Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Lucky them, indeed. I am glad to see that members of the opposition on the frontbench now are acknowledging the fact that every single one of them is going to get a dollar increase. And it does not matter whether you come from a Catholic education background, an independent school education background or a state school background, every single child in the Goldstein electorate is going to see an increase in their funding. In some cases it will be a quite substantial increase, particularly if you go to a state school. More often than not these are schools which provide opportunities, and we want them to provide equal opportunities, to children who come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds—though not exclusively, and we need to acknowledge that. But, for those people who start life a bit rough, the state system does provide enormous opportunities.

So when we hear the fictitious lies—as we heard from the previous speaker—that have been put out there by so many people, it frankly drives you mad. They then misinform and mislead constituents and we have to go back and clarify the facts. By the way, the constituent I mentioned accepted the facts and was a little horrified at the lies and deception that had been put out there by the Australian Labor Party. They then had to go and educate others and say to others, 'No, that is not true; there is more money going into schools, including to the school that my child goes to, to make sure that they can have the best educational opportunities in life.'

That is the first half of this education package. Yes, we are using the needs-based funding model that was originally recommended by David Gonski. We congratulate him for his contribution to this debate and we congratulate him for supporting the government in implementing it. But we also support him for the second half of this package in a way that the opposition will not. They go silent and want to distance themselves from any suggestion that there has been a fulfilment of what Gonski recommended—that is, to shift the focus in education to where it should be, not just on dollars and cents but also on outcomes. Let's face it: money matters—buildings have to be built, schools and teachers have to be funded and resources need to be provided and books need to be bought—but, in the end, you can spend dollars wisely or you can spend them poorly. You can hire the best and you can skill and up train teachers so that they can have the best opportunities in order to make their maximum contribution and to make sure that, when they engage with children, they give them the most active, energised and educational opportunity.

We all know what it is like to have an amazing teacher at school. I do and the member for Robertson does and, I dare say, even the member for Bruce might have had a good teacher during his school experience.

Mr Morton interjecting—

Though maybe it sometimes does not show, as the member for Tangney remarks. We want teachers who are engaged and provide the best education for students. Yes, there needs to be a focus on their salaries and all of the other things, but we need to make sure that we get the best education outcomes for students. If it comes down to spending more money and getting no better outcome, that is not money well spent. Money is well spent only when you get improvement in results for students—when they have a more engaged and inclusive education environment and when they have the opportunity to realise their ambitions, whatever they may be. Some people want to go on to tertiary education, whether at a TAFE or at a university. They may have the same experience if they want to go and engage in a skills based program or an apprenticeship and go on to become small businesspeople or traders. We love it all, because, when Australian students go through the education system and gain the skills they need to go on and live a happy and fulfilling life, that is the foundation of this great nation's success.

That is what the focus of this education package is: to recognise not only that students require needs based funding but also that the money should be spent well to underpin their being able to have the best success in their life. The bill realigns the legislative framework to support a funding model that is fair, transparent and needs based. It ties funding to reforms that will improve student outcomes and provide strength and accountability mechanisms. That is the strength of this package, by delivering not just the money but also the tied outcomes.

The schools in my electorate—and I am sure I am not alone in this—will achieve enormous benefits from doing so. That is the feedback I am getting from schools. There are people who have raised concerns because scare campaigns have been run. I am not disputing that. People in my electorate have raised those scare campaigns with me and asked about the accuracy of the information, and I have made it clear that the information is inaccurate and then gone on the journey with them and proved to them that what they have heard is not the case. And they have accepted that, because they can see the intention of this government, which is to focus on how we achieve the best opportunities for every child, because we are not focusing just on dollars and cents; we are focusing also on outcomes.

There is also, as there should be, proper protection and assistance for children with a disability. The bill changes the calculation of the student with disability loading to include differentiated loadings to better reflect the needs of students in the top three levels of adjustment. Having worked with people who have a disability, I know that is extremely important. And it is important not just for the children who have a disability, and the educational challenges they face, but also in terms of the challenges presented to their parents, to make sure that they can provide the assistance and support that their children need and to make sure that their parents can also work with the schools to achieve the assistance and the support they need.

These changes are enormously important and extremely welcome. The minister, Senator Simon Birmingham, should be congratulated for this enormous contribution to improving the lives of children who have a disability. But, more than anything else, the cherry and the icing on the cake of this package are the long-term commitments and long-term agreements that it gives. One of the things we hear consistently across the board, no matter which school it is, is that they want certainty. They want the opportunity to plan their future with confidence, to be able to make sure that schools know where they are going to be in 10 years time so that they can make important decisions about hiring the best people, about building the skills and the capacity and investing in their people to deliver the best outcomes for students. By giving a clear and unambiguous 10-year commitment on the frame, direction and trajectory of funding, school principals, where they have the power to do so, can go ahead and plan around what they need for their future. I cannot think of something that is more important than giving school councils, principals and students the confidence they need to deliver the best outcomes, which I would have hoped we would all want to see.

Unfortunately this sometimes childish debate from the opposition—and I say that with a heavy heart and a bit of deep reluctance—put forward by, say, the member for Bruce, who sniggers up there in the back like a 12-year-old, getting up there and having this constant confected and fictitious debate about funding, corrodes that confidence that schools need in order to make those decisions in the interests of students. I would have thought that the lesson of the debate over the past few years is that we have to do as much as possible to enable those schools to plan for their success. That should be, I would hope, what the members opposite will stand up and argue for, as I am sure many of the members on this side will. They can stand up and plan with security and confidence about the direction of government policy.

In closing my remarks, I support this legislation because it provides the assistance and needs based funding for students—tick. But more important than that is that it focuses the discussion on making sure that that money is spent efficiently and effectively and that it is outcomes focused—tick. A+, as the member for Moreton would say; and maybe even A++. And for giving security and confidence to the schools sector in the long term: double-tick, smiley face, and A ++. (Time expired)

See this speech in context