Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Schools Assistance (Learning Together—Achievement Through Choice and Opportunity) Amendment Bill 2006 and I welcome the effect that it will have in supporting our teachers and our schools.

I would also like to commend the member for Riverina for her fine contribution to this debate, which was in stark contrast to the endless whingeing of the member for Jagajaga. This opposition is drowning in its own negativity. They have no plans, no ideas and no policies to build a better Australia. It is the coalition that has a vision for this nation, building a stronger Australia through measures such as quality education programs like this one—the $l billion Investing in Our Schools program. In this debate, the opposition shadow minister has again shown the policy void that is the Australian Labor Party with regard to education. It is all too easy just to whinge. It was a contribution all too typical of the member for Jagajaga when she speaks in this place.

I must say thankfully that not all members of the Australian Labor Party share the same intellectual void with regard to education as the member for Jagajaga. As chair of the Standing Committee on Education and Vocational Training, I am privileged to have the Member for Port Adelaide as my deputy chair, a member who is passionate about education and who knows more about education than the member for Jagajaga ever will.

I would also like to commend other Labor members for their commitment to the work of the committee—members with a positive contribution to make to education as opposed to the feeble efforts we regularly see from the member for Jagajaga. This member has called for greater cooperation from the states. I would like to point out in this House that the very reason for this program is failure by those very states to adequately resource schools. The former Minister for Education Science and Training, Dr Brendan Nelson, produced an analysis that details the amount by which the states have underfunded their schools compared to the Commonwealth. In his press release of 17 June 2005 the former education minister detailed that, if the states had increased their expenditure at the same rate as the Commonwealth, there would have been at least $882 million extra available to state schools. In fact, if the states had matched the federal contribution, the works being done by this program could have been funded by the states.

So rather than carping on about greater cooperation with the states, I call on the member for Jagajaga to do, for once, something positive: to get on the phone to the state Labor premiers and get them to match the increase in expenditure offered by the Commonwealth. I would like her to get on the phone and perhaps talk to Mr Morris Iemma and ask him to increase the New South Wales contribution to the same level. New South Wales increased its expenditure for its schools by 4.3 per cent. How much did the Commonwealth increase its contribution? By 7.8 per cent. What is the loss to the schools of New South Wales with Morris Iemma failing to match the increase in the Commonwealth funding? Not $100 million, not $200 million, but $241 million.

While the member for Jagajaga is on the phone, she can make another call. She could perhaps call Premier Steve Bracks and ask him to match the Commonwealth’s increase. By how much did the Commonwealth increase its expenditure to schools in Victoria? Not seven per cent, not eight per cent, but 8.8 per cent compared to a paltry state increase in Victoria of 4.3 per cent. How much is that costing Victorian schools? Some $217 million could build shade structures; $217 million could provide airconditioning; $217 million could be put to a host of other uses. So rather than the member for Jagajaga just whingeing and moaning, as is her habit, I would like her to get on the phone and do something for the schools of Australia by encouraging those state premiers to match the contributions of the Commonwealth. I think that is a very important fact.

Another factor in the success of this program has been local communities deciding their own priorities and not centralised bureaucracies such as Macquarie Street, Sydney. As I said, the member for Jagajaga called for cooperation from the states, but it is those very states that are pursuing a centralised decision-making policy that is not providing for those local priorities. It is certainly providing more for metropolitan schools than for schools in regional and rural areas. The member for Jagajaga raises the issue of pork-barrelling. She claims that, on average, National Party seats received 246 per cent more than Labor electorates. I certainly make no apologies for achieving for my electorate. Education outcomes are vital, and I will certainly be fighting to ensure that good educational outcomes continue.

I would like to place on record that the Investing in Our Schools program is assessed on merit. I will say that again: it is a program assessed on merit. All of the projects are funded on the recommendations of independent, state based advisory panels. These panels comprised of parent and principal representatives, who I believe have been acting very properly. The question is: is the member for Jagajaga saying that these bodies are acting corruptly? I would like her to come into the House and clear this up and say that she believes either they are acting corruptly or that the state based assessment panels have acted properly. I believe they have acted properly, and if that is the case then her arguments about pork-barrelling have no substance whatsoever. It is vital that she clears that up.

A more likely cause for the discrepancy between regional and rural schools and those held by the state members is the fact that regional and rural schools and many schools in coalition areas have been neglected by state Labor governments around the country. That is why the need is so great: not pork-barrelling under this program, not corruption by the advisory panels, but merely the fact that state Labor neglects regional and rural Australia and that state Labor has also been neglecting schools in coalition held areas.

Let me now turn to the education issues that are at the heart of this bill. There can be few careers today as rewarding or as challenging as teaching. Not only do we ask young people with little experience of life and work, and possibly with no experience of children of their own, to take charge of a classroom of young people and start shaping their lives, we also ask older, more experienced teachers to bridge the ever-widening generation gap at a time when technological and other changes are taking place at a rate that we could scarcely imagine 10 or 15 years ago. Email, text messaging, camera phones, video on demand, iPods—all of these things are part of our children’s lives. They affect the way they communicate, how they absorb information and how they see the world. Not only do teachers have to take this into account, they also have to try to equip themselves with computer skills that many pupils take for granted. I could imagine that for any baby boomer teacher it is no mean feat to keep up with a bright class of nine-year-olds who have been using the keyboard since kindergarten and whose minds are set more in the idiom of the computer screen than the printed page, and whose curiosity and interest is barely satisfied by all the World Wide Web has to offer.

The education and vocational standing committee, which I chair, is currently conducting an inquiry into teacher training. The government have an obligation to ensure that we not only provide these young people coming into the profession with the tools they need to meet their demanding role but also help them develop once they have entered the classroom. There are constantly changing bodies of knowledge in a range of subjects, not just computing, which pose a challenge for professional learning.

Whilst the laws of physics and chemistry may remain unchanged, new fields such as nanotechnology were not even thought of when many of our currently serving teachers first trained. The need to deliver ongoing professional learning is just one of the challenges which faces our education system and poses particular problems in regional and rural areas. Research conclusively shows that teacher quality is a major determinant of educational outcomes, and quality professional learning is vital to developing teacher quality. We have to ensure that we make realistic demands on our teachers. Our curricula have become too prescriptive and wide ranging. The information explosion has meant that the problem has been not what to include in our curricula but in fact what to leave out.

There is an overwhelming trend in our society to expect more and more of our social problems to be solved by our school system. Sadly for many children, the only orderly and secure environment they know is their school. Somehow in six hours a day our teachers are being expected to compensate for the failings of some parents. A stable home life which teaches courtesy, punctuality, good behaviour and a commitment to learning is just a dream for some children. If teachers have to tackle this failing before doing their own job then clearly we are asking a great deal. One cannot but deplore this state of affairs. However, we cannot ignore this reality. It brings into clear focus the fact that an improved school environment will have a positive impact on many needy children as well as on the broader school population. Helping to create better schools is the very focus of this bill.

On the broader topic of schools and communities, I would like to take this opportunity to commend the staff and students of Bowraville Central School in my electorate for their success receiving at the National Awards for Quality Schooling an award for changing the school culture from one centred on welfare to one centred on learning. The school has successfully addressed the issues of absenteeism, high suspension and drop-out rates, low self-esteem and low literacy and numeracy levels through a range of measures in a project known as the community alliance project. Community support and involvement has increased, morale has improved and pupils are performing better academically, socially and personally. Schools like Bowraville are doing a fine job for society as a whole and they deserve our support. I am glad that they have received national recognition for their efforts.

As I said earlier, I very much welcome this amendment bill, in particular the accelerated support that its passage will bring to the Investment in Our Schools program. This is a simple and effective scheme that provides tangible benefits right in the heart of our communities, and I am glad that the merits of this scheme are being recognised. I note that the Minister for Education, Science and Training told this House on 16 February about demand for the grants the program provides and that there had been more than 8,000 applications from state government schools last year. As a result, this bill will bring forward some $186 million from 2008 to 2006.

When the first round of grants was announced in October last year, I visited many of the schools in my electorate and the staff were quick to point out the benefits from their point of view. Foremost was the fact that the choice of project is left to actual schools themselves. There is local decision making by local schools to solve local problems. Parents, students and staff are getting involved and making the right decisions for their school. They are the best people to identify the needs in their particular school. They are the best people to decide whether they need shade areas or airconditioning or playground equipment, not a centralised bureaucracy back in Macquarie Street, Sydney, and not some person hundreds—and in many cases thousands—of kilometres from the school involved. A key to this project is divestiture of decision making to the local communities. There would be very little use in having a prescriptive program for, say, shade areas. We would probably see all these cloudy towns turning up with their regulation allocation of shade areas. The local element in the decision making is a vital part of the success of the project.

These projects are not hugely expensive, but they are often beyond the means of many local schools—that is, schools that do not have the ability to raise the funds they need for these small projects. With some assistance from the federal government they are able to get much needed improvements that will be appreciated by the staff, by the pupils and by the wider school community. I have visited many of the schools in my electorate and spoken to principals, teachers and pupils. They were eager to show me how the funding was going to be spent, where the shade structures were going to be erected and where the new playground equipment was going to go. It is great to see local communities taking ownership of improvements in their schools and not being told by Macquarie Street that they need improvement X or improvement Y. Local decision making is the key to success.

In my electorate of Cowper more than 30 schools received some $1.3 million in the last round of grants. It is a great program for small communities and larger communities. We have had schools in Coffs Harbour, Kinchela, Bellimbopinni, Bonville, Smithtown and Woolgoolga, to name a few, receiving funding under these projects. Also, three non-government schools received support under the program. From talking to school principals, I know they support this program. From talking to school principals, I know they would not support the whingeing and whining of the member for Jagajaga. They would probably prefer her to get on the phone to Steve Bracks and Morris Iemma and get them to increase their funding to state schools to match the Commonwealth’s funding.

I mentioned earlier the role of the parents. Schools cannot and should not stand alone. They should be an integral part of the community, and I welcome the part that parents have played in the decision-making process and the contributions that the P&C associations have made in providing funding to go with the Commonwealth funding to complete many of the projects. I am sure those parents would be the first to agree that a school is more than bricks, mortar and sunshades. A school is all about strong leadership, dedicated staff and support from a strong school community. As I have said, the environment is important but what is crucial is the commitment of all of the partners in the learning process. Having cooperation between the local community and the federal government to deliver outcomes is very much part of building that.

In turning to the detail of the bill, I support the proposal to carry over unspent funds from the Investing in Our Schools program from 2005 to 2006 and to bring forward that funding I mentioned earlier from 2008 to 2006. I would like to commend the Tutorial Voucher Initiative, which provides $700 in vouchers to assist children who have failed to reach the appropriate benchmarks in year 3. I think it is important that we get in early and assist these young people to have better education outcomes. If they are falling behind in year 3, they cannot possibly hope to keep up in later years. Whatever criticism the member for Jagajaga may level at this scheme, it is focused on improving the outcomes for those young children, making it a better experience to go to school so they do not feel ostracised by not being able to keep up and giving them the confidence to be part of the school community and further their education. Unfortunately, the take-up rate has been low but the rollover of these funds will assist to further enhance educational outcomes.

I also welcome the extension of full Commonwealth recurrent funding to those special schools catering for students with social, emotional and behavioural problems who are likely to leave school early. This is an instance where a modest and timely expenditure can make a big difference not just to the life of an individual but also to the support, financial and otherwise, that society may have to provide to a particular individual. Evidence suggests that early school leavers earn less, are more likely to be unemployed and are more likely to experience periods of prolonged unemployment. Assistance at an early stage can help prevent this. I commend the proposals to continue that expenditure. It is a very worthwhile program.

I commend this bill to the House. I think that the Investing in Our Schools program is going to be welcomed into the future. I know that the local school communities certainly support this program. I know they are right behind it. I know that the whingeing and whining of the member for Jagajaga counts for very little. She has no solutions and she has no plans—just endless whingeing. She should be talking to the Labor premiers, getting them to increase their expenditure on schools to match the Commonwealth. When we see her doing that we will know that she is serious about education. When we see her doing that we will know that she is actually starting to get a bit of a glimpse about educational policy. Perhaps she should talk to the member for Port Adelaide and pick up a few hints on education policy. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context