Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I speak in support of the government’s Tax Laws Amendment (Education Refund) Bill 2008, a bill that amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 and, among other things, introduces the education tax refund. I have to say as a bit of a side issue when looking at the fact that it does amend the Income Tax Assessment Act, that we all know the income tax assessment acts have grown bigger and bigger over the years. This bill also makes consequential amendments to a range of other acts, but it is really to the education tax refund that I will direct my comments.

The purpose is to give expression to government policy and government objectives on educational matters that put more resources in the hands of students and also some extra money into the pockets of families and carers. The education tax refund will provide a 50 per cent refundable tax offset for eligible education expenses up to $750 for children in primary studies and $1,500 for children in secondary studies. Eligible expenses are defined as follows: computers and computer related equipment such as printers and disability aids and also associated costs; home internet connection; school textbooks and other paper-based school learning material including stationery; and course prescribed tools of trade. And I imagine that there will be some working-out in that last area because it would be impossible to list all course prescribed tools of trade in the amending bill. That definition will become obvious as parents and carers put in their claims, otherwise the amending bill could be quite lengthy.

The bill also sensibly makes provision for a transition period when a student transitions from primary to secondary education during a financial year. The education tax refund will apply at the secondary rate for the entire year, which is a really important provision. Most importantly, education expenses in excess of the taxpayer’s offset limit for a financial year can be transferred to the subsequent income year, and this is a welcome provision.

What I did not say at the outset was that as long as the primary and secondary studies are recognised, the tax offset will apply. This of course will include distance education such as home schooling, which is a good thing. It has to apply to all of the approved areas of primary and secondary studies. It also applies to families and parents and carers and also to shared care. That is important given the arrangements that we have in families these days. Again, that aspect often takes some negotiation, as we all know, but it is very important that it is provided for in this bill.

Some other key features of this bill are as follows. It is a tax refundable offset, which means any part of the offset that cannot be used to reduce tax liability is paid out to the taxpayer. An approved care organisation is also eligible to claim the tax offset—that is, obviously, if a child in their care makes them eligible to receive the family tax benefit part A payments. It extends to families whose child would entitle them to family tax benefit A except that they are in receipt of payments such as youth allowance or disability support pension. Also, students in receipt of certain payments such as youth allowance and disability support pension who satisfy the independence requirement relevant to the amount of payment they receive are eligible for their own education expenses—another important provision in the bill.

I would add that it is important to note that, in terms of what is eligible, there are expenses that are not eligible expenses for the purposes of the tax offset, as we would rightly expect. They include school fees, and I have a view about school fees. My view is not related to this bill, but I just do not think that school fees should exist at all because, when we are talking about inclusion in education, wherever it is, school fees can put an enormous burden on some families and cause some social exclusion. Expenses that are not eligible also include school uniform expenses and student attendance at school based extracurricular activities such as excursions. Again, my personal view on this is the same as the comment I made about school fees, but that is not related directly to the bill. Other expenses that are not eligible are tutoring costs, game consoles and school subject levies—for example, payment for consumables for particular subjects et cetera. The tax offset cannot be claimed for an educational expense to the extent that the expense is tax deductible or subject to another tax offset. That is to be expected as well—that there would be no double dipping, as we call it.

I have been listening to other members in the debate, and I listened the other day to the member for Mayo. He was talking about the importance of education and also, as a general comment, about the importance of preschool education. What I would say there is that preschool is certainly an important component of lifelong learning and education, and it is part of the Rudd Labor government’s education revolution policy agenda to provide 15 hours per week in preschool for four-year-olds. That is a matter that will be worked out over the next period, and it is being worked on now by the parliamentary secretary. I just wanted to make the point that it is a key part of education and the education revolution.

In my concluding comments on this bill, I would like to say that education is important, and all members agree. What we disagree about is how we achieve it. Education is what gives us individual opportunities in life regarding work, careers and the way we live, and it is what gives society and communities within society opportunities to be prosperous, productive and peaceful. Each government and each major party has a view about our education system and how it should be, and that is always the issue around which we have contestation and debate, although there is a lot that we can agree on. We disagree about the way certain things should operate. In the Labor Party there is a strong commitment to education as a means, in a sense, to achieving inclusion, equity, access to opportunities and, indeed, a better life. Education has given us opportunities to better ourselves, as many of us have done, and as I have done.

We are committed, as well, to social inclusion, for reasons that are obvious, and we in the Rudd Labor government match this commitment with action. The education revolution is evidence of this. Other examples are this bill that is being debated now, computers in high school, transparency and accountability from all schools, a national curriculum, the preschool commitment and the tax offset. We are committed to making sure that families can better educate their children and provide their children with better opportunities and better access, and this is precisely what this bill does. With those comments, I commend this bill.

See this speech in context