Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017. As we have just heard from my colleague the member for Kingsford Smith, we thought we had a bipartisan agreement on this issue—the education of future generations, no matter whether it be public, private or Catholic. We thought we had agreement on the approach that would be taken to educating generations for the future. This government has reneged on this issue, as it has on so many issues. Now what we are seeing is not just a backtracking on a bipartisan agreement and commitment to education for the future of all Australians but also a cut—a $22.3 billion cut—from Australian schools. What we are seeing is that what that actually means is a $2.5 million cut for each school throughout the country.

This is going to have a significant impact on schools in my electorate—particularly the Catholic schools, but also the public schools. It is going to particularly hurt our public schools because they will receive 50 per cent less funding if this bill is to pass. This bill will result in an inequitable outcome and see a significant number of young Australians disenfranchised and missing opportunities that a high-quality education can provide.

I am living proof of the fact that education is transformative. My sisters and I are living proof of the great enabler, the great opportunity opener and the great transformer that is education, thanks to my mother's commitment to putting us through high school and then through tertiary education and university. It was her commitment to actually see us educated. She was a single mum; my dad left us with $30 in the bank when he left us when I was 11. We did it very tough, but my mother was absolutely determined that we were going to be educated—that we would finish high school and go to university—because she was very starkly aware of the limited opportunities offered to the women in her family as a result of limited education.

My great-grandmother left school at 11 and was a domestic in the Western District. She was a cleaner, for want of a better term, in the domestic district for the wealthy families in the Western District in Victoria. She brought up 13 children on her own. My grandmother was a cleaner and she cleaned three places: a factory, a theatre and a workplace. She brought up seven children on her own in a housing commission house in Preston. My mother left school—dragged, kicking and screaming—at 15. She brought up my sisters and me on her own. As I said, Dad left us with $30 in the bank when I was 11. She was determined that that cycle of disadvantage would not continue—that it would be broken by my sisters and me and our generation—and that education was the only thing that allowed that cycle of disadvantage to be broken.

As I said, I am living proof of education's transformative powers. My middle sister is living proof. She is a scientist and Australia's first female master of wine. She is now making wine and consulting on wine. She has done that all over the world and she is now doing it in Victoria. My little sister is an internationally renowned neurologist. It is education that has basically provided us with those opportunities for these wonderful, rewarding, enriching careers and the opportunity for all of us to give back through our various careers.

Education is the transformer. Education is the silver bullet. Education is the great enabler, full stop. The cuts this government is proposing have the potential to deny the young Australians of the future those opportunities and choices, and deny them the experiences of the transformative powers of education and the opportunities for cycles of disadvantage to be broken.

Labor undertook, as we know, the landmark review into school funding. We introduced the Schooling Resource Standard, which was a sector-blind model that clearly defined the funding all schools needed to deliver a great education. The funding model guaranteed extra funding for kids with poorer outcomes to give them the help they needed. Despite the coalition government's commitment to a bipartisan approach and despite the coalition government's commitment to being on a unity ticket, this is not what the Turnbull government is putting forward with this bill.

The Turnbull government speaks volumes through this bill. The message that is being sent here is that it does not believe in education as the great enabler or as the great transformer. It does not understand how it can change lives and how it is the silver bullet. The Turnbull government does not want to guarantee the rights of every child to receive the best possible education this nation can provide, no matter where they live, no matter what their parents earn or parent earns, no matter what postcode they live in and no matter what their background is. The Turnbull government has turned its back on so many who are doing it tough.

The Turnbull government is proposing changes to the current act that will remove the national targets for Australia. It will remove the national target for Australia to be placed in the top five highest-performing countries by 2025. Why would you do that? Why would you not have that aspiration for your country and the aspiration for every child in our nation to be in a country that is one of the top five highest-performing countries by 2025? It is removing the target for our school system to be considered high quality and highly equitable on the international stage by 2025, and for the lifting of year 12 or equivalent attainment rate to 90 per cent.

The Turnbull government is also looking to remove targets for halving the gap between Indigenous and other students in attaining year 12 or equivalent by 2020 from the baseline in 2006. Finally, the Turnbull government is removing the target for halving the gap between Indigenous and other students in reading, writing and numeracy by 2018 from the baseline in 2008.

The Turnbull government's changes also remove the statements about quality teaching and quality learning from the act. Again, this is perplexing. It was a unity ticket, bipartisan approach, but here is the government removing these statements about the aspiration for quality teaching and quality learning to ensure that teachers have the skills and support they require to improve their performance over time. The Turnbull government is removing statements that Australian schooling will provide a high-quality educational experience with an environment and curriculum that supports all school students to reach their full potential.

The fact that these statements, commitments, aspirations, goals and targets have been removed just underscores again that the government simply does not value education for all. And I am speaking here about all; I am not talking about the top end of town—I am not talking about Shore and I am not talking about Kings or Geelong Grammar; I am talking about Richardson Primary in my electorate, with 25 per cent of its students Indigenous. I am talking about schools in your electorate, Mr Deputy Speaker Georganas, and schools in all of our electorates, where kids are doing it tough; they are not from wealthy parents. And I am not just talking here of our public schools; I am also talking about Catholic schools—I will come to that shortly.

The Turnbull government's lack of commitment and understanding of education, its lack of valuing of education and it lacks understanding that it is transformative, that it is a silver bullet, is represented in these $22.3 billion cuts. As I said, this means a cut of $2.4 million for every Australian school over the next decade. That is the equivalent of sacking 22,000 teachers.

Under this government's approach, less than 50 per cent of extra funding will go to public schools. Labor was providing 80 per cent of extra funding for public schools, because we know that public schools cater for seven out of 10 kids with a disability, for seven out of 10 kids from a language background other than English, for eight out of 10 Indigenous students, and for around eight out of 10 kids from low-income families.

These are people like me. These are the people who I was when I was a student—when I was a young girl: low-income families and single-income families. Thanks to my mother's commitment and a great public education, I am now proudly representing the people of Canberra. These schools have seven out of 10 kids with disability, seven out of 10 kids from a language background other than English, eight out of 10 Indigenous students and around eight out of 10 kids from low-income families. Under this government, these schools will basically see less than 50 per cent of extra funding. According to the Canberra School Census, released in February 2017, 46,557 students attend public schools in the ACT. That is a lot of students who are going to be affected by this cut.

But, as I said, it is not just the public schools that are going to be disadvantage as a result of the government's cuts. The government's cuts are also penalising Catholic schools, particularly here in Canberra. In Canberra, systemic Catholic schools will feel the brunt of the cuts. As a result, they are going to have to increase their fees or cut teachers at their schools. I recently had the great pleasure of going to St Thomas More's Primary School in Campbell in my electorate with the Leader of the Opposition, the deputy leader and, also, shadow education minister. Under this government's proposed changes, St Thomas More's will lose $214,400 over 10 years, while The King's School, that very prestigious and privileged school in Sydney, will receive additional funding in the multimillions of dollars. How is this fair?

I was also contacted by a parent who has children at St Thomas More's Primary School. They said that St Thomas More's Primary School is a small school with basic facilities. It does, however, have gifted and dedicated teachers who have a deep understanding of each child and how each child learns more effectively. Its school community is close and supportive. You can feel this when you walk into the school. This is one of the schools that has been targeted by the Turnbull government's cuts. The Turnbull government's proposed funding cuts are risking this school's future right now as I speak. It is a critical point in time for the enrolments. It could have a significant impact on enrolments for the future and, also, on the future of the school. The school community has been told that they will see thousands of dollars in increases in school fees. That is just one of many here in Canberra that has been very hard hit by this government.

I received a message from the principal of St Mary MacKillop College. St Mary MacKillop College is a co-ed school. It is the largest school here in Canberra. It is located in the Tuggeranong Valley. According to the principal there, the base funding of all students at MacKillop has been frozen for 10 years, and then it will be cut. This includes students with disabilities. This was confirmed to me over the phone by Minister Birmingham's office. This is a disgrace and is not fair. After 10 years, MacKillop's funding will be cut by $770 per student—a net loss of $4.6 million. So here we have St Thomas More's losing in the vicinity of about $215,000 in 10 years, while The King's School has a multimillion dollar increase in its funding. Here we have St Mary MacKillop College—a very modest school with parents of modest incomes—losing $4.6 million. This is the government on education, despite its commitment to bipartisanship and its commitment to a unity ticket.

This bill speaks volumes about the Turnbull government's commitment to education for all Australians, no matter what their background, no matter what their parents earn, no matter what their circumstances. It is all about funding The King's School at the expense of public education at schools like Richardson Primary School and at the expense of Catholic education in schools like St Thomas More's Primary School. It is all about looking after the big end of town while the rest of us, the disadvantaged and those with disability are underfunded and have their funding cut. (Time expired)

See this speech in context