Page 3315 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
That said, the Education Act already provides that schooling is compulsory until age 17, or until completion of year 12, and that education in government schools is free. The provisions by both Mr Seselja and Mr Rattenbury propose to ensure that there is no potential inconsistency between the Human Rights Act provision and the operation of the Education Act. As this is the ongoing intent of the government’s proposal in any event, we have no objections to this amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (12.01 am): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 3326].
I did speak to this earlier. Very simply, this amendment seeks to replicate the government’s intent to make clear that a child’s parent or guardian has the right to choose the education for their child. We think it is worth spelling out this point here, simply to ensure absolute clarity.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development) (12.01 am): The government will not be supporting this amendment. This amendment will have financial implications. Progressive realisation has not been thoroughly tested in a First World or developed country, so it could be taken to extend in the ACT to areas such as transport, books and other learning resources.
The government has proposed a measured and staged approach to this issue. The Greens are proposing to leap in and immediately adopt progressive realisation. This is a reckless approach and it puts at risk the adoption and acceptance of the provisions of these rights in the Human Rights Act. For that reason the government cannot support this amendment.
Amendment negatived.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development) (12.02 am): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name and table a supplementary explanatory statement to the government amendment [see schedule 5 at page 3327].
This amendment will make it clear that parents and guardians are able to choose an education for their child, other than that provided for by the government, which meets their religious and moral beliefs, as long as it meets the minimum educational standards.
This amendment inserts the words “other than schooling provided by the government” to clarify the scope of that immediately realisable aspect of the right as set out in section 27A(3)(b). The amendment is consistent with article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The intention of the section is to reflect the right of a parent or guardian to choose schooling other than public schooling for their child, in line with their religious and moral convictions, provided
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video