Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 11 Hansard (13 December) . . Page.. 2964 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

including Em's lab, the yurt, the Education-constructed toilet block, the campfire structure, the recycling centre, the flying fox and path access, the problem solving equipment, the bridges providing access to program areas, and the ropes course. Quite clearly, under the proposed arrangements, the Department of Education and Training, as it does now, will fully book accommodation at the centre for the 38 weeks by five days.

What is being provided in relation to the education component of Birrigai is to maintain these programs, and there are very good reasons for that. As Ms Tucker says, they are good programs. However, I think Mr Moore was quite correct in what he stated in relation to the thrust of Ms Tucker's motion. She is seeking absolutely no reduction whatsoever in, effectively, what amounts to how those services are delivered, including all the personnel who are there at present. What does that mean? At present, apart from the teachers who actually teach the programs, we have some other staff. I am advised that we have a schools assistant, who is fundamentally administration. That may well be able to be taken over by somebody else. We also have a bursar. Again, that is administration and, again, that may be taken over by somebody else. We also have a number of teachers who teach the program.

Ms Tucker has indicated some concern about the level 2 teaching position, that is, the teacher-in-charge position. The department, when it wrote to the union, flagged initially all positions as being part of the review, simply to let people know that their work environment might be changed as a result of the Government's decision in the budget to contract out the management of the centre. That does not mean that any of those positions will necessarily go and it certainly does not mean that the education programs will suffer in any way whatsoever. The tendering-out process is simply a means of achieving greater efficiencies to enable these outdoor programs to continue in the most effective way. I think that is crucially important.

If Ms Tucker's motion is accepted, and that is, effectively, that there be no reduction of the educational services and teaching positions, we could see remaining three cooks and a kitchenhand currently paid for by Education, with a total salary bill of $78,840.

Mr Wood: You do not want the kids to eat?

MR STEFANIAK: No, that is what having some rationalisation of the system is for, Mr Wood. Even Ms Tucker seems to accept that the centre can be run more efficiently. We might also see some administrative positions remain as well, when, quite clearly, the intent is for Education to get on with its job of conducting its very good program. I think everyone accepts that the centre can be run better. The two speakers so far have indicated that. Education has to make savings in relation to how its excess expenditure is utilised - and not just education but the whole of government, because currently there is money lost as well by Sport, Recreation and Racing. Last year's figures are quite significant. It seems that Education lost in excess of $450,000; if I do my figures, it is more like $481,000. (Extension of time granted) That $481,000 is a quite significant amount of extra revenue forgone. It is not just a revenue question, either.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .