Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support this bill, Australian Education Amendment (Direct Measure of Income) Bill 2020. Centre Alliance was critical in assisting the landing of the major Gonski education reforms in the last parliament, negotiating for Australian schools to receive $23.5 billion—$4.9 billion above the government's original proposal of $18.6 billion. This was critical for South Australia in particular, because, when the previous state government had an agreement with the then Gillard government, the Gonski agreement that was negotiated had the funding in the backend of the agreement. That meant that many South Australian schools were behind other state counterparts, because the funding for them was in years 5 and 6 outside of forward estimates, not that I'm being particularly critical there, but I do appreciate that we needed to make sure that we got reforms through. So we negotiated for those underfunded Australian schools to reach their new funding targets within six years rather than the government's original 10-year proposal. We felt that that was important because a child that was five years of age shouldn't have to wait until it was 15 years of age by the time that reform was completely implemented. It is important to recognise that this has led to record funding levels in education by the federal government, even despite the fact that funding for public schools ultimately remains a responsibility of states.

We also negotiated for a National School Resourcing Board to be implemented to review and improve the school funding methodology, with benchmarks for state and territory governments so that they pay their fair share of education. In the early days of Gonski, we saw that where the federal government tipped in a particular state or territory government would in some cases crab walk away from their responsibilities.

The central element of this bill comes directly from the school national schools resourcing boards reveals school funding, the June 2018 Review of the socio-economic status score methodology. A key recommendation of the board was that the socioeconomic status scores for non-government schools should be calculated on the capacity of school families to contribute to the cost of education rather than using area based calculations, based on postcode. The reason that this is important is that many families make enormous sacrifices to send their children to a non-government school because they are not as wealthy as the average resident in that particular school's area or postcode. This can often be because families live outside the area where the school is. This is particularly true in my electorate of Mayo, where families often live in outer lying rural areas and townships and send their children to the larger towns, where non-government schools are often based. It is worth remembering that not all non-government schools are wealthy schools from leafy inner suburbs. For example, a good number of students in non-government schools in Mayo are actually children on school cards. Many of them are children with special needs who are supported and included in the very inclusive and caring small environments for children. A long-running South Australian initiative, the school cards support children from financially disadvantaged backgrounds.

I know that schools right across my electorate, whether they be independent or state schools, are all fund raising. They're all running sausage sizzles, they're all running cake stalls and they're all organising school fetes. All of that is to put more money back into their schools. They are careful with their budget, particularly when they're a small school. That's because in many of our small schools in regional areas if one family can no longer afford to stay at that school, an independent school, that can drastically change enrolment numbers.

When I talk about school cards and about families who send their children to independent schools and sacrifice so much to do so, often the reason they do that is that they want their child to be taught in the faith that's in the home or they're looking for different learning styles that will suit the specific needs of their children, whether it be Montessori or Waldorf-Steiner models. I have Steiner model schools in the Adelaide Hills and in Wilunga. I will say, though, that every school in my electorate is a quality school, whether it is a public school or an independent school. For a regional area, we provide significant choice for families, and that, ultimately, is what we want to see in an education system, that there is choice for families.

I have received reassurances from the government that the funding transition is being made so as to minimise any disruption. Given my knowledge of the non-government schools in Mayo, I am confident that these changes will create positive funding outcomes for all of our non-government schools, and I therefore commend the bill to the House.

In closing, I would like to mention the school community fund, which provided $200,000 per electorate for small projects. I think that provided an enormous boost to our schools right across Australia. They were small projects organised through electorate offices. I would strongly encourage the minister to consider having a funding round in the future. I know that it was well oversubscribed in my electorate, and I'd like to think that more schools in my electorate would have the opportunity to participate in that grant round in the future. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context