Mr Speaker, hon members, I suspect that a lot of the inputs we have had today were the result of prepared speeches gone horribly wrong because the Minister sprung a surprise on us. Well, I don't want to respond to everybody, but I would like to make a few comments on the speeches that were delivered here today.
In response to the hon Vukuza-Linda from Cope, I think it bears noting that the review committee drew its expertise not only from universities and practitioners, but from teacher unions themselves. So, to suggest that teachers must either be teachers or union members is a bit of a spurious debate. [Interjections.]
On the issue of the curriculum and policy research unit, Dr Kloppers- Lourens is correct and one of the things that the department is doing - you would know - is reorganising its organogram to include a section dedicated to curriculum and policy research.
I think it merits some mention that, as much as Mr Mpontshane from the IFP constantly refrains "we told you so", I do think that when you ask what outcomes-based education, OBE, is and what it isn't, and how confusing it all is, you would know better than me that when we say that, effectively, OBE is taken out of the curriculum by and large, that does not mean that there is substantive change to the curriculum because OBE is not about the curriculum, it's a methodology of teaching as opposed to what is in essence a curriculum. So, in that respect there is consistency and certainty. And, certainly, any radical changes to the curriculum would hamper our success as opposed to amplifying it.
I think the following points concerning what the review is need emphasis: Firstly, and many people have alluded to it, there is the removal of administrative as well as assessment burdens on teachers. I do think that that must be stressed. It's not to say that there won't be administrative or assessment type work, but these have been streamlined and, certainly, simplified in order to ensure that there is more teaching time as opposed to time spent doing these other things.
Certainly, teachers will benefit from the clear outcome that has been adopted from the report. That outcome is clear, uniform, definitive and direct communication from the department, not interpretations of those communications from the other ranks within our governance structure. Regarding the role of subject advisers, I think it is enormously welcome to teachers that there is a dedicated focus on their support role as opposed to, perhaps, an evaluation role.
With regard to the earlier introduction of the second language, English, I think that this is also a very positive measure. It certainly gives expression to the fact that when languages are introduced at a younger age it's easier for children to absorb those languages. So, by the time they graduate to tertiary level, where they will be primarily taking their lessons in English, they will be far more conversant in the language.
Lastly, let me just say that the Minister has said that the task team started a while ago. The one thing that people forget is that when the Minister assumed office it would have been so easy for her to sweep away what was old and to restart new processes, and so on. I think we need to give enormous credit to you, Minister, for looking at this properly, for sticking with it and then embracing the good things that have come out of this report. I think that that is something worthy of note and appreciation from this House. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.