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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 4 Hansard (2 April) . . Page.. 1211 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

about the importance of having another "working party"established. This is just a bureaucrat's way of getting more jobs for more bureaucrats.

The department has sufficient capability and capacity to examine the useful issues that Connors has pointed out. I am sure that the new minister will have the imagination, the warmth and the ideas to direct her department to get to grips with the priority needs-I hope along the lines that I described earlier.

Mr Speaker, the former Liberal government spent more than any other government on education-more than $40 million above CPI over our two terms. We also introduced firsts in education: for example, ICT testing in year 10; smaller class sizes from K to 2; teacher appraisal reporting as a first step to developing greater accountability in our schools; school-based management to allow greater autonomy to our schools for more creative programming; core subject testing; and new initiatives in indigenous education.

Labor has thankfully continued with those programs and, to be sure, expanded the smaller class size program. But when is Labor going to introduce a first in education in our system? Well, don't hold your breath if you think Connors has provided new groundbreaking creative ideas for the new minister to seize upon. Ideological cries for the public sector at the expense of the non-government sector and recommending the transfer of funding from one sector to another is not creative.

In addition, the inquiry has failed to indicate where the government should spend the $7.4 million-

Ms Gallagher: It was never asked to.

MR PRATT: This is despite a clear commitment, Minister, from the former minister that the report would indeed make such an indication. The new minister, Ms Gallagher, has now informed the Assembly that this money will be rolled over into the 2003-04 budget. Therefore, $7.4 million less has been spent on education this year than what the government had promised would be spent "inside the school gate". That was $7.4 million denied to the students of the ACT in 2002. This amounts to lost opportunities.

Awaiting Connors, which was unnecessary, the government has prevaricated in implementing any new strategies. Of the new initiatives suggested by Connors, nothing has been costed or prioritised. The government, by its actions, has broken promises made to the Catholic systemic schools in respect of ITC, teachers' laptops, students with disabilities, and class reduction programs. Connors is biased and, while playing lip service to celebrating the diverse nature of ACT schooling, she has not reinforced the fact that 38 per cent of ACT kids go to non-government schools.

Mr Cornwell: How many is that?

MR PRATT: Thirty-eight per cent, and it is 44 per cent between years 7 and 10, Mr Cornwell. She has not demonstrated a strong intention to reinforce that diversity. There is ample evidence in the way this inquiry was conducted which illustrates this bias. Who can forget Mr Corbell's pathetic response to our initial concerns when Connors was appointed. His response was one of contrived outrage that we had allegedly attacked Ms Connors' reputation, that we had allegedly attacked her personally.

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