Page 4779 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Then Mr Barr will have to debate the issues and tell the community why he will not support our principals. He will have nowhere left to hide. We have no intention of giving up on this important reform for our school principals or be blocked by pathetic processes of avoidance.
We have to acknowledge that the government and the opposition agree on the fundamental premise of this bill. This we cannot argue. We both agree, unlike the Greens in this instance, that the passage of this bill will make a difference to the day-to-day operation of our schools. This bill is totally based on Minister Barr’s Education Amendment Bill.
There is an incredible irony in this exercise. Should Minister Barr choose to vote against this bill, then he will be voting against about 15 clauses that he himself presented to this Assembly a few weeks ago. There are only two changes that we have made, changes that are relevant.
The one element we disagree on is the maximum number of days a student can be suspended, which seems like a ludicrous point of difference on the surface. The bottom line, and the reasoning behind the opposition recommending the maximum of 20 days, is that this will provide parity between the ACT and New South Wales and parity between government and non-government schools.
Consider the following dichotomy. In Queanbeyan a government school principal has the authority to make a decision as he sees fit. In a Canberra government school the principal does not. On the other hand, an independent school principal in Canberra has the same ability as his New South Wales government school principal counterpart has.
Minister Barr, why the double standard? Why do you not trust our school principals in the government schools in Canberra? The government are quite content for us to have parity with New South Wales on many policies and laws. However, only when it suits them. The minister has chosen in this instance to be belligerent and dig in his heels, to the detriment of the ACT.
It is good enough for the government to use the argument of providing an equal playing field and argue that the states should be united when it comes to the Education Participation Bill, as he did yesterday. Only yesterday in this chamber he was telling us the benefits of parity with other states, and we agreed with him. We supported his Education (Participation) Amendment Bill, and not through gritted teeth, minister.
Minister Barr, you have the opportunity to work together with us again this morning for the benefit of the ACT. Or you can confirm that it is the government who are opposing for the sake of opposing, to coin a phrase. It is the government who steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that we may have a point, that it may be worth while for us to be in line with the policy in New South Wales, that it makes sense to have the same autonomy within Catholic and government schools as independent schools in the ACT.
Currently, the Education Act 2004 has a different provision for suspension powers within independent schools. Principals at these schools already have the ability to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video