Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2088 ..
MRS CARNELL (continuing):
Those opposite and others would realise that Mr Humphries actually launched this policy. Mr Humphries has had carriage of it since we took over government - before we had our last reshuffle, in fact. Mr Humphries has total control over this, and has had the whole way through. We believe that probably the most important part of this whole issue is planning, making sure that our city works, both socially and functionally, in the future. We believe that local shopping centres are very much part of that.
MR WOOD: I ask a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. The Chief Minister said that because this was handled across several portfolios she gave it to one Minister. Does that mean that, when we take up the debate on the trading hours legislation, Mr Humphries will have the full carriage of it?
MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I am sure that Mr Humphries will speak on the issue, as will Mr De Domenico and I. In the debate on a Bill it is normal for a number of different Ministers to speak. It seems that those opposite have forgotten that the trading hours part of this policy is a very small part of the total. In fact, when you look at the policy as a whole, you see the planning parts, the helpShop approach and new approaches to planning for local centres. All of those sorts of things bring this policy together to give local centres a real chance for the future. Those opposite who seem to think trading hours are the only part of this policy simply have not read it, which would be normal for them. We are talking about the livelihood of many Canberrans. In this question time many people have spoken about the supposed 300 casual and part-time staff the Supermarket Institute believe will lose their jobs. What about the 700-plus people, many of them full-time workers, who have lost their jobs over the last few years? What about the people who have lost their homes, the people who have lost their total investment in this city? The fact is that the people on this side of the house simply will not turn our back on those people in the interests of big business. It is that simple.
MS McRAE: My question is for the Minister for Education, and this is a question that I would like Mr Stefaniak to actually answer. Can the Minister explain why he is conducting a secretive and rapid review of the School Without Walls? Is it because the school is to be closed?
MR STEFANIAK: I thank the member for the question. I am certainly happy to answer that one, Ms McRae. Firstly, you called it a secretive review. I do not think there is anything particularly secretive about it. I and senior officers of my department will be talking - in fact, they may already have done so - to the chair of the board of SWOW about the possibility of changes in the situation at the school. Mr Speaker, the board of SWOW has not formally met this year. Guess why? It is due to the industrial bans put in place by the AEU. A report is being worked upon which will make some recommendations about the best way to meet the educational needs of all the students at SWOW. SWOW was established primarily for students in their post-compulsory years, in