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

Earlier, I was discussing just how bad the strategy of constantly repeating mistruth is. It is both insulting and deceitful for everyday Australians, and certainly confusing for parents everywhere, including those living in my electorate of Gilmore. I talked about the bubble of politics—the argy-bargy of debate that can be easily dissected into truth and false facts, or fake news, as some of my colleagues referred to. However, many parts of the media are not as savvy, and, clearly, from some of the debate today, neither are some of those in the opposition. Every member of the opposition over there is repeating the same fairy story. There was no funding for the fifth and sixth years of their proposed education funding. I believe this is a pretty shameful way to behave. Labor's 2013 election commitment to education was unfunded then, and it remains so, despite some Labor candidates stating that every dollar will be replaced. I ask: show me the money. Where is it coming from? No member of the shadow Labor ministry has confirmed this information is in fact truth. I wonder, does the shadow Treasurer know that the Labor team has committed to $22 billion? I imagine not. It will leave a massive, unfunded commitment.

Education funding is calculated using a really complicated model that has a reference to a base amount per student, plus loadings. Those loadings are put there to target schools and students of disadvantage, including those from lower socioeconomic areas, students with disabilities, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and students with low English proficiency. There is also a consideration of school size and location. In my case, the New South Wales government has a different methodology, for which I cannot account. Commonwealth funding to government schools in New South Wales has been growing faster than the state funding. Under the coalition government, from 2014 to 2017, total funding to government schools in New South Wales has been $7.2 billion, an increase of 43.7 per cent, and the second largest increase across government schools in Australia. The future increase from 2015-16 through to 2020 will be an additional $563 million. Our funding growth means there is no reason schools cannot continue to support teachers with their new or existing initiatives, such as specialist teachers or intervention programs. Buildings, playground equipment and yard maintenance for government schools is actually the responsibility of the state government. Overall, the coalition government is growing investment in schools from $16 billion to $20.1 billion, on top of more than $14 billion the coalition has been delivering for regional and remote schools. There have not been and nor will there be any cuts to education funding in Gilmore.

However, there is a great deal more to education than having well-maintained buildings and increased funding: there is the quality of our teachers and their efforts in every way to help each and every child reach their individual potential. I know that the majority of our teachers love their work. They love the children that they teach. I acknowledge that. I have seen their work in action and the results they achieve.

The budget has committed future real funding for education, giving certainty. This is much preferred by parents and teachers, rather than some dreamlike, nebulous amount that, to this minute, remains unfunded—like an empty piggybank. I question the reasons behind the Labor Party denying initiatives for truly delivering a needs based funding model. Why will they vote to see government schools receive, at most, 4.7 per cent legislated funding growth compared to the coalition's plan for a 5.1 per cent annual increase? Why will they vote for schools of identical need to receive different levels of funding for their Schooling Resource Standard just because they are in a different state? Why, after using the name of Gonski as a call to arms for teachers unions around the country, is Labor now going against David Gonski's endorsement of the coalition's plan?

Why do they prefer different funding methodologies that advantage some non-government schools over others? And if they want to continue the 27 special deals that they implemented they will see needy students in one state get up to $15,000 less than the same sort of student in the same sort of school but in a different state.

Labor is trying to have an argument about funding, but the legislation before parliament is about delivering a real needs based model to distribute that funding. Spending is not a substitute for reform. It is remarkable that after years of posturing on the Gonski that the Leader of the Opposition now stands opposed to the Turnbull government's consistent implementation of a needs based funding model.

I began with a reference to the Schooling Resource Standard, which is the central focus of the Gonski reforms. From 2018, new arrangements for Commonwealth schools funding will be focused on needs with the Schooling Resource Standard, as recommended by that review in 2011. The resourcing standard for each school will depend on the size and composition of its student population, the number of students who need extra help through having a disability; those who come from a disadvantaged home, who may never have read a book at home; Indigenous students; and the size of the school and its location.

I call on the Labor to stop this ridiculous rubbish, treating Australians as if they were gullible sponges absorbing constant repetition of untruthful statements so that eventually they believe them to be true. Mums, dads, grandparents and families just want to know that the current programs running in their children's schools will continue. With our increases, these programs will continue.

Let's just examine some real case scenarios of funding for the students in Gilmore. If a student is attending Shoalhaven High School, this year the federal government is contributing $3,708 to that child. Next year it will be $3,896. Nowra East Public School, the school in my electorate that is now known throughout the country—not necessarily for the terrific job they do—this year receives $3,528 for each student, and next year they will receive $3,707. At Vincentia High School each student is allocated $3,380; next year it will be $3,551. And, as a final example, at Moruya High School each student is allocated $3,419 this year, and next year it will be $3,592.

Every single school in Gilmore gets an increase in education investment from the Commonwealth government. The figures are averaged out per student, but in the end it is a number gained by adding to the base according to the needs. Eventually, the school principal, working with his or her staff and parents, chooses how best to utilise the money allocated to their school in the best interests of their enrolled students. The teachers and principals just want to know that the time they have spent developing new programs or having the training opportunities to grow in their professional development to deliver great programs for our children will continue. They want certainty in relation to this. With our investment in education, all of the above will happen.

Contrast this certainty of funding to imaginary dollar figures that are unfunded. It has been quoted that sometime somewhere they will get that from revenue: 'Oh, does that include borrowing from overseas? Well, whatever it takes.' This is not appropriate for Australia. We need to spend within our revenue sources, particularly for education.

As a parent and a past teacher, I note that certainty wins, absolutely, over fake promises. The teachers in my region—in schools like Sanctuary Point Public School, Nowra East Public School and Nowra Public School, then going from Bombaderry down to Ulladulla and Milton and then further down to Batemans Bay and Sunshine—are amazing. They have done fabulous things with our children and they just need to know that the money they are getting next year will be more than the money they are getting now. They need to know that the money they are getting over the next 10 years is going to be more—more than CPI—so that principals can actually develop programs like the robotics at Sanctuary Point, like the video classes or like some of the other things they are doing with STEM. They are doing amazing things, and yet there are children in those schools who have literacy problems so they are bringing in helpers for literacy. Each and every one of those programs will continue, and each and every one of those parents needs to be reassured that each and every one of those programs will continue.

I am tired of the opposition scaring my parents and my custodial grandparents by telling mistruths—which are then regurgitated in the media—to the public that their children will miss out. It is wrong, it is inappropriate and they should stop doing it.

Our children deserve so much more respect than you are showing them. Our teachers deserve more respect. You are degrading the work that they have done and you are pretending that you have got a funding bucket that will commit to what you are promising. You do not. You never did and you still do not. I am absolutely ashamed of some of the tactics that you are using. For goodness sake, education is far more important than that.

See this speech in context