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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (2 December) . . Page.. 4234 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

We found that the Community Advocate may need to have a broader reporting role. We are not convinced yet that we have the answer, but clearly on some issues that confront the Community Advocate broader input from the Assembly, more than just reporting to a Minister, may be of assistance. We have recommended that the Government look at this area in more detail and perhaps report back to the next Assembly. There are several models that could be looked at. We need to be convinced that we are not putting into the public arena a series of issues that the Community Advocate must deal with in an unemotive and non-political way. The jury is out on that one, and we look forward to both the Government's response now and the next Assembly's response in future years.

We discovered a curious thing while looking at the Department of Education. The legislative requirements under the Schools Authority Act are such that we really should have a board of management for the Schools Authority. One member in particular became quite concerned about this, but on further questioning it was discovered that that board was abandoned long ago. It was not simply this Government that was responsible for the non-compliance with the legislation but every government since the beginning of self-government. We decided to make a broad-sweeping recommendation, so that before we form government next year, be it us or the Liberal Party or a collection of Independents - who knows who is going to come into government next time? - we are assured that every department has reviewed its legislative requirements for boards of management and advisory authorities and that the incoming Minister knows of those requirements and appoints those boards. If appropriate, amending legislation should come before the house so that the Minister for Education is not caught out - as this Minister was, and the Minister before him, and the Minister before him - and does not operate at odds with the requirements of his Act.

The issue of school sponsorship was discussed because it raises the ongoing and really serious social policy issue of the management of equity within the education system. More importantly, it raises the issue of reporting of sponsorship. Personally, I found the Department of Education's report one of the most disappointing because one had no flavour at all of all the exciting and really good things that have been happening within the Department of Education and no flavour at all of some of the real difficulties that confront the system in terms of the unevenness of schools' capacity to gather money. I do not really mind schools getting sponsorship. As opposed to other members of the committee who perhaps would have liked to abolish it altogether, I think sponsorship is very valuable and links a school very closely to its community. But we need to know that some schools are not disadvantaged and that the Department of Education has a handle on that and can deal with the ongoing and chronic difficulties faced in some schools, more often than not by virtue of their location, in that there are no businesses nearby, no shops nearby, and no-one can offer them sponsorship. I think the Government ought to look at that a little more seriously than it has.

We also looked at green issues. Invasive plant weeds are apparently still on sale. That is a matter of concern. We really need a more comprehensive plan for managing our environment. We ask that the Government have a look at that in more detail. The ongoing debate on greenhouse emissions is dealt with yet again.

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