Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Fisher for bringing this motion to the House, as it gives us the opportunity to discuss the very vital issue of school education in Australia. Unfortunately, I must start by correcting an error in the member's motion. The government is not investing an additional $23.5 billion; it has removed $17 billion. Neither I, nor the member for Fisher, were in this place in 2013, but I am sure that he remembers the member for Sturt, who was then the coalition's education spokesperson, promising Australian parents there would not be one dollar difference between the coalition's and Labor's education plans. It was such an ironclad promise, the coalition even had corflutes made up, which were brandished with abandon at election booths. After the election, the coalition sought to break its promise by trying to cut $30 billion in school funding, which Labor and the Senate blocked. Now the government expects praise for cutting just $17 billion and not the $30 billion that was formerly proposed. If the funding you legislate is less than what you had promised, it is a cut. So, if we're going to debate an issue, we should at least start with the truth.

I am delighted that the member for Fisher is pleased that three schools in his electorate are, between them, to receive an extra $76.6 million over the next decade. It's a less happy tale in Tasmania, where public schools will receive $60 million less than they were promised by the coalition, and that's just over the next two years. And it is, of course, public schools and Catholic schools that do the really heavy lifting in Tasmania—educating three-quarters of the state's children, including most children with a disability. It is beyond comprehension that the new funding formula also strips Tasmanian schools of $10 million targeted at students with disability.

It is public schools and Catholic schools that need the most funding, but apparently that's not the case under this government. The exclusive Friends' School in Hobart, where high school tuition can cost parents more than $20,000 a year, is getting an extra $19 million from the government's changes to funding formulas. While kids in Bridgewater, Campania and Westbury and Evandale get less for their schools, Friends' School gets a few million extra.

Those opposite will often accuse Labor of waging class warfare, but the fact is our funding model would have ensured that no Australian school would have been worse off, whether it were public, private, Catholic or whatever. Our formula was based on need, and that formula would have seen more funds directed to public and Catholic schools, where the need is demonstrably greatest. The government's model, on the other hand, skews public funds markedly to wealthy, high-fee-charging, independent schools. Caulfield Grammar in Melbourne, which charges $29,000 a year, will get $34.8 million more from taxpayers over the next decade. Wesley in Melbourne charges $30,000 and gets $22 million more. Presbyterian in Melbourne charges $30,000 and will get $18 million more. Kings in Parramatta charges $34,000 and gets $19 million more. Newington and Santa Sabina in Strathfield, which charge $32,000 and $22,000 in fees, get $19 million more. It is not Labor waging class warfare; it is the coalition waging warfare on public education funding.

Anyone who says school funding is not relevant to education performance is kidding themselves. It is not the only thing that matters, but it is right up there in importance. On all the education indices, my electorate of Lyons is behind the eight ball. Many in my electorate do not aspire to university; they see it as either out of reach or irrelevant to their needs. Just 5.5 per cent are university graduates. I'm sad to say, just 6.8 per cent have a diploma or a trade qualification. That's a huge percentage of people without any formal qualification beyond school. That means these people are automatically behind the eight ball when it comes to better employment prospects, better pay, better working conditions and more social mobility. Education is where it starts, and it starts in primary school, and that is where these cuts are having the worst effect. The silence of the four Tasmanian Liberal senators has been deafening on these cuts, while the meek surrender of the Liberal Premier of Tasmania has been, frankly, pathetic. That is why we need a state Labor government in Tasmania.

See this speech in context