Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's no surprise to anyone in this room that what the government budget does in terms of education is critical not just for communities like mine in the electorate of Lalor but also across the country and at all levels, whether that be in early education, schools education or higher and post-secondary-school education or TAFE—VET, as we call it.

This government have now had five years where their attention to detail in education has been next to zero. Other than knowing what education should cost, but not understanding the value of it, there's very little that they can give us in the detail around what their cuts mean. If we remember what the original Gonski review suggested and then think about the reform that was put in place, it was based around a student resource standard. That was a base in schools education that was said to be the minimum requirement for Australian schools to meet the standards that we expect of them. Then there were layers around disadvantage that would have gone above that student resource standard. What we know from this budget and what we know from the Turnbull government is that very few state schools in this country will meet the student resource standard. Families are now confronted with the fact that this has been capped for state schools at 20 per cent of a contribution.

This government wanted to talk a lot about 'special deals', as I think the term was. How are those individual special deals going with each of the states and independent sectors, and the Catholic systemic sectors, and at what point will schools reach the student resource standard? I think that's a fairly reasonable question. What does it mean for equity measures when state schools are to be capped at 20 per cent? Is the federal government therefore abandoning equity measures altogether? Are we going to be putting in place the equity funding that would mean it doesn't matter which school your child goes to or which postcode they live in; they would have an equal chance at a quality education? And when will the state schools in Victoria—and my electorate—reach their student resource standard? None of them have as yet. And how long will it take the state government to make up the difference, given that that's now going to be capped at 20 per cent from a Commonwealth contribution?

I just want to make this point. It is not surprising at all that this government, in five years, have done nothing but reverse what was going to be the biggest reform that this country had seen in schools education. What they've put in place is almost a replication of the Howard era school-funding model, except there's probably a little bit more money in it because the population's bigger. They've also taken the opportunity to ensure that the independent sector will get 80 per cent of its student resource standard funded by the Commonwealth. This is absolutely outrageous. It can't possibly be determined that this has anything to do with needs based funding or with a system that's supposed to be sector blind. They're basically my questions. Other than that, what will it mean in the Catholic systemic system, and what will it mean to the family contributions or fees over the next two years for families attending Catholic schools in my electorate?

I want to go too to some of the things that were said today in question time as they relate to the budget. The Prime Minister said today in question time that we all need to be aspirational. The Prime Minister suggested a 60-year-old aged-care worker should get themselves a better job. On this side, we understand that getting a better job might require you to retrain, go to TAFE. The cuts that have occurred mean this is less likely. The cuts to university mean it is less likely that the 60-year-old might be able to aspire to get a better job. I would ask the assistant minister if she agrees with me that perhaps the 60-year-old childcare worker would be better to vote Labor and get themselves a better Prime Minister.

See this speech in context