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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (11 November) . . Page.. 3967 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

in the political arena. That would be improper. This Bill now removes what I am sure all would agree would be an entirely inappropriate scenario. Secondly, giving the board statutory status bestows on it a significant degree of neutrality. The Department of Education and Training is only one provider of education in the Territory, and issues that stretch across non-government schooling would be much better handled by a statutory board clearly separated from the department. Of course, every other State and the Northern Territory have a statutory body to carry out the functions of accreditation, assessment and certification. It is most appropriate, therefore, and certainly not least in terms of transparency, that the ACT follows suit.

Our board is unique amongst its contemporaries, in that ours is the only system that relies on school-based curricula, and, along with Queensland, is the only jurisdiction to rely solely on school-based assessment. I think members will agree that that is a situation that has served us well and is worth preserving. We have been well served by this board and by its predecessors for over 21 years, but the legislative basis is clearly dated and we are overdue for a change. I firmly believe that amending the status of the board and addressing the functions of accreditation and approval for vocational courses will serve only to strengthen and enhance our deserved reputation as an leader in senior secondary education.

This board, as I said before, is an expert committee. It makes decisions about assessments and certification of Year 11 and Year 12 students and accredits courses. It is essential that it functions well for the credibility of the ACT Year 12 Certificate, and that its decisions are both relevant and accepted nationally and internationally. In other States where board membership has been reviewed, decisions have been taken to restrict membership of technical experts.

It is important also - some members have touched on this - that there is a balance between government and non-government schools, the VETA and the university sectors, and major providers and stakeholders. I accept the important role that bodies like the Independent Education Union play. They were one of the key proponents who wanted to be added. However, adding them would have upset the balance between providers. There is a ratio of government and non-government students in this sector of 7 : 3. The ratio of nominees from the government and non-government sectors is 4 : 3. The IEU, too, is one of two unions covering the non-government sector, and not necessarily, I understand, the biggest.

One proposal was that if the TLC did get a representative it would be from the IEU. I do not think that would be desirable, in that we do have that balance between the government and non-government sectors. In terms of that point about the need for the TLC that Ms McRae is putting, the AEU is a very significant component of the Trades and Labour Council and I cannot see any real reason why that body's interests could not be taken on board by the AEU. Also, in terms of the Government's principle, that person, by the very nature of the job, almost certainly would be a member of the AEU. That is something that can be borne in mind.

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