Page 2725 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr De Domenico: They would accept more money if you gave it to them.
MR WOOD: If I had more money I would give it to them. It is operating extremely well, and it has well in excess of what some people - not I - consider to be a desirable number. St Anthony's has 593 students; St Thomas the Apostle has 539; and on it goes. I think those simple statistics indicate clearly enough that you cannot run any valid argument about the size of a school, and how good or bad it is. I think Mr Cornwell has been to one of these schools. Go out to Cook or Lyons and see how well they are going. They are doing a great job. Let me tell you that I am not concerned about schools and the number of students in them; I am concerned about the quality of programs in those schools.
MR MOORE (4.15): Madam Speaker, Mr Cornwell has raised some important issues and Mr Wood has attempted to address them. There is positive research that provides some good evidence for what is in the committee's report - that schools function best, in other words, at the optimum, below 600 students for primary schools and below 800 students for secondary schools. There is evidence that they are optimum levels. That is not to say that schools cannot operate effectively; but what we are looking for in our education system is to try to run optimals, if that is at all possible. So I think this part of the debate still should remain open.
I would like to raise a couple of other issues that Mr Cornwell did not touch on. The first is the committee's recommendation at paragraph 4.140, namely:
. detailed discussions about sharing of facilities at the Primary and Pre-school in Nicholls take place as quickly as possible which will enable any outstanding difficulties to be resolved.
The Government's response is that the Government is currently holding discussions with the Catholic Education Office regarding the co-location of educational and community facilities at Nicholls. That is good; but, if you read the paragraph leading to that recommendation, you will see that we were quite specific in saying:
The Committee notes that although extensive consultation has taken place in relation to the proposed sharing of school facilities ...
I think it is important to note the tone of this; that the committee is supporting that process. We are not being critical of the process. We are making what I consider to be a constructive recommendation. We note:
... further consultation will be undertaken during the design stage with Government agencies and union, community and specialists representatives.
We are seeking to have you go further than just your consultation with the Catholic Education Office, which we accept has been going on along the way. I think it is appropriate to recognise that the Government is responding in a positive way, but I hope that the Minister will clarify that matter for us.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .