Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I would associate myself with the very positive comments that have been made by the member for Batman in relation to Tiwi islanders and the associated programs that are taking place, such as employment programs that mining companies have introduced, particularly in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, and in relation to companies involved in the tourist industry that are also embracing Indigenous Australians and offering them employment opportunities. I believe that education—and I think most Australians would agree with this belief—is a key factor in addressing social disadvantage. Education provides knowledge and opportunity, and an overwhelming majority of Indigenous Australians need and often have difficulty accessing it.

All key social indicators demonstrate that a much greater level of disadvantage exists for our Indigenous Australians than our non-Indigenous Australians, and I believe that as a nation we should hang our head in shame about that. Looking at health, you can see that morbidity and mortality rates are much worse for Indigenous Australians. Indigenous Australians are sicker and they die younger. I think we have been very slow in addressing that issue. When it comes to unemployment, domestic violence and the number of Indigenous people that are languishing in our jails, the figures are all deplorable.

Moving to education and looking at any of the benchmarks, you will see that Indigenous Australians are performing at a much lower level than other students in our nation. Their access to education is much more limited. If you make a comparison between indigenous people overseas—I think Canada and New Zealand are two prime examples—and Indigenous Australians, you find that other countries have recognised the need for education and creating opportunities while we in Australia have languished far behind them.

The government has recently focused on problems with Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory and I feel that quite often it has come back to blaming those Indigenous Australians. I would like to emphasise very strongly tonight before the House the fact that the best results can be achieved with partnerships—partnerships between the Commonwealth, the state and the private sector. The key to success is always education, education, education.

I take great pleasure in supporting the legislation that we have before us tonight, the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006, and I also support the amendment that has been moved by the member for Jagajaga. The legislation will provide an additional $43.6 million over the years 2006-2008 for Indigenous education and training. It will extend tutorial assistance to students in year 9 of school and in vocational education in TAFE. It will also support community festivals to promote health and anti substance abuse—which, given the comments I have already made, I feel is essential—as well as school based sporting academies and related activities for Indigenous Australians.

The amendment that has been moved by the member for Jagajaga really highlights some of the concerns I have about this legislation. The fact is that it has not really honed in on the issue of addressing problems relating to literacy and early intervention in literacy as well as problems with parent-school partnerships, which I do not think have been adequately addressed in this legislation.

The funding will be based on assessments of students’ needs and the availability of funding. I think that the assessment of needs is a very good principle. As a nation, we really need to make sure that those funds are available to address those needs so we can eliminate the disadvantages that exist for our Indigenous Australians. Funding should be available to all students who need help; it should not be based on competition for those dollars.

Commonwealth general recurrent grants are open ended. The government provides money to some of the richest schools in Australia. They are not restricted because they have a special formula applied or based on whether or not the money is available. Surely the same criteria should apply to the most disadvantaged students in our nation, but that is not the case. The bill does nothing for primary school students. The ITAS continues to be linked to year 3 literacy and numeracy results, which means that a student has to wait until year 4 before they can receive tutorial assistance. This is inconsistent with the overwhelming message that has come out in relation to educational research. Early intervention is paramount if you are going to improve educational performance. Indigenous children need urgent support: only 20 per cent in remote areas are achieving the national reading benchmarks in year 3. That really necessitates the need for assistance in year 1 and 2, before they fail in year 3.

It is not only Indigenous students in remote areas who are failing these benchmarks; it is not only Indigenous students in rural areas who are having difficulties; it is Indigenous students in all areas. I would like to share with the House tonight a story about one of the schools within the Shortland electorate. A constituent recently approached me about this particular situation. Gorokan Public School runs a homework scheme for Indigenous students, which is funded by the Department of Education, Science and Training. The facility was made available to all of the school’s Indigenous community. That was done through parent meetings and newsletters, and it was embraced by Indigenous families within the electorate.

There were 24 students who were accessing the centre—it is an after school hours centre and homework centre—and these students were receiving intensive tutorial assistance from trained tutors, which is just what they need to be able to address their educational disadvantage. The students who were involved in the centre showed improvement in their normal classrooms, and their parents and classroom teachers were commenting on the changes that had occurred. It was not only the changes that were occurring educationally; there were also social changes occurring. These students felt a lot better about themselves. That is one of the things that achieving does: when people achieve, when students find they are reading with the best of them in their class, they feel good about themselves and they are prepared to take risks; they are prepared to push themselves just a little harder. This was happening at Gorokan Public School. The Indigenous children who were attending this homework centre were performing at a level that surpassed anything that they had performed at previously.

But a problem arose in the school. It was discovered that 12 of those 24 students were under the age of eight—the age when children are best able to learn—and they were told they had to take those children out of that homework program. It is true that the guidelines for the program say that the children must be eight years of age or older, and those guidelines were put in place by the Howard government in 2005. It said homework centres would:

• focus on improving outcomes in literacy, numeracy and other curriculum subjects;
• encourage partnerships involving schools and local business and community groups—

which this homework centre at Gorokan does, and—

• involve suitably skilled personnel in the supervision of homework where possible …

Of course those people who were involved in the supervision and providing the extra assistance to the students at Gorokan primary school are more than suitably qualified and committed to the students of the school. The final point is:

• target students aged more than eight.

So the students have to fail: they have to get to the age of eight, be unable to read and be unable to get the assistance they need before they can access the service of a homework centre like the one at Gorokan Public School that has achieved such outstanding results.

The constituents who have approached me about this were very disappointed that these young people had to be removed from the classroom. The school was told that unless other students could be included in the homework centre then it would close. That is despite the fact that students had made such a dramatic improvement and despite the fact that every study supports early intervention as a key approach to addressing educational disadvantage and any problems that are surfacing in the area of education.

I have been reliably informed that the school has now approached local schools, and students from both Toukley and Kanwal are attending the homework centre. There are still fewer than 30 students, but what really worries me is that there were students who under the age of eight years. It was a prime time to address the problems that they had with education, and now they have been removed from the homework centre and they will only be allowed back when they are eight years of age. When that happens, their problems will be a lot greater than they are now.

I look at the amendment that has been moved by the member for Jagajaga, and the example that I have given fits right into the guidelines of what she refers to in it. The amendment looks at the imposition of red tape by the government. I do not think that you could have a better example of where red tape and bureaucracy are affecting the outcome that each and every member of this House would like to see. That outcome is addressing educational disadvantage of Indigenous Australians. I implore the government to rethink, to revisit, that particular issue and to consider what restricting access to homework centres for children under the age of eight can mean long term.

In addition to the issue that I have highlighted—an issue that is so important to my electorate—I point out that there has been chronic underspending of Commonwealth funding for Indigenous Australia in the context of this bill. Department officials have admitted to an underspend of $126 million. So we have $126 million underspent and students being denied access to a homework centre. That does not gel with me. The underspending was accompanied by changes to program administration which were very similar to the type of thing that I have mentioned.

As a nation we owe it to Indigenous Australians to ensure that they have the greatest opportunity to access education. We owe it to Indigenous Australians to address those key factors of disadvantage that I mentioned earlier in my contribution. We owe it to Indigenous Australians to work together in partnerships of the Commonwealth, the states and the private sector. And we owe it to Indigenous Australians not just to provide an extra $43.6 million over the period of 2006 to 2008, but to see that that money will provide them with the opportunities that they need to succeed in the future.

Whilst supporting the legislation, I strongly urge the government to look at the issues raised by the member for Jagajaga and I ask them to revisit issues like the homework centre and many others. I know that the member for Lingiari will be able to draw the attention of the House to issues that are of great concern in remote areas of Australia and he will be able to demonstrate most definitely how Indigenous students in the Northern Territory are being disadvantaged by changes that this government have made to Indigenous education.

See this speech in context