Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to oppose the government's destructive Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017. The Prime Minister's sales pitch on this legislation has been the most brazen, shameless attempt to mislead the electorate that we have seen in recent years. But no amount of spin can disguise the fact that the government is preparing to undertake a $22 billion ram raid on Australian school funding. This is the equivalent of sacking 22,000 teachers. We can be sure that this is exactly how much is on the line because it comes from the government's own policy document, which was given, conveniently, to journalists. It reads: 'Compared to Labor's arrangements, this represents a saving of $6.5 billion over four years from 2018 to 2021 and $22.3 billion over 10 years from 2018 to 2027.

In my own home state of New South Wales, schools are set to lose $846 million in the next four years alone. Yet, still, the government have been desperately trying to disguise the extent of their cuts, even from the schools themselves. The secretary of the New South Wales education department, Mark Scott, could not have been clearer when he called out the government's fake figures in an email sent to school principals on 11 May. The email referred to funding amounts provided to school principals by the federal government. It reads:

You should not rely on these figures for future planning or budgeting purposes. The calculation of apparent increases to your school also does not take into account increases in teachers' salaries or any other cost growth over the next decades.

This is because Mr Scott knows, just as I do, just as parents in my schools do, that the government's figures and its school funding calculator are deliberately designed to disguise just how deep these cuts will go. Even the New South Wales Minister for Education, Rob Stokes, has called the Turnbull government out on its extraordinary attempts at deception. Mr Stokes has questioned whether the government's figures 'represent reality or not'. In fact, he is so concerned about the impacts of this legislation on my home state that he is currently looking into the legality of the government's plans to trash the existing school funding agreement that the New South Wales government has with the Commonwealth.

This is extraordinary stuff from a Liberal government, and it demonstrates clearly just how much is at risk. It shows how little the Turnbull government understands about the importance of education not only for our children but for our national capacity and indeed our future prosperity. Investment in education is fundamental to increasing productivity and addressing inequality, which we know is now at a 75-year high in Australia. But those opposite clearly do not care about the economic impacts of this decision and they patently do not care about inequality or fairness. When given a choice between properly funding our schools or giving big business a tax cut, they have chosen big business. This is what the school cuts are all about—funding the Prime Minister's corporate tax cuts, which have now blown out to $65 billion.

And we must not forget that the Commonwealth's own figures show that these same tax cuts will take 20 years to deliver even a minuscule one per cent boost to growth. Last year, the Economic Society of Australia and the Monash Business School undertook a pre-election survey of Australia's top economists about the benefits of education investment compared to corporate tax cuts. Of the 31 economists surveyed, two-thirds agreed with the statement 'Australia will receive a bigger economic growth dividend in the long run by spending on education than offering an equivalent amount of money on a tax cut to business'. Only one lone respondent said he was strongly opposed to that statement, and even he stipulated that any benefits of tax cuts would not be particularly large.

That is not exactly what you would call a glowing endorsement of the government's plan. But so blinded are those opposite by the opinion of experts, so desperate are they to help out their big business mates, that they are taking money from our kids to hand over to large corporations. There is no doubt that the school plan on offer today in no way delivers on the government's spin. It is not sector blind, it is not needs based, and it will hit the schools with some of the most disadvantaged students the hardest. The government has cynically appropriated the Gonski brand but none of the Gonski substance. This plan is really a continuation of the long-held agenda of Liberal governments to rip funding from education, especially from our public schools. This government clearly sees education as a line item to be slashed, not an investment in the most important thing we have—our kids and our people.

Those opposite like to pretend that this legislation is sector blind, that it only looks at needs and not whether schools are public or private. But nothing could be further from the truth. This is a plan that prioritises private schools and leaves public schools at the mercy of individual state governments. Under this plan, public schools, which currently educate 80 per cent of Australian students, will receive less than half of the small increase to funding that is on offer.

Not only does this bill slash critical funding of our schools but it also legislates a reduced role for the Commonwealth funding of our state schools into the future. It abolishes the existing requirement for the federal government to increase funding for underresourced schools by at least 4.7 per cent a year and it caps Commonwealth contributions to public schools at 20 per cent of the Schooling Resource Standard, the benchmark amount that our schools need.

When the Prime Minister complains about different funding arrangements made with the states under Labor, which we have heard loud and clear, this legislation will in fact make the situation worse. Under the former Labor government's plan, Commonwealth funding was, importantly, linked to and contingent on the states also increasing their funding. We were setting Australia on a path which would ensure that every school got 95 per cent of the Schooling Resource Standard. Under Labor, most schools would have reached that standard in two years' time. But this meant that the states had to pull their weight too, and that is only fair. It was essential for the states to contribute so that we could in fact ensure that not only every school but indeed every child in every school had access to a good quality education.

There is no such requirement in Mr Turnbull's legislation. This government is giving public schools 20 per cent, eventually, and abandoning all responsibility for how the rest is funded. Clearly, this means that the quality of education children receive will be determined by the state they live in. Those living in states that believe in and can afford to invest in education will prosper; all students in other states will fall behind.

This is very serious, and no matter what the Prime Minister says about being a fan of needs based funding, his plan will hurt disadvantaged schools and it will hurt kids living in states that cannot or will not contribute more. In doing so, the government's plan will rip opportunity away from students who we know benefit the most from extra support, making an absolute mockery of the Gonski principles the Prime Minister pretends to support.

In contrast, private schools will get 80 per cent of the Schooling Resource Standard through federal funding. This means that by 2026 and 2027 private schools will all be getting 100 per cent of their Schooling Resource Standard funding while public schools will be nowhere near that, even if state governments do maintain their funding in real dollars—which is highly unlikely. In fact, only one-seventh of public schools will have reached the Schooling Resource Standard by 2027.

It is painfully clear that the Prime Minister's school funding plan does not come close to being fair. But we should not really be surprised. After all, this is the man who wanted the federal government to pull out of funding state schools entirely. The government has tried to run the line that because 24 very overfunded schools will receive small cuts that the Prime Minister's plan is somehow fair. This is a shameless red herring, and people should not fall for it. It represents only 24 out of 9,000 schools across the country. Meanwhile, schools across the country are being hung out to dry.

So what does this mean in the real world? It means less funding, it means less individual attention for kids and, inevitably, it means that many kids will fall behind. It means that schools will be less able to provide one-to-one attention for kids who are struggling. It means that literacy and numeracy programs will be cut. It means fewer programs for disadvantaged kids reconnecting with education and it will mean that some enrichment programs in things like STEM, languages and music will not be able to go ahead. It will also mean that fewer extension activities to help gifted and talented students achieve their potential will be taught.

It is a little hard to get your head around just how damaging this government's $22 billion cuts will be on a local level. Fortunately, the New South Wales Teachers Federation has done some excellent work on the precise impacts on schools in New South Wales. I would like to put on the record right now the exact amounts that individual state schools in my electorate of Newcastle stand to lose.

Adamstown Public School will lose $181,632; Belair Public School will lose $309,659; Callaghan College, with three collective campuses, stand to lose $2,753,008; Carrington Public School will lose $85,025; Elermore Vale Public School will lose $308,934; Glendore Public School will lose $424,580; Hamilton North Public School will lose $110,189; Hamilton Public School will lose $191,554; Hamilton South Public School will lose $273,121; Heaton Public School will $183,987; Hunter School of Performing Arts will lose $618,677; Islington Public School will lose $201,769; Jesmond Public School will lose $252,481; Kotara High School will lose $647,171; Kotara School will lose $74,168; Kotara South Public School will lose $186,495; Lambton High School will lose $673,301; Lambton Public School will lose $286,196; Maryland Public School will lose $439,516; Mayfield East Public School will lose $273,460; Mayfield West Public School will lose $333,711; Merewether Heights Public School will lose $195,373; Merewether High School will lose $540,451; Merewether Public School will lose $153,573; Minmi Public School will lose $71,800; New Lambton Heights Infants School will lose $40,206; New Lambton Public School will lose $358,430; New Lambton South Public School will lose $296,235; Newcastle East Public School will lose $145,126; Newcastle High School will lose $726,889; Newcastle Middle School will lose $56,332; Newcastle Senior School will lose $78,388; Plattsburg Public School will lose $452,993; and Shortland Public School will lose $413,751.

That is not the end of it, but that is all that time permits today. These are outrageous cuts to public education.

See this speech in context