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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1330 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

that the community now understand that they should have full confidence in the ACT education system.

Recently released ABS figures illustrating the continuing up trend of secondary school retention rates-that is, a repeating trend over the last five years or so-fly in the face of Labor's 2001 election platform, which predicted doom and gloom about retention rates. The Assembly, I hope, will recognise the reality and encourage the government to continue the present direction of ACT education. That is, there is no need to make a massive diversion because of a doom and gloom prediction which was unfairly put forward.

The situation I refer to is that of 2001, when Labor-desperately seeking negative issues, I suppose-began a scare campaign about the state of education in the ACT. Let me describe how that campaign started and how it progressed.

Mr Stanhope in September 2001, then Leader of the Opposition, demanded of Chief Minister Gary Humphries, as reported in the Canberra Times of that day: "Why are school retention rates in free fall?" The truth is they never were in free fall.

A media release from the Labor Party of Tuesday, 2 October 2001 stated:

Labor's plan will address the falling retention rates identified so graphically by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in its report ACT Focus 2001.

The release goes on to say:

They showed a six per cent decline in year seven-year 12 retention rates in just one year, the highest in the country.

Most telling of all, the official Labor Party election platform says:

ACT Labor will also address the problems faced by secondary schools and the reasons for the decline in retention rates under this present government.

The platform goes on to say:

Although still higher than the national rate, the apparent retention rate of students attending school full-time, from year 7-12 in the ACT was 87 per cent in 2000, a fall from 93 per cent in 1999.

I hope members of the ACT Assembly will note the use of the word "apparent". It means that even Labor Party strategists at that time had doubts about falling retention rates. They wanted to hedge their bets so they said "apparent". Was this wishful thinking, talking down ACT education for political purposes? Did they want retention rates to be falling? Did they hope retention rates were falling so just said they were falling?

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