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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1169 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

While I am on the topic, I would like to say that it was a major disappointment in this budget that there was no financial commitment to implementing the ACT's greenhouse gas targets. We do not see any money being directed towards making the waste reduction targets a reality. We also have the issue of selling the light-poles to ACTEW. As members here are aware, there is a committee inquiry at present looking at how our streetlighting is operated, ways in which we can have greenhouse gas emissions reduced through more efficient lighting, and also the quality of lighting reducing light spill and light pollution in our night skies. It would be interesting to see how selling light-poles to the electricity supplier would enhance the possibility of these sorts of objectives being met.

There are good initiatives in the environment budget - things we have pursued, such as protection of native grasslands at Dunlop, a better environmental purchasing policy, a ground water strategy and the rainwater tank subsidy. But, for the second year running, this budget contains a deep cut in our capacity for strategic planning and environmental regulation. The conservation and Landcare package also contains a significant deception. It is simply stretching the definition too far to include roadworks in Tidbinbilla and upgrading of the camping ground as key conservation initiatives; yet these two projects account for about 30 per cent of the conservation and Landcare package.

Education is another issue in which the Greens are extremely interested. Maintaining education funding is a smart move; but it would be even smarter if we recognised this as the real investment it is and put more resources into helping those who are, for whatever reason, disadvantaged in our education system. Despite the recent closure of the School Without Walls, there are no resources for the new alternative education facilities. From the response by the School Without Walls, it looks as if basically alternative programs will be off-line programs from schools. The Social Policy Committee was told by the Government that two of the off-line programs had folded because of teacher burnout and lack of resources. We must see a commitment to resourcing such programs appropriately. The teacher-student ratio may, indeed, need to be different from in the mainstream classes if these programs are to be successful, which means that there may have to be extra resources allocated to these sorts of programs. There is also no additional assistance for the education system to come up to speed with the new training agenda. Additional resources are required for programs to support students at risk of substandard performance, early intervention for emotionally and behaviourally disturbed students or professional development for teachers, and disadvantaged schools have to be accommodated in this age of school-based management and an increasing dependency on financial contributions from the community.

Obviously, I am pleased to see the Government provide more resources for communities which have been the subject of recent Social Policy Committee inquiries - children at risk, disabilities, and mental health. Most of this will really help us catch up, if you like, because these are areas which are severely underresourced. While an additional $200,000 has been allocated for the introduction of mandatory reporting, this is far less than what all the reports on this subject have recommended - even if there is only a slight increase in reporting levels.

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