Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (9 April) . . Page.. 771 ..

MR MOORE: I ask a supplementary question. Mr Stefaniak, you indicated in your answer that learning needs assistance is allocated to 20 per cent of students. As my memory serves me, about $4.5m is allocated - - -

Mr Stefaniak: It is $5m.

MR MOORE: Nearly $5m is allocated according to these statistics. Surely, it would be in the public interest if the Government said, and surely an open government would say, "If we have the data available, it should be available for other people to look at as well". Minister, are you part of an open government or are you going to continue with this closed government until such time as I put the question on notice?

MR STEFANIAK: Mr Moore, I think it is patently obvious that we are running a very open government. We consult a lot more than that lot over there ever did when they were in government. As far as we possibly can, we take needs, aspirations and wishes into account. I think this process is the most successful in Australia. Every other system had all sorts of dramas when they brought in literacy and numeracy assessments and testing. You must recall the controversy in New South Wales in relation to league tables and inappropriate activities there. There have been problems in every State. Here all the groups that have a real interest in students got together and came up with this program which we are now implementing in accordance with the agreement with that group.

In answer to your question, we are hardly running a closed government. When the system results of our assessment program are available later in the year, the Government will provide information to the community. That information will be based on a rigorous and standardised assessment which will provide reliable information about the literacy achievements of our ACT students. It will be in a form that respects the privacy of the individual and the confidentiality that was requested by the reference group.

MR BERRY: My question is to Mr Kaine in his capacity as Minister for Urban Services. Minister, in an answer to a question yesterday about the future of ACTION CEO, Mr John Flutter, you said that Mr Flutter has always enjoyed your full support. In saying that Mr Flutter had tendered his resignation, you tried to create the impression that he had gone of his own volition.

Mrs Carnell: He did.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell interjects that he did. Minister, how does this reconcile with the statement issued yesterday by the CEO of DUS in which he stated that as a consequence of the reorganisation of ACTION Mr Flutter has considered his career options and has agreed to conclude his executive contract? Minister, to agree to these sorts of things, somebody has to put the proposal. If Mr Flutter agreed, who asked?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .