Laurie Ferguson (Reid, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Urban Development and Consumer Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

Members on both sides of this House were highly amused some months ago when the member for Bass, who spoke earlier, imagined that he had been made a knight. However, today we see he has imagined what is actually in the motion before the House. I point out to him that there is no mention whatsoever of the continuing debate between private and public education; it was not mentioned at all. I also turn to another part of his contribution, where he talked about the great achievement of this coalition being to precipitate some comment from Labor with regard to the question of TAFE education. Quite frankly, this answers a question I have had in recent weeks, because I commissioned some work from the Parliamentary Library with regard to the educational performance of this country compared to other OECD countries, and the figures are alarming. Today the member for Bass has given us the answer as to why they are so poor and why this government’s performance is so dreadful. It is actually, as he said, the great achievement of precipitating debate by us.

Let us go through some of those OECD indicators. With regard to the expenditure on tertiary education, this country is now ranked only seventh among the 22 OECD countries. The proportion of GDP spent has declined from 1.7 per cent in 1995 to 1.5 per cent today. With regard to what households pay for their education in this country, in 2003, the latest figures available, 19.6 per cent of education expenditure was borne by the household sector. That had risen from 13.7 per cent in 1995. The situation today is that, of the 22 OECD countries, only households in Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United States pay more than Australian households for their education. It does not end there. In 2002, the most recent figures available, Australia’s investment in knowledge was 4.1 per cent of GDP; in the league of OECD countries, Australia came ninth out of 22. With regard to expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP, Australia’s total expenditure is less than most other OECD countries. It ranks 18th on that indicator, out of the 22 countries.

As I noted, this is an alarming situation, as shown by some of these figures, which are on the public record and which are OECD comparisons. They are reputable, they are credible and they are acknowledged. The situation is that expenditure on education is not only poor; it has seriously deteriorated. And it is not only in that information that we see such comments. In a recent paper, John Edwards remarked:

The decline in Australian export performance in the years since 2000 has been quite unexpected. For the financial year 2001-02 the Commonwealth Treasury forecast export volumes would increase 5 per cent. They fell by 1 per cent. The following year it forecast an increase of 6 per cent. They again fell, this time by 0.5 per cent.

But as part of his solution he, like most people, homes in on one of the most important issues. He calls for:

… programs in education, training and retraining that increase the supply of skilled workers, and programs that support the basic science, engineering and research and development that no single business can make commercially viable.

And I should note that another OECD indicator indicates the alarming performance of this country with regard to maths and science graduates. So even when we are talking about our trade situation, the renowned economist John Edwards says that one of the crucial factors that is driving our situation backwards is this government’s failure—this country’s failure—on training.

A member on the government benches had the effrontery to say that Labor is supposedly talking about these matters for the first time. This week the government will put before the parliament the Social Security Amendment (Apprenticeship Wage Top-Up for Australian Apprentices) Bill 2007, which once again is just a reaction to Labor Party policies over the last year or so. They are catching up; they have decided they had better do something about it. It may not go as far as Labor went, but it is a last-minute gesture. I recently had the benefit of meeting some TAFE teachers. They pointed to alarming changes such as the government cuts in expenditure in 1996-97; the 16.3 per cent decrease in per unit funding from 1997 to 2001, when there was growth in enrolments; and the way in which this government is using TAFE funding to compel independent institutions to accept its Work Choices changes. We have a member on the government benches who is saying it is a state matter, but we have a federal government that is using its funding proposals to compel institutions to accept its Work Choices changes.

We have a classic situation of failure. We are not looking at what the Labor Party says; we are looking at what this country does in comparison to its major competitors—the advanced developed countries. We have failed on education, and that is acknowledged in the statistics. Labor’s recent measure to initiate training opportunities in high schools in this country—which at the same time will do something about the deplorable retention rates by raising them from 75 per cent to 90 per cent—is a step in the right direction. (Time expired)

See this speech in context