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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (11 November) . . Page.. 3964 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

the assessment tools that are put in place. Unless we do that we do offer some level of discredibility to our system, which I think is entirely unwarranted and never has been warranted. I do not think we have a problem that we need to fix. I think we are facing the future and saying that the ACT now is well and truly a self-governing body.

The ACT has learnt a lot from the boards of senior secondary studies that have served us well since the beginning of the Schools Authority. The ACT has an excellent assessment process and an excellent level of quality outcome for its students. The ACT is now going to place itself in a much better position to deal with the broader world. The ACT and Region Chamber of Commerce, the CIT, the VETA - I believe the TLC ought to be there - plus a very good balance of government and non-government schools, union and school representatives are saying, loudly and clearly, that this is a partnership in which we are all involved - parents, carers, guardians, independent and non-independent schools, teachers and union interests; that all of us are working together around the table, albeit a very big one.

Finally, this being the first step, I would like to suggest that we put on record that it should be reviewed in two or three years' time. We are venturing into new waters here. We do want to be sure that a review is anticipated and known about, so that people can watch the progress of this board and, in particular, watch the progress of boards around Australia. As I have said, they are all grappling with the same problems of size, representation, technical needs, whether somebody has to report back to their parent body, whether someone is there as an individual with an individual interest, whether this is a good reflection of the key interests in this area, or whether we need to work toward another model.

For the moment I am confident, particularly if people take my suggestion of the TLC inclusion seriously, that we will end up with a very good board. I think we have got around the table the key and major interest groups, but I do not want to seal off opportunities for change, because we are in such a rapidly changing environment, particularly with the onslaughts of our good Dr Kemp. I want to be sure that we are always a step ahead and able to serve our students well, both in the assessment processes and in the ongoing registration and maintenance of the correct registration of people who offer courses and the educational institutions that have registered. With that, I commend my forthcoming amendment to the Bill and reiterate the Opposition's support for this Bill.

MR MOORE (5.51): Mr Speaker, there is no doubt that we need a Board of Senior Secondary Studies. We have had a Board of Senior Secondary Studies; but it is appropriate that it be established as a body in its own right, and that is why I will be supporting this legislation. I do have a few minor amendments, and, indeed, I see Ms McRae's amendment as minor to the sense of the legislation.

Having said that, I find it disappointing that the board is of such a size. I have listened to the argument since the legislation was tabled that the board is consistent in size with similar boards around Australia. I think that is not a good enough argument for establishing a board of this size. A stronger argument is that by having a board of this size there is a wide range of community views that are critical to education and critical to the way we go about dealing with curricula at the senior secondary level; that having this number of people involved in the process will enhance that, and I do not disagree.

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