Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

The fingers on the keyboard that provided that answer to the parliamentary secretary belong, I detect, to the same people who provided the answers at Senate estimates, because once again it is basically, 'The decision is the decision is the decision.' Dr Culvenor has a proven methodology. It has worked exceptionally well. People have complimented him on it and he sees no reason why a trainer with a proven method should be forced to change to a lesser-performing method. That prompts me to ask: why? What were the perceived deficiencies in Dr Culvenor's training methods, which delivered outcomes that agencies complimented him about, that made it so important that this legislation rule out his methodology? What are we interested in here? Is it the process or the outcome we are interested in? If it is the outcome and the training people get, the accolades given by Commonwealth agencies and departments to Dr Culvenor speak for themselves. So that cannot be the reason; it has to be something else. But we have continually been denied any genuine rationale other than: 'It is the decision.' We know it is the decision. We want to know what underpins that decision.