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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 12 Hansard (20 November) . . Page.. 4392 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

Again, at page 9, the report happily tells us that indigenous teachers have been recruited and four new teachers placed into ACT schools in 2002. That is pretty pleasing. But we also have a right to know, in this report, what the ACT requirement for indigenous teachers is and what the shortfall now is. The reports should successfully be keeping a running tally on this very important factor and should detail this issue, regardless of where else it is recorded in other reports and departmental documents.

The budget initiative on page 10 deals with another reconciliation in schools issue, which is also very important: indigenous support staff positions. In this area the report repeats the pattern of concern I outlined in the previous paragraph. There is a nice statement there about various stakeholders entering into negotiations and more rounds of discussion and, of course, the inevitable round of union negotiations. But when are we going to cut to the chase? How effective is this program? What is the need for support staff across the ACT? How many short are we across the affected schools, and what does the department propose to do about it?

I believe these reports need to reflect on and analyse where we are at and what steps are being taken to address those weaknesses. It seems that the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous students is consistent with the last report, which is a shame, but the department is doing the best it can to address this weakness, performing no less than any other jurisdiction. In fact, the performance of our education department versus those of other jurisdictions in this area is quite pleasing.

The strength of this report is in this area of reporting-the gap in education performance standards between indigenous and non-indigenous students-because it outlines what action is being taken and offers reporting in some detail. That is where the report is pretty useful. And on this subject I will mention the alarming issue, identified later, on page 14, of the accelerated failure rates of indigenous students reaching year 9. The report does not detail the nature of the assistance provided through the high school development program and the indigenous education support program to address this issue. Nor does it qualify its success or failure, whatever the case may be.

I am very interested in this particular area, and I am sure my colleagues in this place, plus the community, are too. This is one of the areas of greatest need with respect to youth at risk in the ACT community. It goes to the heart of how we manage the youth-at-risk issues in the ACT. I would like to see this report focus on the support area for indigenous students from years 6 to 9. These are the vulnerable years. Performance at school, and the retention of these young people at school, is vital for the ACT community. This is one report, amongst the plethora of government reports, that has a major role to play in addressing youth at risk, and it does not do so sufficiently. I implore the minister to take action in this area and ask the department to give us a lot more information about how we are tackling the issues of indigenous youth at risk, particularly from years 6 to 9.

I have raised the fact before that this series of reports has not quantified the take-up rate of indigenous parents in respect of the department's compact for parent involvement in education. We know how important it is for a successful indigenous education program to have the parents fully involved. Mr Pearson and other notable indigenous affairs

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