Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 12 Hansard (Thursday, 20 October 2005) . . Page.. 4005 ..

Education—focus group meetings(Question No 486)

Mrs Dunne asked the Minister for Education and Training, upon notice, on 18 August 2005:

• What exactly were the terms of the 2005 contract between the ACT Government and Colmar Brunton Social Research with regard to focus group meetings on ACT schools policy;

• Is it the case that participants in the focus groups were requested to sign a confidentiality agreement; if so, what were the terms of that agreement and why was it deemed necessary;

• Were participants in the focus group meetings paid for their participation; if so, how much were they paid.

Ms Gallagher: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

I am advised that:

• Colmar Brunton Social Research were contracted to conduct a number of focus group meetings and report on community concerns of a proposal to build a P-10 school in an area of declining enrolments; how any concerns might be overcome; how to effectively communicate the benefits of such a proposal; and maintaining confidence in public education.

• Yes, Colmar Brunton Social Research used their standard agreement with participants, in accordance with the Market Research Society of Australia’s Code of Professional Behaviour.

• Yes, participants received $50.

Roads—development advice(Question No 489)

Mr Pratt asked the Minister for Planning, upon notice, on 18 August 2005:

• On how many occasions in the last 12 months has the advice of ACT Roads been ignored or rejected by ACTPLA when approving developments;

• Where are the sites where such advice has been ignored and rejected and on what grounds was it ignored or rejected.

Mr Corbell: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

• None. The ACT Planning and Land Authority is required to consider all advice received from Government agencies. It does so having regard to a range of planning issues, which might make incorporating that advice into a development approval either impractical or undesirable.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .