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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 4 Hansard (10 April) . . Page.. 950 ..

MR PRATT: That is not a comment about the consultant: that is a comment about you, minister. That is a comment about the unprofessional way in which you have cobbled this inquiry together.

Mr Corbell: Do not play with words, Mr Pratt.

MR PRATT: No, don't you play with words. So you see, again the minister talks about interference: good God, how dare I question the establishment of this inquiry, or the way in which it has been done? That is characterised as interference into the independence and the mobilisation of this inquiry. That is absolutely untrue. It is my duty to question the way these vehicles are put together, and I will continue to do that. We, on this side of the house, will not be bullied by a minister who simply needs to create smokescreens.

On this side of the house, we understand and respect the capabilities of Ms Connors, and we have never questioned them. We have only questioned the viability of the establishment of an inquiry involving one person, and one person who tends to represent a fairly prescriptive viewpoint. That is not an attack on the person: it is a severe questioning of the process of the establishment and the mobilisation of this inquiry.

Surely a committee of reference, representing a broad spectrum of stakeholders, and one which is given ownership of the inquiry, will be one that will eventually march to the same drum, and speak with one voice about the outcome of that inquiry? Ms Tucker has commented that I may have difficulties with the terms of reference. That is not the case, Ms Tucker, and I have never said publicly, or in this place, that I question the terms of reference. Given that the inquiry is a fait accompli, I have no difficulties with the terms of reference, and I have stated that. I do not think you are on the right track by criticising that.

I will finish by saying that the appropriate involvement of all stakeholders in this inquiry, not just as respondents to questions, will allow a far more effective and representational outcome, and one much more likely to add value to one of Australia's best education systems.

Question put:

The Assembly voted-

Question so resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

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