Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Hansard source

I do want to take the opportunity to respond to some of the erroneous claims that have been made by the coalition in the course of this debate, and to reflect, as it were, on the fact that up to this point in time we have not seen any commitment from the coalition to education reform of any kind. Neither have we seen any commitment from the coalition to investment in schools.

In fact, what we do have is a commitment to a broken funding model—identified as broken by the Gonski panel itself. I was invited by one of those opposite to talk about where it is in the amendments that we give effect to the Gonski recommendations. Quite clearly, the amendments are about a schooling resource standard, plus loadings to be delivered to approved authorities—states and territories and non-government school bodies.

I will just read the recommendation of the Gonski panel itself. It is very straightforward and very clear in what it says—in particular:

The Australian Government and the states and territories, in consultation with the nongovernment sector, should develop and implement a schooling resource standard as the basis for general recurrent funding of government and non-government schools. The schooling resource standard should:

That is absolutely what sits in these amendments to this bill. That is literally what it is about.

For the member for Sturt to come in here and say that, when in the budget papers there is quite clearly additional appropriation in the budget over time—considerable appropriation, that would see $14.5 billion delivered over six years on a two-for-one basis of effective partnership between the Commonwealth and the states—and to maintain that it is anything other than an increase in funding for schools is literally laughable. The shadow minister will say anything at all—that is true.

There is one other point that needs to be made here, and that is that we have, and we will continue, to be in constructive negotiations with states and territories and the non-government school sector, who stand to benefit considerably. For the independent school sector there is around $1 billion and for the Catholic system there is around $1.4 billion. My expectation is that as we reach agreements with those sectors over time, as we should, then we will be in a position to make clear what the benefits are for this National Plan for School Improvement.

When I hear those opposite assail the government on the basis of delivery in education, I think they must be living in a parallel universe where negativism is inherent and where no clear or rational thinking in a debate of this kind is actually delivered. I can see some students watching us here. I look for an example of how this legislation works. The example has been made public, but it is a useful one. Members have been shouting at us, asking, 'How does it work; what does it mean?' I am very happy to share it with them.

Let us look at an inner regional independent primary school of some 220 students. You take the school's characteristics, you look at the base SRS amount and you then see whether the loadings that are inherent in this model would be applied—loadings for low socioeconomic background, disability, the size of the school, its location and whether or not it has students who require additional support for English language proficiency. That is what is included in this legislation that is before the House and which we are now debating. But the fact is that the shadow minister just wants to oppose—that is all the coalition can do—for the sake of opposing. It does not go to the heart of what this will mean for schools and students around Australia.

If we as a nation lock in a funding model which meets the needs of students both now and into the future, we are not only locking in equity and fairness but driving the whole of the appropriation. Yes, there is additional investment, but it is about every single dollar and cent that we as governments spend on education, on a model that is focused on student need. The government have articulated those things which we think are necessary. We have reached agreement with the New South Wales government. We know that those bilateral agreements will reflect A National Plan for School Improvement and we know that those resources will be put to the best possible use they can.

See this speech in context