Page 1857 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 7 June 2006

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


the other way around. You have put the schools in the paper. It is a shock decision; it is last minute.

We say that addressing the subject of school closures has to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. You cannot draw a Plimsoll line across the ACT map and say, “Due to facts of declining enrolments or population numbers or demographic factors in these particular areas, these schools automatically go straight to the chopping block.” You have simply got to go out there and expect that some small schools deserve to remain open while perhaps larger, inefficient schools may have to be closed. Why do you not reinforce success? If a school, perhaps a niche school with a niche set of programs and a unique culture, is a successful school, why not reinforce success and why automatically think that that school has to be closed?

I draw your attention to Copeland college. Copeland college is a small college but it is a niche-program college. I can recall that Copeland had broken ground in the very difficult area of VET education and the difficult exercise of engaging and identifying with youth at risk. It was a very successful program. It had a very dynamic principal. Perhaps its population is quite small now and it might qualify in straight demographic terms for closure, but why not provide that school with sufficient support to perhaps try to grow further, to attract—

Mr Barr: That is what we are trying to do.

MR PRATT: That is not clear. It is not clear that you are doing that. You have got a list of schools in the paper, and that is all there is to it—the list of 39; the night of the long knives. It is all there; it is on.

Why is Tharwa primary school on your list? Tharwa primary school has a proud history. It is a school in an isolated community. I would put it to you that Tharwa primary school is a very, very special case, as is Hall, as Mr Stefaniak pointed out. They are good schools with good cultures, and they are going to suffer.

If there is a small school with a niche program, a unique set of circumstances to it, how can you say, as you said in question time, Mr Barr, that you would simply pick up the program and transfer it somewhere else? You cannot pick up the environment, the culture, the staff that were at that school and all of those factors which, when combined, create a successful set of programs. It is abstract. You do not just pick it up lock, stock and barrel, shove it all on the back of a semitrailer and drive to the next suburb.

There is also the question of whether schools that are going to be impacted by school closures in suburbs next to them are going to be able to cope. How do we know that? By concentrating all the students in the Weston Creek area into whatever school is left over, have you now decided which schools are going to be able to cope? And have those impacts been considered? These are the issues. If they have been considered, you are not telling the public.

Why should we be surprised about that? This is a government which operates in secrecy and all decisions are made in secrecy; it is none of the community’s business. How this government governs is never the community’s business.


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