Page 2833 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 17 August 2005

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

MR QUINLAN: I thought the second part of your question yesterday, Mr Mulcahy, would be: can I go too, please? The answer would have been no; so I am sorry.


MS GALLAGHER: Earlier today, Dr Foskey asked me a question about the family violence partnership program. I have had advice that the Office for Children, Youth and Family Support is aware of the funding under the family violence partnership program and the office has been in negotiations about accessing that funding.


MS GALLAGHER: Yesterday, I took on notice a question from Mrs Dunne in relation to whether a directive had or had not been issued from the Department of Education and Training in relation to information being put on notice boards in preschools—specifically a preschool—and whether staff had been reprimanded for displaying information. The written advice I had from the Department of Education and Training last Thursday, 11 August, was that there has been no directive from the department asking preschools to remove any material.

Following up on some extra information Mrs Dunne gave me yesterday, I sought further advice from the department. The department has no knowledge of any staff member being reprimanded for displaying non-government school information. However, it has been drawn to my attention that, in informal newsletters to preschools in southern and northern districts—newsletters which, I am advised, are emailed through to preschool staff—there is advice about advertising independent schools and visits of non-government schools to speak at parent meetings in preschools. The advice was not a formal directive and not cleared by senior executives of the department. This information has just come to my attention and I am following up the matter. It needs further investigation and advice to me.


MR CORBELL: In question time yesterday, Mr Seselja asked me a question in relation to the possible relocation of the site proposed for a sport and recreation facility in Gungahlin, including a 50-metre swimming pool. He asked if the site had been deemed not suitable. I inform Mr Seselja and the Assembly that the advice I have from the Land Development Agency this morning is that the relevant studies have been undertaken as to the suitability of the site and have confirmed that the proposed site is suitable. There is no intention to change the site.

Personal explanations

MR PRATT (Brindabella): Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation under standing order 46.

MR SPEAKER: Please proceed.

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