Page 4150 - Week 11 - Thursday, 17 Sept 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS BURCH: I think I was saying that this inquiry and the recommendations are a clear endorsement that the government’s Towards 2020 policy was indeed right. I would also like to point out that at no point could the opposition or Greens explain how they would go about reversing Towards 2020 or how they would explain to the schools, teachers and parents the loss of resources from their schools that would be required if the closed schools were reopened.
The Greens’ education bill amendments called for longer consultation. However, this amendment gained little support. In fact, it is not a recommendation in the final report. The ACT Principals Association commented:
The majority of our association would think that around six months was long enough … factors, like seepage, demoralisation, all of that kind of thing, would be exacerbated if it was longer …
The opposition and the Greens have made comment about the perceived lack of a social impact assessment. Indeed, there are a number of recommendations and comments that refer to the need for an SIA. However, in reviewing comments made by the independent expert brought in by the committee, Dr Alison Ziller, she made comment along the lines that a social impact assessment is not a clear-cut process, nor does it provide an answer.
Indeed, comments by Dr Ziller—I did value her contribution—need to be balanced by the fact that, on her own admission, she “did not read the original case from the proponents” and she had only a “brief, cursory look at some of the materials on the website”. She said:
… but I am not here to comment on the facts of the matter before you—
the committee. In her evidence, Dr Ziller commented:
… social impact assessment is not a proof, and people sometimes trip over that hurdle.
As stated, a number of recommendations contained in this report call for additional reviews or social impact assessments to be undertaken by the government. But there is not a single mention of the potential financial cost of undertaking such additional investigations. How many dollars would it cost to perform on one school, let alone on 23 former schools? Or would they also choose to go and do impact studies where students are now enjoying new schools, new friends, new learning opportunities? How much are the opposition parties willing to spend to look backwards when the overwhelming majority of students, families and teachers affected by these changes are happy in their new schools?
Opposition members interjecting—
MS BURCH: Madam Assistant Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition often claims in this place that he cannot be heard. I cannot be heard. Can we stop the clock and ask them to be quiet?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .