Page 345 - Week 03 - Thursday, 1 June 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I certainly look forward to working directly with staff and administrative representatives of both the ANU and the CCAE. If this proposed committee is set up, I undertake to give them all a very fair and full hearing and to try to deal with the kinds of issues that Mr Humphries has put forward. I urge members of the Assembly to support his motion.
MR WOOD (11.23): Mr Speaker, I rise, among other positions that I have, as the member for committees. I do not know whether to thank Mr Humphries for nominating me. I do, and indeed I thank him for this motion which I totally support. It reflects the sort of approach that I have been urging for a long time; I am very pleased with it. As a consequence I do not propose, in the 10 minutes that I have here - I could not, in any case, in that short space of time - to argue the issues about the local amalgamation. It is now good and proper that it will be done within that select committee.
I will make a few general comments. I have been concerned, because it seemed to me that the initial reaction to this proposal was one of shock and horror, that we cannot have change. Frankly I was surprised that, coming from our tertiary institutions, including the intellectual leaders of our community, we seem to have an automatic response against change. It was surprising because these are the areas from which we expect rigid inquiry, challenging of preconceived ideas, detailed examination of issues and, above all, considered, rational responses.
There was a time when we were not getting that. It was, perhaps not surprisingly, the election period. Sometimes it is not easy to get considered debate at such a time. I was very pleased after the election to see a sensible, logical, coherent debate being carried on in our media. That was excellent, and I followed it very carefully. I know that it will form part of the committee's inquiry.
But it frustrates me that from time to time, when any notion of change is suggested, the automatic response is, "No; not for it; don't want it". I hope that in this community that does not become a habit. There are longstanding problems in our tertiary sectors; let us not deny it. There are problems, and they have to be examined. For some time it has been clear that the binary system has been causing difficulties. It has been perfectly clear that governments, if not the institutions, would have to reconsider the roles of the colleges of advanced education and the universities, and the other tertiary sectors as well.
As far back as 1964, when the Martin report introduced a more practical, worldly aspect into our universities, it was clear that these tensions would come. We still hear today the arguments about the real place of universities - the centuries-long traditions versus the immediate urgent needs of today's society.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .