HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-11-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

TRUANCY

Mr PISONI (Unley) (15:19): Can the Minister for Education name who she has consulted in relation to truancy and changes to the Education Act? The minister told Adelaide radio this morning:

I have to say I am a great supporter of the notion of talking to people and consulting. We have had this bill in planning. We have been out to consultation.

The opposition has been advised by the Primary Principals Association, the Secondary Principals Association, the Australian Education Union and the Association of Independent Schools that none of them has been consulted on the matter.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Education.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH (Adelaide—Minister for Education, Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (15:20): The member for Unley's question is an interesting one because he manages to do what he does so well, which is to take a statement, turn it upside down, distort it and come up with the wrong conclusion.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: It is very easy to misquote someone and imply that something horrendous has happened—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Unley is warned.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: —when you only get part of the facts, and I have to say that the member for Unley is a past expert at this and I would advise most members to take what he says carefully and examine the words.

Mr WILLIAMS: I have a point of order, sir.

The SPEAKER: Order! Yes, member for MacKillop. I do not think it assists for the minister to make reflections on the member asking the question. The Minister for Education.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: I think that the member for Unley has forgotten how we have carried out our consultation. For our reforms for what is, after all, a very old act, we have been engaged in an enormous public consultation process that has involved each segment of our reform agenda. For instance, where we have sought to reform the teachers registration—

Mr PISONI: I have a point of order, sir.

The SPEAKER: Order! the member for Unley has a point of order.

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr PISONI: My question related to the bill that the minister described on radio about truancy. The minister is talking about changes to the Education Act, where truancy is not addressed.

The SPEAKER: The minister is directly answering the substance of the question, which was about consultation on this matter. She is answering the substance of the question. The Minister for Education.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: Thank you, sir. The process that we have used has been a very extensive and inclusive one. What we have done in each element of the act for reform is to go out with a discussion paper—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley has already been warned. If he wants to ask another question, if there is something which the minister has misunderstood or missed in her answer, I am more than happy to give him the call to ask another question of the minister. He does not need to yell out while the minister is attempting to answer. The Minister for Education.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: Thank you, sir, for your protection. As I was explaining, in seeking to reach the best landing with any legislation that we reform, we produce first of all a discussion paper which highlights the issues and the matters that need to be resolved, and those discussion papers are very extensive in their canvassing of the problems that we seek to resolve. We put out those discussion papers—which would, of course, be responded to by anyone who chose to read them and, of course, if you do not choose to read them you cannot respond to them (but, of course, you could respond to them without reading them, but we would prefer that experts and those people involved in education actually looked at them). Having put out those discussion papers—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the member for MacKillop! Minister.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: Thank you sir, again. Having put out those discussion papers, it has been a matter of some pride that we have also convened what could only be described as a very significant consultation through a working party. I did not quite catch the names of all the organisations that allegedly have said they have not been consulted—and I say 'allegedly' because, as I have suggested, the member for Unley may not have been accurate in his assertions—

Mr PISONI: I have a point of order, sir.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member has a point of order.

Mr PISONI: The minister is reflecting on the member for Unley, and I ask that it be withdrawn.

The SPEAKER: No, I do not think saying that a member may not have been accurate has been understood in this chamber to be a reflection on that member. There could be any number of reasons why a member would be inaccurate. It does not necessarily imply that the member has been deliberately mischievous. The Minister for Education.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: As I was explaining, having had the discussion paper go out broadly to the community and be widely available, we have had a working party involved—

Mr PISONI: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Unley will take his seat. I will not entertain points of order while there is other noise going on in the house. Member for Unley.

Mr PISONI: My question was about the bill to amend the truancy act. The minister is answering a question regarding the changes to the Education Act.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr PISONI: My question related to the truancy provisions and the minister is deliberately not answering the question.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Unley will take his seat. There is no point of order. The question was about consultation and that is what the minister is answering. The minister may want to conclude her answer.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH: The point I was trying to make was that not only have we had a discussion paper with wide consultation, we have also had a very broadly based working party where each of the key stakeholders in legislation and the education system are involved in looking at the issues and giving us advice. In seeking to take their advice—and I really do believe in consensus because I think that one wants to do the best for our non-government sector, our Catholic schools, independent schools and, of course, our state education system—I have worked with the unions, principals associations, teachers groups and, of course, anyone with experience in this area, and the consensus out of the working party was then used to inform the drafting of the bill to amend the act. Let me make this clear: we have already heard that those opposite do not support provisions whereby we toughen up the truancy measures. They do not support our attempts—

The SPEAKER: The minister is now debating the question.

Mr WILLIAMS: I seek a point of clarification, Mr Speaker. Given the allegations made by the minister about the veracity of the quote, would you contemplate accepting the tabling of transcripts from the opposition so that you can verify that the quotes we are using are indeed accurate?

The SPEAKER: No, there is not that facility. However, the member can ask for leave to make a personal explanation and, by that means, establish the truth of their assertions.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT