Published The Advocate, April 18, 2006


BEFORE I go let me leave you with three things that are not quite right about Tasmania. EDUCATION: Parents want the best for their children. Most people will make sacrifices to give their kids the best education they can afford. They do not want their kids to suffer unemployment and poverty. Yet Tasmanians are less well educated than other Australians, which helps to explain why Tassie wages are lower than the national average. Student scores for reading, maths and problem are the worst of the States; 44 per cent of Tasmanians do not finish Year 12 compared to the national average of 32 per cent. The kids are not dummies. They have the same innate abilities as the rest of Australian kids; indeed, at primary school, many of their performance scores are above the national average. And then it all falls in a hole. I blame the two-tier school leaver system, where some high schools finish at Year 10 and some at Year 12. It creates a dumbing-down mindset for the Year 10 mob; the expectation that Year 10 is when you finish school. There are plans afoot to use technology such as video conferencing to bring Year 11-12 college courses to all high schools. Embrace them. Believe in the power of education for the sake of your kids’ future. There is no bigger issue in Tasmania. PLANNING: The planning approval process is a joke. Councils act as the promoter of private projects, even to the extent of contributing council resources to help get the plans off the drawing board, and then change hats to sit as a supposedly independent planning authority to consider those same plans. And expect people to take the process seriously. There is no greater potential conflict of interest in local government. Mark my words, one day a thwarted developer is going to sue a council for millions in damages. The planning system needs an independent Development Assessment Committee attached to each council, comprising a mix of councillors and outside experts. JUSTICE: A jury trial is the cornerstone of the criminal justice system. Twelve fair-minded people are chosen to sit in judgment of the accused. To select a jury requires a filtering process intended to produce a final group of people who have no personal knowledge of, or bias for or against, the defendant. That’s not easy to achieve in the North-West where the community is small enough for everyone to know everyone else’s business. I am not saying the close-knit family and community networks have skewed any verdicts but Burnie jury decisions are notoriously unpredictable. There you go, another mainlander giving unwanted advice. There’s the ferry now. My editorship of The Advocate has run its course, as have these Saturday columns. Next week, this space will be occupied by former MLC Tony Fletcher, who did such a fine job covering the recent State election. It’s been a privilege. Thank you.