Page 2566 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 24 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DE DOMENICO: I have a supplementary question. The Chief Minister invited it, although I do advise the Chief Minister that I am hideless, I must admit. In light of that answer, Chief Minister, what members of the private sector, if any, will the ACT Government purse be funding to go to Japan?
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, I have already said in answer to Mrs Carnell that it is the intention that the private sector fund their own visits.
Schools - Commercial Sponsorships
MR MOORE: My question is directed to Mr Wood, the Minister for Education. I would like to know what you are doing about providing the guidelines necessary for schools to be able to make decisions about commercial sponsorship, particularly the government schools of the ACT?
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, some time ago the Australian Education Council put out draft guidelines for the use of school systems as those systems worked up their own policies. The ACT Department of Education has been working on those and is about to put out a draft policy, if it has not already gone out. It may be in the next few days that it will be out for comment in the community and in the schools before the policy is more firmly set in place.
MR MOORE: I ask a supplementary question, Madam Speaker. Minister, will you make sure that members are provided with a copy of that?
MR WOOD: Yes, indeed.
Freedom of Information Charges
MR HUMPHRIES: Madam Speaker, my question is to the Attorney-General. Talking about misleading, I refer the Minister to his - - -
Mr Connolly: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Is that snide little remark - "talking about misleading" - an accusation that I am misleading the house? If so, it should be withdrawn.
MR HUMPHRIES: Madam Speaker, I was referring to Mr Berry's reflection that Mrs Carnell had misled the public, and I make the same reflection in relation to Mr Connolly.
MADAM SPEAKER: I think you ought to be very careful, then, Mr Humphries.
Mr Berry: I raise the same point of order. That clearly is an imputation against Mr Connolly. It ought to be withdrawn.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Humphries, were you pointing out to me that there was no intention of imputation against Mr Connolly?
MR HUMPHRIES: I make the same reflection on Mr Connolly that Mr Berry made on Mrs Carnell.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .