Page 129 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 13 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The minister referred to the published safe walking routes to schools. The minister should probably speak to the parents of children who go to Lyneham high as to whether they believe the crossing of a six-lane road in Northbourne Avenue to get to their school from where the bus now drops them off is considered a safe walking route.
The minister wilfully misunderstands me in saying that flashing lights are not a silver bullet. I have never claimed them to be. Of course they are not. But I had hoped that she would have at least listened to some of the staggering evidence that I put in my speech. Clearly she did not. She clearly also missed the part where I said that safety and traffic management plans are needed for every school because every school has different needs.
Ms Cheyne apparently had an issue with me referring to the program as a pilot, which it clearly is, and I have said that. The real question is: why did it take 16 months after the start of term for the pilot to commence in the first place? And if, as Ms Cheyne says, we should wait, and it would be imprudent to do anything other than wait, until the pilot has ended in June to see if it actually works or not, why has the government rolled out the program to another five schools this year? You cannot have it both ways. You cannot have a minister in a speech just now literally spruiking how well it is working and you cannot roll out further schools into this program and then say, “But wait; we would not rush into this and you are irresponsible for suggesting that we do so.”
As to the comments saying that I was excusing dangerous driving, that is just absolutely incorrect. I want to put on the record that she should withdraw that remark.
The members on the other side, even Mr Rattenbury, clearly did not read my motion in its entirety and listened to selective parts of my speech. Every single one of them was criticising, saying the whole one-size-fits-all approach does not work. I have said very clearly in the motion, and it is in the “calls upon” section, that we need to get the government to commit to “ascertaining the safety needs for every school in the ACT”. I have clearly said in my speech that every school’s needs are different. Every school’s safety needs are different, and that needs to be considered. We would ensure that schools’ different safety needs would be addressed.
Parents have expressed their frustrations that this government is not listening to their concerns, whether that be safety outside the school or safety inside the school. The education minister lives in a bubble of blissful ignorance about what is happening in her own schools. The transport minister is about as informed on school buses as her education minister colleague. The education minister is too busy having conversations around buzzwords to get to the heart of what is happening in education in this territory.
Madam Assistant Speaker, we have seen this government let down our children when it comes to literacy, numeracy, academic standards, language education in our schools, safety in our schools, safe transport to get them to and from school, and even, now, making sure that our school zones are safe. We have amongst the highest per student funding of any jurisdiction, so we have a right to expect evidence from that investment. At the very least, our community should expect that our children are safe at school, inside and out.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video