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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 5 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1703 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

If, through our PE program each week, our children take on a bit of onerous activity where they have to push themselves and aerobically lift themselves, then that is going to contribute to their health. So, recognising full well individual capabilities and sensitively programming in our classes to make sure that some kids who cannot do it as well as other kids are catered for in a proper and a sensitive way, it is important that we ask all the children to push themselves to their physical limit at some stage somewhere.

On the subject of fitness testing, the committee is concerned that fitness testing is undertaken in an exhibitionary manner. I am not quite sure where to come in on that. I agree with the committee that there is a need to maintain sensitivity and confidentiality in fitness testing. You certainly cannot allow children's testings to be laid open to the rest of the class to have a look at. If that is happening, it must stop because every child is entitled to a confidential testing and to be told, quite frankly, where they stand.

Do they need to go and seek medical help? Do they need to go on to some other sort of supplementary physical program to improve their health? That is a private matter between the child, the family and the school and, if it is not happening, then it should. Up to a point, I agree with the committee that that must be the case, but it does not mean that we should abrogate fitness testing in such a way that, because of the concerns we might have for a minority of children, who we can quite properly and professionally manage and do that in a sensitive way, for their sake we throw the baby out with the bath water and degrade our physical fitness testing to such a point that we do not intervene anywhere to identify children who need to have work done on them.

The report has made some very good points about obesity, and surely the report's treatment of the issue of obesity should ring alarms bells with respect to the need for a substantive physical education program and mandatory fitness. The report points out that the rate of obesity has more than doubled in the 15 years to the year 2000. I particularly agree with the comments at paragraphs 3.50 and 3.51, and I congratulate the committee for their useful and thoughtful observations.

However, I must disagree with the comment at 3.54 that says that "the constant dialogue could compound cultural obsession ..."There is no way that we cannot but talk regularly, through education and public information, about the wretched concern of obesity. We have got to make sure that we get this message out to adults and children: "You have to maintain your health and look after yourself. Your obesity is going to burden the country's health system, and you've got to do something about it."

We must do that in such a way that, if some children find that they are oversensitised by this, it is up to the school, the school welfare officers and the physical education teachers to take care of that child's concerns. I am sure that can be done without cutting off at the knees the otherwise very important need to teach kids and the community about obesity.

I must go on and talk about condom vending machines. We do not send our children to school to have sex. Where we might identify children at risk who need to be given the opportunities to obtain condoms because of the great fear that we have about STDs and unwanted pregnancies, there are ways we can do that. I do not think putting vending machines where 13-, 14- and 15-year-old children can see them is helpful. That is

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