Government in the training area with the policies under the Hewson Government. It is of enormous importance that the Keating Government continue, because the major emphasis that they give to training is essential for Australia. If they are replaced - in that unlikely event - that emphasis will be much diminished. Madam Speaker, I think I will leave it at that because members generally welcome this. In fact, with a little reservation from Mr Humphries, they enthusiastically welcome this. Let us now pass this Bill.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .