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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 4 Hansard (2 April) . . Page.. 1209 ..

Mr Speaker, when I refer in this speech to "Connors"I am referring to Ms Connors' report. So when I refer to Ms Connors I am speaking about Ms Connors; and when I refer to her report, I may refer to Connors-and that is not to mean any disrespect.

This government since its election has struggled to make decisions. It has struggled to show the people of the ACT that it is in control. It has relied on its reactive nature to exercise authority, and it has contracted out the policy development program in a way unseen in ACT political history.

This government has commissioned a record number of reports and inquiries to develop the policy platform it will take to the next election. Labor Party policy is being developed by bureaucrats and consultants using taxpayers' funds. Education funding was only area where the government had some idea of what it wanted before it commissioned the report. That is why the government appointed Lyndsay Connors to conduct this inquiry and that is why we have a report containing such recommendations.

The government wanted a report which simultaneously kicked the non-government sector, gave a glowing report about the public sector-while emphasising how much better it could do with the money provided to those pesky "elitist"schools-as well as bashing the federal government as much as possible. Congratulations. The government got what it asked for. But the question remains: will our kids get what they expect and deserve when it comes to their education? The answer, if the recommendations of this report are enacted, is no.

We are extremely disappointed in the Connors report, and when the community absorbs the reality of this report, they, too, will be disappointed. There is nothing new in this report, so how can it possibly set the agenda for education funding in the future?

This report has failed to do what the former minister said it would, and that is point out where the $7.4 million slush fund should be spent. The Connors report fails to put dollar terms on anything. Therefore, the ideas are uncosted and constitute more of a wish list for the budget submission process which we are about to go into.

Mr Speaker, the major and most galling disappointment for me in this report is that, while examining areas of funding for some school sectors, Connors failed to comprehensively address schooling capabilities across the board. With so much time allocated and carrying a hefty budget, Connors has not significantly addressed the many difficulties in the government school sector, nor sought to identify efficiencies, costed nor cost neutral.

Ms Connors has completed her $276,000 funded review into education funding some three months later than scheduled. We have always maintained that Connors was

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