Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 4 Hansard (22 April) . . Page.. 1191 ..
MS TUCKER (continuing):
The absence of some coordinated arrangements for ensuring the best pest management practice and minimal use of toxic synthetic chemicals in and around the ACT schools is of considerable concern.
He also found that the current arrangements for pest management provided neither security nor comfort.
Under section 6.2 of the schools injury prevention and management policy, which Mr Stefaniak often refers to as the solution to the problem, principals are responsible for ensuring:
... that appropriate substances are selected for use in an Agency's workplace and any work procedures devised for the use of these hazardous substances should take into account their toxic and physical hazards.
Not only do school principals have to provide educational leadership, manage staff, manage finances and other assets, oversee school building and maintenance programs and ensure parent and community participation in schools, but also they have to make expert decisions about the best chemicals for handling rats, cockroaches, weeds in the school playground and other pest problems and ensure that these chemicals are used safely and appropriately. It is appalling that school principals are left to take responsibility for the use of highly toxic chemicals in their schools. It is clear that use of these chemicals requires expert knowledge that school principals could not have and they should not be burdened with such a responsibility.
The Commissioner for the Environment's report also found that not only is pest control fragmented and devolved to people with no experience in managing chemicals, but also there is little evidence to show whether chemical control of pests was actually working. He found:
... the purchaser-provider model appears to favour evaluation based on outcomes rather than on detailed steps to reach these outcomes, and it is not yet obvious that this model will lead to the most socially responsible and consistent set of guidelines and practices for the use of pest control chemicals.
He also found:
... it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of individual programs or the programs overall, because of the absence of rigorous monitoring programs to determine the long-term impact of the control activities on the target species, and the incomplete evaluation of the impact of the control of chemicals on non-target species and communities.
He continued:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .