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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (28 October) . . Page.. 2332 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

the broader community does. They do not. I agree with other members that it is highly likely that suspension will lead to the closure of Downer Preschool. I am hoping that it will not even be suspended. I am hoping we will get support here today for Mr Berry's motion.

Another really concerning thing is the use of numbers in the justification presented by government. Particularly concerning and offensive, I believe, was the fact that, because the processes within the department mean that you have a cut-off point for registrations that precedes the cut-off point for decisions around placing children who are repeating a year, those children repeating the year are not going to be taken into account. Those sorts of children, I would have thought, in educational terms, are normally given a priority, not used as a scapegoat to promote a political and economic agenda of government. That is what I find offensive. This Minister for Education claims to want to be reaching the highest standards of education in the ACT and always to take into account in decision-making the educational outcomes for children. We have heard him say that many times. Rather than the department or the Government using this inconsistency in determining the enrolments between repeating children and normal registrations as an excuse to justify their decision to suspend Downer, they should have been terribly quiet on it. It is because of poor management that this is happening. This should have been fixed up by the department long ago. Obviously, it is going to lead to confusion around numbers. There was a very generous allocation at North Ainslie. It looks as though it was done purposely to accommodate those children who may not be able to move from Downer into Watson or Hackett. It does start to look like a strategy worked out pretty well in advance.

I have been to a number of meetings and talked to the Downer community, parents and children. I would like the Minister to care for three children under the age of six or seven and walk with them from Downer to North Ainslie. I would like him to do that in all weather, not owning a car. I would like him to try to catch a bus with those children, especially when one is sick. I would like him to try to organise car pooling when you do not have a car yourself, or even if you do. The point is that it is a very difficult situation to have to deal with. The locality of the preschool is incredibly important for access. I have heard you say that yourself. Children will not have equal access. Downer children and families will be disadvantaged if they have to travel that far. There are major roads, and it is a big deal moving from Watson and Downer through to Ainslie.

Concerning for me, as I said, is the very poor consultation process that occurred with the Downer community. The Government needs to acknowledge that it has made a mistake. It may be forced to by this motion today. I am really disappointed, because I said when we tabled our report - and I did get what I thought was a good response from the Government - that here we had an opportunity to look at these issues together, that you were not being provocative and that it was not going to be politicised. This has happened many times, as we know. We have heard about Reid and Mr Moore's influence. We have had politicisation at these decisions. It is not good and it does not inspire confidence from the community in how decisions are made.

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