Page 3830 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
$10 million for the necessary preparatory work and appointed a panel to consider the report’s findings, there is still much work to be done, as COAG alluded to. Clearly, the scheme would involve a serious commitment by all Australians. We need to get this right, because the system we currently have does not work and the solution is a very costly one.
I was very pleased to hear that our Chief Minister supports the scheme. It was good to hear her say on local ABC radio the week before last:
At the end of the day, whether you have a disability in Kaleen or a disability in Queanbeyan, it doesn’t really make a huge amount of difference. You need the support, you need those dollars, and if you want to move around, you need those dollars to follow you.
Absolutely, Chief Minister. But why does this not also apply to special needs education, Mr Hargreaves? Why is special needs different if you happen to be at school? Special needs education is the same for parents with children in both government and non-government schools. This is a very real and important need that we have to address. The Chief Minister’s comments go completely against the current disability benefits systems within the ACT education system that, as Chief Minister, she oversees. They differ hugely between government and non-government schools and are not fully portable if a student moves between sectors.
That is the very reason why the Canberra Liberals fought for non-government schools to be included in the Shaddock review into ACT special education. Education Minister Barr was begrudgingly forced to do that some two months after announcing his Shaddock review. Mr Hargreaves’s motion calls on the government to continue to progress the implementation of Future directions and other relevant matters. The issue the Chief Minister raised, namely the portability of funding, is most certainly a relevant matter.
That is why we are calling on the ACT government and the Greens to support this through my amendment to “continue to progress implementation of Future Directions: Towards Challenge 2014 and other relevant disability initiatives, including true portability and equity in funding for disabled students in both government and non-government schools as the Chief Minister has proposed and improve upon these initiatives until final implementation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme”.
I raised the issue of the Chief Minister’s comments last week and I do so again today because they are extremely worrying. Her admission on ABC radio that she does not care where $13.5 billion for the proposed national scheme would come from or who manages it is somewhat loose language for someone in her position. I quote what she said:
I haven’t had a look at the details of what’s being proposed yet … I don’t really care who funds and manages it.
We know that the scheme will have a significant impact for and on Canberra taxpayers. I trust that she has now participated in COAG and that she is somewhat
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video