Page 1696 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 21 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
for equal distribution of attention across a broad range of issues. I will briefly outline some of the issues and recommendations arising in the committee’s report. In the Treasurer’s portfolio there were several recommendations surrounding the reporting of the budget, in particular, triple bottom line principles and budgeting. There were also recommendations regarding cross-jurisdictional travel card concessions, superannuation investment policy and funding towards MusicACT.
The education portfolio was a little less robust than it was last year. When the minister was questioned about how the largest investment in capital works funding by an ACT government would address the gaps and achievement between high and low achieving students from high and low socioeconomic status backgrounds, the minister responded with the following statement:
Investment in quality infrastructure and quality learning environments had a positive impact on the quality of teaching and learning.
In response the minister also stated:
A number of researchers—for example, Professor Brian Caldwell and Greg Whitby from the Catholic Education Office—had called for greater investment in school infrastructure to make schools more suitable for teaching and learning in the 21st century.
This is just one example of the many positive responses received by the committee when questioning the minister for education. I believe that this budget has delivered quite well on education. After the committee’s inquiries into short-term outcomes from the 2020 initiative, the committee made one recommendation that the Auditor-General investigate whole-of-government economic cost and gains incurred by school closures and amalgamations.
The committee found that the health portfolio warranted only five recommendations. While it is important that the government consider each of these recommendations, it is encouraging to see such a large portfolio as health, under incredible scrutiny, receive so few recommendations. This again demonstrates what a positive budget this is. The affordable housing package gained much interest both from the community and the committee. The community sector welcomed the initiative but also said that the full effects of the affordable housing package would not be felt for some time.
Several recommendations were made in relation to housing and, in particular, security of tenure. The committee recommended that the minister for housing clarify the meaning of the term “security of tenure” and communicate clearly to tenants its implications for their tenancies, ensuring that all tenants are consulted in regard to the changes and no tenant is disadvantaged by that change. This was followed by a recommendation that the government make public any cost-benefit analysis that informed its proposed changes to security of tenure. The committee also recommended that the minister for housing table in the Assembly a biannual report on the progress of major housing projects.
Planning, something about which I believe the Assembly will hear a lot in the next two weeks, was well discussed by the committee. It was pleasing to see Minister Barr, when questioned on planning, providing a high level of detailed responses, having
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .