Ann Sudmalis (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I sometimes wonder just what the opposition go on about with their education cuts. I can say the following with a high level of relevance because I was a secondary science teacher for 10 years. Under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd successive governments we saw huge investment in education—well, at least that was the public perception. The halls, especially in state funded schools, were built according to a formula by an urban-based construction company that had no ability to leverage local subcontractors. They had much higher contract prices anyway. They were beaten hands-down by the private school sector because they could do both parts to gain a much better bang for their buck. Then there was the universal distribution of the class sets of laptops for a school. There was no budget for repairs, replacements or stolen items. The result was a storeroom filled with outmoded and unrepaired laptops. But, worse still, in order to change the youth unemployment level back in 2010-11 any child up to the age of 17 had to remain at school. I was a teacher trainer at the time and I can tell you the devastating effect that that had in the classes to the teachers, the students who wanted to learn and the students who hated to be there.

Today this so-called matter of importance is trying to present that the Australian government is failing schools. I really feel sad when education is used as a political football, and so do the parents and the teachers. Much has been made of the Gonski model of funding, even to the point of giving the term the status of being a noun—like 'I give a Gonski'. But when you ask them what that actually means you rarely get an answer. The most important element of Australian education is not this word 'Gonski'; it is the concept of needs-based funding where local schools with specific needs gain sufficient funding to give the best opportunities to the greatest number of students—those with a disability, those with cultural disadvantage and those with an economic disadvantage. This is not a system designed for an equal outcome for every child. While in utopia that would be brilliant, we on this side of the House live in the real world.

While we are referring to the real world, I wish the opposition would stop talking about mythical money being taken from education. Labor in its amazing marketing—and I wish I had had that when I was a fudge manufacturer—

See this speech in context