Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006 does contain some welcome additional support for Indigenous students. However, it is a missed opportunity to deal with some of the problems which have been identified and should be being addressed in this legislation. I will go through those. The bill provides an additional $43.6 million over 2006 to 2008, mainly to extend tutorial assistance support for school students in year 9 and for students at TAFE and with other providers of vocational education and training.

The bill does not deal with some of the serious flaws in the government’s policies and programs. These flaws, as I say, have been apparent for some time. In June last year in a speech to the parliament, I described the inherent problems and the unfair ways in which Indigenous education funding is provided for Indigenous students, parents and communities. We had a number of other opposition speakers outlining their concerns as well. Unfortunately, there has been no mention of these issues either in the legislation or in the minister’s second reading speech and no attention given to the problems that both my colleagues and I have raised many times. It seems there is continuing indifference to the problems which I am sure the government knows about and which we would certainly like to see addressed.

That said, Labor certainly will be supporting this bill, because it does provide additional funding. We want to see that urgently needed additional funding out and into our schools and TAFEs as quickly as possible. Given that our underlying concerns remain, I intend to move the second reading amendment that has been circulated in my name. I move:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1)

condemns the Government for:

(a)

failing to deliver urgently needed funding for Indigenous students by insisting on complex and bureaucratic administrative arrangements that prevent many schools and communities from benefiting from education programs;

(b)

causing a $126 million underspend in Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives expenditure in 2004-05 through bureaucratic bungling;

(c)

imposing impenetrable red tape that has led to a decline in the involvement of Indigenous communities in the parent-school partnership initiative;

(d)

failing to provide sufficient resources for early intervention programs in schools to raise Indigenous children’s literacy standards;

(e)

reducing the number of Indigenous school children who access tutorial assistance by making eligibility requirements more restrictive and short term; and

(f)

presiding for ten long years over continuing gaps in educational and training participation and performance between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students;

(2)

requests the Government to reform its funding criteria and guidelines so as to the address the above concerns and provide all Indigenous students with the opportunity to achieve quality schooling  results”.

I want to go through why we believe the parliament should voice these concerns, and I call on the government to address them. They are very serious indeed and have been around for some time. The report on the review of Aboriginal education in New South Wales, Freeing the spirit: dreaming an equal future, laments in the following terms:

How can it be that, in a country like Australia, there is a group of young people whose early years do not prepare them adequately with the skills and confidence to enjoy a meaningful role in society and a share in the country’s wealth?

Indigenous people are looking to the nation’s political leadership, particularly members of this parliament, for an answer to this and other questions. The member for Kingsford Smith in last year’s debate referred to the march from Melbourne to Canberra by Michael Long. This well-respected Indigenous leader walked from Melbourne to speak directly with the Prime Minister about the needs of his people. He took the Prime Minister’s word in his election night speech in 2001 that he wanted to place Indigenous issues, including Indigenous education outcomes, at the centre of the government’ policy agenda. We saw on television that Michael Long got a cup of tea from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, he, like the rest of us, is still waiting for a response to the substantive issues affecting Indigenous people, particularly in education.

Just the other day the member for Fremantle told us about another story of Indigenous people reaching out for help. In her question to the Speaker last week she referred to the actions of two women who arrived at the parliament after walking across the Nullabor. The women wanted to draw attention to the need for action to eliminate racism in our communities. They wore aprons with the words ‘Steps towards healing’ on the front and a map of Australia on the back with black and white hands reaching out for each other for succour and friendship. The women were confronted, unfortunately, by parliamentary bureaucracy when they arrived, but that is not particularly the point I want to make here; rather, this is another case of Indigenous people calling out for understanding, support and, in their words, ‘healing’.

The government has been in office now for a very long time—time enough, I would say, to assess its effectiveness in making progress in the education of Indigenous people, despite the difficulties. I acknowledge that there have been some improvements, and all governments and communities, federal, state and territory, should be given credit for these. I think one thing for which people need credit is the fact that there are more Indigenous students completing secondary schooling. The retention rate to year 12 for Indigenous students in 1998 was a very low 32.1 per cent, which is a difference of over 40 percentage points when compared with the rate for non-Indigenous students, who had a completion rate of 72.7 per cent in that year. By 2005 the retention rate for Indigenous students had improved to 39½ per cent, so we certainly have witnessed an improvement since 1998. The retention in 2004 was slightly higher, so I hope we are not seeing a reversal of the trend in 2005.

The biggest problem we are aware of is that there is still a very substantial gap between the retention rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. The retention rate for non-Indigenous students also increased in 2005, to 76.6 per cent. So we have a gap of over 37 percentage points between non-Indigenous and Indigenous students when it comes to completing year 12, and I do not think anybody in this chamber would say that this massive difference is acceptable.

There is also some evidence of some improvement in the literacy and numeracy standards of Indigenous primary school students over recent years. Once again, the gap in these standards when compared with non-Indigenous students remains extremely troubling. For example, around 60 per cent of year 7 Indigenous students achieved the national reading benchmark in 2001, compared with just under 90 per cent for all other students. By 2004 the achievement rate for Indigenous students had improved to 71 per cent, but I would have to say that that is still unacceptably low when compared with the level for all year 7 students, which was 91 per cent.

Unfortunately, there has been very little improvement in the percentage of year 7 students who have achieved national benchmarks for numeracy. The rate for year 7 Indigenous students hovered around 50 per cent between the period 2001-04. If you compare that with all Australian students, you find that their benchmark achievement was about 80 per cent. So the year 7 numeracy benchmarks were 50 per cent for Indigenous students and 80 per cent for all other Australian students, and that is plainly still totally unacceptable.

When we look behind this data at the differences between the states and territories, unfortunately we see some very big disparities. The percentage of year 7 students achieving the 2004 national reading benchmark in the Northern Territory, for example, was just 39 per cent compared with the national result for Indigenous students of 71 per cent. So you can see that, even among Indigenous students themselves, there is a huge disparity between the achievements of children in year 7 in the Northern Territory and the results of Indigenous students elsewhere. The rate for year 7 Indigenous students in Western Australia in 2004 was 58 per cent, and in New South Wales and South Australia it was 69 per cent. By contrast, in Queensland, the rate was over 85 per cent. Clearly, things are in much better shape in Queensland.

The numeracy rates for year 7 Indigenous students, as I said before, are worrying. Only around half of the students are achieving the national numeracy benchmark. The rate for year 7 students in the Northern Territory was a very low 27 per cent. It is bad enough that only half the Indigenous students nationally achieve the numeracy benchmark, but in the Northern Territory it is a very disturbing 27 per cent.

One of the problems, of course, with the results we get from the national literacy and numeracy benchmark tests is that they only provide information about minimum standards at the various stages of schooling. The gap in performance between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students is very stark. One of the other things that have been done is that these test results have been translated into months and years of schooling. The Report of the review of Aboriginal Education in New South Wales advises that the gap between basic skill test results for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students in year 3 is equivalent to 19 months of schooling. In other words, Indigenous children in year 3 have been going to school for only three or maybe four years and, on average, even by year 3, they are about 1½ years behind the level of achievement of their non-Indigenous counterparts. So, even by year 3, they are falling a long way behind. Unfortunately, things do not improve the longer they stay at school. By year 5 the gap is around 24 months. The gap in the writing and language results for Indigenous students in year 7 rose to around 60 months—that is, Indigenous students find themselves five whole years behind.

Each and every one of us knows just how important writing and language skills are for success in secondary schooling. Children cannot hope to do well in secondary schooling if their literacy and numeracy is not up to scratch. It is as plain as can be: these very poor literacy and numeracy results are of fundamental concern when it comes to Indigenous education. Compounding these concerns is a very high rate of absenteeism among Indigenous students. It is about twice the rate of non-Indigenous students. Suspension rates are six to nine times those of non-Indigenous students. The absentee rates for Aboriginal girls in year 10 in New South Wales secondary schools is around 28 per cent—that is equivalent to about 60 days of school missed each year. It is no wonder that they are having trouble keeping up with the standards they should be achieving.

The government’s key strategy for dealing with Indigenous literacy in primary schools has been the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme. The guidelines for the scheme say:

In-class tuition provides Indigenous students who do not meet the Year 3, 5 and 7 literacy and numeracy benchmarks with up to 2.5 hours a week of literacy and numeracy tuition for up to 32 weeks each year.

That means that this funding is available to Indigenous students in years 4, 6 and 8, after they fail to meet the national benchmarks in the previous year. The guidelines go on to provide some flexibility for principals to allocate funding for students who are at risk of not meeting the relevant literacy and/or numeracy curriculum outcome levels for their age.

I remind my fellow members of parliament that, in response to opposition criticisms on this point in parliament, the previous minister for education indicated in last year’s debate that he had apparently allowed a degree of flexibility at the school level for principals to decide how they might best allocate the resources. I would certainly appreciate the new minister for education updating the House on whether or not principals are, in fact, able to spend the literacy money where and, most importantly, when they think it will most help students learn to read and write. As many principals have told us, this is most likely to be well before the child fails the year 3 test. We do not want children having to wait until they have failed the year 3 test before they get help with their literacy and numeracy.

The key point remains that what is needed are guidelines that encourage early intervention strategies at a school level. I say to the minister that we would like to know whether or not principals and teachers are getting the flexibility they have called for, as well as getting the resources when they need them the most. And that really is at the earliest time so they can identify and prevent or minimise failure, not try to pick up the pieces when it is too late. We do not want to see support that is so late that Indigenous students, at the end of primary schooling, are up to five years behind their non-Indigenous counterparts, which is what is happening at the moment.

There are other problems with the way the government administers its tutorial assistance program, which, as a result of this legislation, will now be extended to year 9 students. For example, tutorial assistance funding is not available for students in metropolitan areas that enrol fewer than 20 Indigenous students. That means, of course, many students miss out on the urgent assistance they need.

The guidelines for this funding also state that the money is limited and that students in remote locations will be given priority. Nobody in this parliament would say that Indigenous children in remote areas do not need more support. Of course they do. With only 20 per cent in remote areas achieving national reading benchmarks in year 3, we certainly must be putting the extra effort needed into those remote schools. But it does not mean that Indigenous students in regional and metropolitan areas do not have educational needs. Of course we know they do. Funding should be available to all Indigenous students who need help with their reading, writing and numeracy. It should not be based on competition for scarce resources between one group of Indigenous disadvantaged students in remote areas and similar disadvantaged Indigenous students in metropolitan and regional locations.

That really is an incredibly nasty way of going about allocating this funding, especially when you contrast this approach with the open-ended funding available under the schools General Recurrent Grants Program, which provides automatic per student funding to all students. Some of that money, of course, is going to some of the best resourced schools in the country. So I think we should find a way through this program to make sure that all disadvantaged young people and children, especially Indigenous children, are able to have the same criteria applied so that they can get the help to learn to read and write and help with their maths at the earliest time.

I have had a lot of feedback from principals and schools. They are very frustrated with the way the government organises and delivers this money. I want to quote from a few principals and teachers who have voiced their concerns. One primary school principal advises:

We have only 8 Indigenous students here, but 3 have huge literacy problems ... if we want these kids to make serious sustained improvement they need expert intervention for a sustained period ... there are no quick fixes.

Another primary school principal says:

... with hard work and creative additional learning assistance, we (previously) achieved 100 % of all year 3s and 5s above the national benchmark ... AND THEN THE FUNDING STOPPED ...

That was when the previous minister said the money had to be removed from these metropolitan schools that had small numbers of Indigenous children. Another principal says:

We have a small but significant Indigenous student population—11 students, which represents 10 % of our total enrolments ... we need to base support on very early assessments, such as Kindergarten checks on reading level so that effective intervention programs can be implemented early.

The point that principal is making is the one I made earlier: we do not want to wait until those children in that school fail the year 3 test; we want the kindergarten children and the children in year 1 and year 2 to be getting the checks, to be getting the additional tutorial support, before they fail the year 3 test.

Other principals have made the point that many Indigenous students with poor attendance records may have been absent when the benchmark testing was done. It is more than likely that these children are going to be at risk and would not be eligible for funding. These are practical problems that I hope the minister will take into account.

Many of these frustrations from principals are also matched when it comes to concerns about the operation of the Parent School Partnerships Initiative. Once again, the previous minister for education dramatically changed the way in which this funding is delivered to schools. There has been a very significant increase in bureaucracy in this program, and it has had the effect of excluding many parents and community members. Parents now have very little understanding of the processes and feel very remote from them. Many of us on this side of the House raised concerns about these issues last year. I am pleased to see that the department has made some changes, but schools are still complaining that the funding arrangements still require them to undertake considerable work to access what I think everyone would say is pretty modest funding. Schools are complaining that they are spending more time in submission writing and paperwork than in actually designing and implementing educational programs for their students. This is an example from one primary school principal:

We now have no Indigenous involvement despite having quite a high number of Indigenous enrolments. Indigenous parents have commented to me about how the process has kicked them out of real engagement ...

Another principal says:

Since the change to funding we have had no involvement. We have Indigenous children but the work and complexity of getting funds is simply not worth it. Perhaps they (the government) have achieve their purpose, I.e. money stays in consolidated revenue ...

Another says:

During the process we became extremely frustrated ... on two occasions people dealing with the submission (on a homework centre) ... were reduced to tears and were prepared to walk away.

In my last dealing (with the Department) I had to provide information on a program. I was emailed two sets of instructions on managing the database: they would not open and crashed my computer a number of times. When I finally got them to work, the instructions did not match with what was appearing on the screen ...

My experiences mean that I want as little to do with (the Department) as possible. Its (processes) need to line up with the realities of school operation.

The result of all this is chronic underspending of Indigenous education programs. What an extraordinary outcome when we know that the need is so great. The minister’s department has admitted to Senate estimates that there was a $126 million underspend in 2004-05. It really does show that this government does not have an effective strategy to actually deliver the support that Indigenous students need. I would say to the minister that principals in schools who want to do the right thing are saying things are just not working. I honestly hope the minister will now take charge of these processes to make sure that funding is delivered to where it is needed. The administrative processes need urgent attention. It is only through those changes that we will in fact see the money going where it needs to go.

As I said before, we do support the additional tutorial assistance in this bill that is going to go to TAFE and other forms of vocational training. There is no question that Indigenous people rely heavily on TAFE for their training, and also for second chance opportunities that TAFE provides. In 2005 the enrolment of Indigenous students in vocational education and training was around 62,700—about 3.8 per cent of total enrolment. We have seen Indigenous enrolment increase in 2005, which is welcome—especially after two years of decline.

Unfortunately, though, completion rates for Indigenous students at TAFE remain very low: around 43 per cent for completion of apprenticeship or traineeship contracts. This is much lower than the overall completion rate of 52 per cent for all apprentices or trainees. The bill does not cover funding for Indigenous students in higher education, but I did want to mention that it is disturbing to note that education department data indicates the number of Indigenous students starting in higher education continues to fall. The 2004 commencements represent a nine per cent decline since 2002. These are very worrying figures indeed.

These trends are compounded when you look at Indigenous students’ completion rates in higher education. The March 2006 report of the Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council advises that the course completion rate for Indigenous students is only about 42 per cent—two-thirds of the completion rate for other students. So once again we have a serious problem with the number of Indigenous graduates declining as a proportion of total Australian graduates. These are unacceptable figures. In the white paper we put forward on higher education, we have foreshadowed that one of the initiatives we would like to see implemented is increased support to our universities to enable them to provide the support that Indigenous students need as they progress through their second, third and fourth years of a degree course. It is very important to get Indigenous students into university, but we also need to improve the graduation rates.

In summary, the bill before us certainly does provide much needed additional funding. It will be welcome, but there is no point to it if it does not get to where it is needed. We will support the bill, but I commend the proposed second reading amendment to the House.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.

Bruce Baird (Cook, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is my pleasure to support the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006 tonight. It is an important step forward in the education of the Indigenous members of our community who, we would all acknowledge, are significantly disadvantaged compared to the rest of the community, and that is a situation that has existed for some time. In terms of quality of life statistics, Indigenous people are expected to live, on average, 17 years less than other Australians. The infant mortality rate of Indigenous infants in Western Australia, South Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory is more than twice the mortality rate of non-Indigenous infants in those jurisdictions. The Indigenous unemployment rate sits at approximately 15 per cent—more than three times the national average. Of course, in some country towns it is a lot higher than that.

On educational outcomes, the statistics also speak for themselves: only 40 per cent of Indigenous students complete year 12 compared to 76 per cent of non-Indigenous students. The link between health and education status has been well documented. Large numbers of Indigenous students struggle with attendance and learning outcomes as a result of chronic health problems—predominantly middle ear infections and nutritional deficiency. Only 70 per cent of Indigenous primary school students are reaching literacy and numeracy benchmarks compared to 90 per cent of other students.

It is my pleasure to support the purpose of the bill, which is to amend the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Act 2000 and to provide additional funding of $43.6 million over the 2006 to 2008 period for targeted assistance programs to improve opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in school and training. Education is generally considered to be a crucial part of improving social and economic outcomes for Indigenous peoples. A great deal of research has shown that educational participation and success directly affects health and socioeconomic improvements. There are a variety of factors that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people participating in education, such as access to educational institutions, financial limitations and community attitudes. Existing programs that target Indigenous students are aimed at improving outcomes in some areas. However, Indigenous students continue to achieve lower levels of attainment and participation compared to the rest of Australian students.

Within my electorate of Cook, we have a very interesting program in that students who show particular excellence in sport are brought down to the Endeavour High School, located in Caringbah, which is a selective sporting high school. It was set up by a former New South Wales Liberal government under a selective schools initiative. That program has worked very well. In fact, Minister Kemp visited the school and was terribly impressed with the way in which it was developing a whole range of talented, outstanding young people in all types of sporting fields. The school has produced some outstanding Olympians, national basketball team members, baseball team members in the United States and top swimmers. It is very impressive across the board. They are bringing young Aboriginal lads down from the country with particular skills in Rugby League and training them. Many of them have ended up in some of the top Rugby League teams in the competition. In fact, some are in the Sharks, for example.

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It hasn’t helped the Sharks!

Bruce Baird (Cook, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish they had done a little better in the last few weeks, but it is not the fault of the program. It is a very successful program. It is the type of thing that we want to do to sponsor and identify a talent amongst Indigenous young people. It is a program which we support.

There is no doubt that education is not just a means of personal progress. Education will lead to greater equality for Indigenous Australians. Unemployment is the foremost source of poverty in Australia today, and the reason that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people face difficulties with respect to employment outcomes is their comparative lack of education. I remember a long time ago, when I was shadow minister for Indigenous affairs—or Aboriginal affairs I think it was called at that time—in New South Wales, speaking to the head of World Vision about the programs they had set up in New South Wales. I asked, ‘What do you see as the biggest single way in which we could overcome disadvantage?’ He said, ‘By providing jobs.’ We are going to provide jobs, but as part of that we have to provide the educational skills to enable them to take on those jobs. That is why this bill is so important and why this funding is significant.

There is still a significant gap between the educational participation and the achievement of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, but we have made some small advancements and that gap is slowly and steadily getting smaller. Although 40 per cent of Indigenous students now finish year 12, that figure was only 29 per cent when this government took office 10 years ago—and the number of Indigenous students in vocational and technical education has almost doubled since 1996.

No-one can pretend that we have achieved so much success that we can all sit back and say: ‘Well done. Haven’t we done well?’ I think indigenous people around the world are facing similar challenges, whether they are American Indians or Eskimos in Alaska. It is difficult and challenging, but we are making some progress—and it is the incremental progress that I think we should be very pleased with. This bill is not suggesting that this is going to provide some panacea to address the inherent difficulties that we have, but certainly it attempts to address the imbalance and the gap. This bill is part of the government’s strategy to reduce that gap further and to keep Indigenous educational outcomes at the front of our efforts to improve conditions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

In keeping with the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy, the additional funding allocated will pay for a number of new initiatives. There is $14.5 million to provide additional tutorial assistance for year 9 Indigenous students, $11.2 million for new programs of tutorial assistance for Indigenous students in vocational and technical education, $7.3 million to support the Indigenous youth festival’s health promotion programs and $1.5 million for activities that address substance abuse by Indigenous youth in remote areas—and those programs will assist up to 1,000 young people involved in petrol sniffing and other substance abuse in the central desert and other regions. There is no point us having great education programs if our young Indigenous people are involved in petrol sniffing. It is a great tragedy that this is occurring and destroying lives, and it is a challenge for all of us as to what we do to persuade them not to be involved in these activities. It is not easy, but I am very glad to see that additional money is being allocated for that reason. Finally, there is $9.1 million to set up sporting academies and sports related activities based in schools.

These initiatives will complement the existing programs. As for the additional tutorial assistance for year 9 students, year 9 is basically the period when Indigenous students are at risk of dropping out of school, so additional tutoring will be provided for year 9 students as a way of addressing this challenge. They will provide some counselling, and the tutors will assist those who have poor literacy and numeracy skills in overcoming some of the difficulties they experience. I think that is an important activity.

I see that the minister who is responsible for vocational education is at the table. I am sure he has been very much involved in the program, in that there has been no previous provision for vocational and technical education for Indigenous students. This initiative will encourage Indigenous students to enrol as VTE students. While 13 per cent of Australians between the ages of 18 and 24 are neither studying nor working, 42 per cent of Indigenous Australians fit into this category. So we hope that this program will assist to reduce this. I am sure the minister will be watching that. I am sure all of us in this House feel a responsibility for our Indigenous community and for getting them involved in education and also in trades.

This bill provides for the establishment of 18 sporting academies, based in schools, with the aim of increasing sports and related activities for young Indigenous students. If that works as well as it has in Endeavour High, I think it will go particularly well, because sport is something that Indigenous young people can all identify with. There are some great stars. I know in the Sharks, my own football team, David Peachey was a great idol of many of the young people. Unfortunately, he is now playing for Souths. But he got Cathy Freeman involved as the No. 1 cardholder of the team. He is a great role model for our young people. This program will encourage them in life skills, and self-esteem is going to be important as well. By next year these academies will provide more than 1,000 students with a range of school based sporting activities. I know the minister, having been educated in the Sutherland shire, is a product of Miranda North high school—

Gary Hardgrave (Moreton, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Public School.

Bruce Baird (Cook, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Miranda North Public School. He is a great example of education in the Sutherland shire. In terms of countering substance abuse, the Australian government’s Partnership Outreach Education Model has achieved considerable progress in this area, and this new program of diversionary education will build upon that progress. It is aimed at preventing young people from becoming involved in substance abuse.

In conclusion, the government remains committed to addressing the inequalities that exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, particularly to addressing the education area by identifying the problem areas—in particular for those students in year 9, when difficulties exist in their maths and English—providing tutors, helping them overcome problems in other areas, providing these special centres for developing sporting skills, and of course, providing more funding for education in relation to substance abuse.

Overall, I think it is an incremental move forward. I congratulate the minister in bringing forward this bill. I note the comments of the shadow minister, and I am pleased to see that the opposition will support the bill. It is inherent on all parliamentarians to look at the challenge of Indigenous education and at the challenge of our Indigenous community and what we can do. No-one can provide any easy solutions, but at least this addresses in a practical way some of the inequalities that exist and assists people to develop that pride in themselves—the self-help that is required—and to bring out the real talents they have. I think it is worth while and I commend the bill to the House.

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006 aims to provide an additional $43.6 million over a three-year period—2006 to 2008—for Indigenous education and training. It will extend the tutorial assistance program to students in year 9, extend tutorial assistance to TAFE and vocational students, support community festivals that promote health and are anti substance abuse and support school based sporting academies and related activities for Indigenous students.

The extension of assistance for year 9 students restores support that was previously available under the Aboriginal assistance scheme but not under current guidelines. However, I note that this additional money is offset by the tightening of eligibility requirements for Abstudy allowances for Indigenous children under 16 years old.

In addition, the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme funding guidelines restrict access for students in urban areas. It is a strange state of affairs where funding for Indigenous students relies on competition between urban and remote students, yet this government’s recurrent grants to non-government schools are allocated on a per student basis.

The phrase which comes to mind in relation to this legislation is ‘fiddling around the edges’. There is no substantive upgrade of Indigenous education; there is no significant input into an area where funding is being reduced.

My colleague the member for Jagajaga has outlined some of the ALP’s more detailed concerns about this bill and what it actually represents. One of the matters she raises is that parent-school partnerships are not addressed. In fact, the bureaucracy surrounding these programs further excludes parents and community members. To access even a modest level of funding, schools need to undertake considerable work. This results in teachers and education administrators becoming highly competent submission writers but not actually spending their time in delivering educational outcomes. Indeed, the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee in June 2005 found in its investigation of Indigenous education that:

1.11 Commonwealth education funding has long been characterised by the imposition of conditions by the Commonwealth, and by a gradual tightening of accountability procedures.

And:

1.13 The leverage strategy of detailed reporting, however, affects the operations of schools which do not have the resources to deal with the reporting requirements.

One submission, from the Association of Independent Schools of South Australia, indicated that, given the relatively small amount of money available, the level of reporting and accountability is an issue of concern, particularly because of the different reporting requirements for different programs.

I addressed this House on a similar bill just over a year ago, on 2 June 2005. That was a significant date because it was one month before the government took full control of the Senate. This government’s form has been to treat Indigenous Australians as second-class citizens. I have seen nothing in the past 13 months to change my mind on that position. I warned then that this government was uniquely placed because of its control of both Houses to address Indigenous issues.

At that time I addressed the notion of community consultation. This government, however, still does not get it. The abiding lesson I learned when dealing with Aboriginal communities is that one must work with them, not try and save them from themselves or impose whitefella solutions on Aboriginal communities.

In its discussion on parental and community support and awareness, the 2005 Senate committee report noted that there were two basic issues underpinning the dissatisfaction with the government’s approach to Indigenous education. The first issue related to the suggestion that the government’s approach indicates a lack of trust in the Indigenous representatives’ good faith. The second issue related to the greatly reduced levels of funding to support educational programs, particularly in student welfare and attendance support. The government’s attitude to funding for Indigenous education is reflected in a very telling comment from that committee, on page 5, which said:

There is a presumption that education funding policy should be determined by what can be reported, rather that what is most necessary for overall success in achieving learning outcomes.

That statement is a clear indictment of this government. It is all about bells and whistles; it is all about show and not about substance.

Of course, it is difficult to find out exactly how much and where the government is spending on Indigenous education. Until the last budget, and post ATSIC, financial information was provided by program by department. While not always easy to decipher, the information was more or less available. This year, the portfolio statements provided extraordinarily broad information. In the education, science and technology portfolio, Indigenous expenditure is reported by three outcomes: schools, post-school and research. The government would probably argue that this reporting provides an easy-to-view summary of expenditure. As long as one is familiar with the details of each outcome, that may well be so. But not many of us are.

A plain-text reading of the Indigenous expenditure by the Department of Education, Science and Training actually shows a projected decrease in expenditure. In outcome 1, expenditure on schools in 2005-06 was $473,192,000. In 2006-07 it will be $461,358,000. In outcome 2, post-school, 2005-06 expenditure was $110,027,000. In 2006-07 it will be $108,860,000. In outcome 3, research, 2005-06 expenditure was $535,000. It will be $451,000 in 2006-07. This is a total of $583,754,000 in 2005-06 compared to $570,669,000 in 2006-07, yet the minister will claim that new money is being provided when, as far as I can tell, money is simply being moved around.

We must remember the context of Indigenous demographics when analysing expenditure on Indigenous education. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a relatively young population, with a median age of around 21 years on 2002 Australian Bureau of Statistics figures. The same ABS report, the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey of 2002, stated that 39 per cent were under 15 years of age, compared to 20 per cent of the non-Indigenous population.

In 2004, DEST estimated that the Indigenous population is growing at a rate of 5.3 per cent per year. Between 1991 and 1996 the number of Indigenous children under 17 increased by 12 per cent compared to a two per cent increase in non-Indigenous children. Therefore we could reasonably expect to see expenditure on Indigenous education increase to reflect the increase in actual numbers of school age Indigenous children.

We must make a long-term commitment which is meaningful to the education of Indigenous young people. I acknowledge that there are no easy answers. No government has ever found the magic solution to these profound and disturbing matters. But no lasting solution will ever be found where the Indigenous community is marginalised in the process. It is only in consultation with the Indigenous community that we can move forward in identifying solutions which are educationally and culturally acceptable.

We must also remember that Aboriginal children usually operate from a lower economic base than most non-Indigenous children. In identifying the factors impacting on Indigenous education we should consider several factors which operate in the Aboriginal community and rarely in the white community. These include: the link between education and the likelihood of future employment; operating from a base of poverty and the resulting emphasis, or not, on education; the lack of privacy, time and resources for study; the low likelihood of increased workforce participation even when Indigenous people do complete school, TAFE or even university; and the connection between poverty and crime.

The member for Kingsford Smith, in a debate on 2 June 2005, spoke about the OECD inaugural Program for International Student Assessment. One of the findings of that program which is worth reiterating is that learning preferences and behaviours of Indigenous students were different from those of non-Indigenous students. The report also found that Indigenous students have less preference for a competitive learning environment.

These findings represent the essence of my remarks today. This government is relying less and less on Indigenous community input to the education of their children. Yet the findings of the study I have mentioned clearly identify the types of differences apparent in determining learning strategies for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. Whitefella solutions are not appropriate for Indigenous people. The opposition will support this bill because it does put funding—however little—into Indigenous education. I commend the amendment put by the member for Jagajaga to the House.

Louise Markus (Greenway, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on a bill that is very close to my heart. The Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006 sets us on a path that will improve opportunities for Indigenous students and, in the long term, contribute to the social and economic equality that we as a nation aspire to. As the Prime Minister said in a speech to the National Reconciliation Workshop in Canberra in 2005, the gulf between the first Australians and other Australians when considering economic and social outcomes is a measure of the distance we still have to travel. These gaps can only be closed by practical actions that deliver results, and it will be a work of generations.

The Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006 is a further enhancement of strategies focused on assisting Indigenous youth. We are continuing on a path that, if we get it right, will influence in a positive way future generations of Indigenous Australians. I am privileged to be a member of a government that helps where help is needed most, that seeks to create opportunity for all, that creates opportunity for our youth and that, in so doing, builds for their future.

This bill provides additional tutorial assistance in schools and training programs, supports community festivals for health promotion, facilitates activities addressing substance abuse by Indigenous youth in remote regions and delivers school based sporting academies and related activities. The purpose of this bill is to increase funding by a net $43.6 million over the 2006-08 calendar years.

Supporting the bill and releasing the funds will result in an increase of $25.7 million in additional tutorial assistance for Indigenous school and vocational and technical education students; $9.1 million for school based sporting academies and related activities for Indigenous students; $7.3 million for Indigenous youth festivals, a component of the community festivals for health promotion program, which will reinforce the benefits of educational success and positive lifestyles for Indigenous young people; and $1.5 million to be used for discouraging petrol sniffing and substance abuse among Indigenous young people in the central desert and other remote regions. There is also more flexibility for that budget to be increased under special circumstances referred to in the act.

Currently in the electorate of Greenway there are approximately 2,345 Indigenous youth in high schools who may benefit from that assistance. In the 2001 census there were 2,039 Indigenous students in the Blacktown local government area, and the breakdown of that figure shows that 1,239 students were in primary schools, 585 in secondary schools, 161 in technical or further educational institutions and 54 in university or other tertiary institutions. The drop-off rate is stark and we need to reverse this trend. I have worked with many local Indigenous youth and youth workers and have come to know that the measures intended in this bill, if passed, have the potential to make some difference to Indigenous youth throughout Australia.

A revelation as to the size of the issue we are dealing with is found in the statistic that almost 40 per cent of Australia’s Indigenous population is 14 or under, compared with 20.4 per cent of Australia’s non-Indigenous population. The median age of all Indigenous people in Blacktown is 17 years of age. That is, there is basically double the number of children in the below 14 years age bracket who are Indigenous compared with children who are non-Indigenous. We desperately need to provide the majority of our children with positive role models, with targeted programs that will build esteem and a sense of value and with life and work skills so they can realise their potential and build a future for themselves.

Nationally, 40 per cent of Indigenous students progressed to year 12 in 2004, up from 29 per cent in 1996. The number of Indigenous students in vocational and technical education rose from 32,315 in 1996 to 62,726 in 2005. The proportion of Indigenous adults aged between 25 and 64 with a vocational or higher educational qualification has never been higher, and the proportion with a certificate or diploma is also up. Even so, there is indeed much more work to be done. I believe passionately that education is one of the keys to helping young people to reach their potential, to enable and facilitate them to rise above their circumstances, whether it be poverty, peer pressure, dysfunctional family background, personal disability or generational poverty.

The Prime Minister is also passionate about education. He said in a speech to business leaders in July this year that education offers the proven avenue of lasting hope for Indigenous young people. To fulfil that hope and achieve that education, to give Indigenous youth the same opportunities as everyone else, increased funding is critical in the areas of schooling, vocational and technical education and health related strategies. The Howard government is committed to developing the potential of Indigenous youth so they can make informed choices about how they relate and behave in the world.

I personally know many young Indigenous people in my electorate who can reach their potential. One young girl I was speaking to only a short while ago told me that her dream was to become a police officer. When I asked her what she thought about that, she said she felt that there was no hope for her. She believed that this was not an option for her. I challenged her and said that there was an opportunity to continue her education and to remain in school, that there was no reason why she could not achieve that. But informed choices will only come with knowledge, understanding, skills and values, which are the foundation stones of emerging adulthood. It is necessary for them to understand that they can reach their potential, that they do have something to contribute.

A starting point will be $14.5 million allocated to extend tutorial assistance. Tutorial assistance is already provided to Indigenous students in years 10, 11 and 12. This extra funding will be extended to encourage year 9 Indigenous students to go through and complete year 12. Year 9 is a critical year for all students, a time when many make the choice to drop out of school. Many of those who leave school at year 9 have poor literacy and numeracy skills which limit their post-school options, including employment opportunities. Students can access tutorial support of up to four hours per week, for up to 32 weeks in one school year, and the funding will be split between students enrolled in remote schools and students enrolled in non-remote schools. This action is intended to equip students with the necessary skills to consider further education or enhance job prospects.

That drop-out rates are a problem is demonstrated by the example of Greenway. Census figures from the 2001 census show that the number of people for whom year 10 was the highest level of schooling completed was 2,170. For years 11 and 12 that figure drops to 691. That is well over two-thirds of students who do not continue on to higher levels. The end result is the current figure of 42 per cent of Indigenous people aged between 18 and 24 years who are neither studying nor in the labour force, compared to 13 per cent of other Australians. That reality means our Indigenous community starts to lose ground after year 10.

This government is committed to bringing equality of opportunity to all. The tutorial funding program will continue to the year 2010. Over time, we hope the expanded tutorial assistance program will encourage students to stay on at school or continue their education in vocational or technical education courses leading to the attainment of relevant qualifications. To further that aim, an additional $11.2 million will be allocated to Indigenous students undertaking courses leading to the successful achievement of an Australian qualifications framework certificate level III or above, which will significantly increase chances of employment.

The bill also directs funding to sporting, recreational and cultural activities. In 2007 this initiative will enable more than 1,000 students, both boys and girls, to attend up to 12 sports academies, located within schools, which offer a range of sports and recreation activities. The funding will also cover related initiatives to address racism in sport, to promote cross cultural awareness, to showcase the contribution Indigenous people make to sporting life and to provide opportunities to participate in sporting carnivals. By the end of 2008 there will be some 18 academies in place and the number of Indigenous students attending will increase to an estimated 1,530 from every state and territory.

Indigenous sportsmen and women have represented Australia with honour and distinction at district, state, national and international events. The football codes, Rugby League and Australian Rules in particular, have long been a path to success as the young boys grow from youths to men. Those role models are there. The government, through this bill, is making a concerted effort to focus on programs that are proven to work to ensure that every young person gets the opportunity to build a future for themselves.

A working model of the sports academy initiative already exists in Western Australia. The Clontarf Foundation is a model for Indigenous engagement in education that has demonstrated significant and lasting outcomes for their students, both current and former. The Clontarf Foundation operates six football academies in partnership with, but not independent of, secondary schools. The model was developed by the foundation’s CEO, Mr Gerard Neesham, as a result of his experience with Aboriginal footballers and their families and his recognition that the football environment was one in which Aboriginal people excelled. He found that participation in football and related activities helped to develop positive behaviours and to reduce the prevalence of negative behaviour in those who were involved.

Some of the aims of the program for participants include attending school regularly, re-entering education after prolonged absences; achieving retention rates above state averages; enhancing self-esteem; using experience gained to make healthy lifestyle decisions, for example exercise, diet and nutrition; addressing alcohol and substance abuse; setting goals and persevering to achieve them; reducing criminal re-offending; achieving improved academic results; and developing a greater understanding of, and access to, the employment opportunities available to them. Importantly, Clontarf’s results speak for themselves. In 2004, approximately 270 young people participated, with the following results: an average attendance rate of 78 per cent, an average retention rate of 82 per cent and 83 per cent of graduates from the program achieving full-time work

It is the government’s aim to reflect those outcomes through its own sports academy initiative. The program will be rolled out nationally in partnership with national and state sporting bodies with strong affiliations with schools and in collaboration with state and territory governments. This initiative will ensure that more young Indigenous girls and boys have the chance to experience positive education and sports activities, with a view to improving their health, employment and education outcomes. Hopefully they will be inspired to swell the ranks of Indigenous sportsmen and women in the annals of Australia’s illustrious sporting history.

Another important feature of this bill is to provide $7.3 million for Indigenous youth festivals, with an emphasis on promoting healthy, positive lifestyles for young people. More than 30,000 primary and secondary aged students in remote and regional areas will participate in community based music, dance, art and career activities designed for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous young people. Positive events such as these provide an important mechanism for increasing community involvement in building the resilience of young people and for promoting wellbeing and healthy lifestyles. A program such as the one outlined can never be fully effective if it does not address the very serious matter of substance abuse, in particular petrol sniffing, by Indigenous youth. Effectively dealing with substance abuse requires a comprehensive, sustainable approach that includes education, justice, community support and health initiatives. The government is committed to providing education programs, and $1.5 million will be provided by this bill.

Under this bill diversionary and preventative education based projects that build upon the successes of the Australian government’s Partnership Outreach Education Model pilot will be introduced in the central desert and two other remote regions to help combat the critical issues of petrol sniffing and substance abuse. Up to 1,000 Indigenous young people will benefit from these projects, which will act as a safety net to help young Indigenous people in these regions who have dropped out of school.

This bill not only addresses educational and sporting opportunities and provides opportunities to engage in healthy, meaningful lifestyle events but it also will help to address the critical issue of substance abuse—an issue that holds back our children, Indigenous or not, and also impacts negatively on families. This bill offers a comprehensive package of measures that will assist, encourage and inspire a generation of our young Indigenous people. In line with this government’s philosophy, this package is a hand-up not a hand-out. It will give Indigenous young people the knowledge, skills and self-esteem to make better choices and to take their place as the leaders in their community. I commend this bill to the House.

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Reconciliation and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I follow on from the member for Greenway and also from my colleagues the member for Banks and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to again highlight and make reference to the fact that nothing is more important for young Aboriginal kids, young Indigenous students, than completing their education and making the passage from pre-school, primary school and high school and hopefully into a trade or into tertiary studies.

Amongst other trends in Indigenous education that bear down on policymakers, some of which have been identified by those who have spoken in this debate on the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006, I note that despite a period where we have seen significant increases in the numbers of students who graduate from high school and go on to some form of tertiary study, and despite the fact that tertiary studies themselves are of critical and vital importance to people and enable them to be effectively and thoroughly skilled to go into the workforce where job requirements are often increasingly specialised, Indigenous higher education is suffering considerably and the numbers of students who are able to get into Indigenous higher education has in some instances declined. This is a matter of great concern for us on this side of the House.

I speak on this legislation as someone who has a number of Indigenous communities in their electorate. In the electorate of Kingsford Smith, there is a significant population of Indigenous people. Some of them have grown up in the area and some have moved into the area. It is no exaggeration for me to say that one of the most pressing issues in the electorate is getting Aboriginal kids into the schooling system so that they can prosper and succeed.

The point needs to be made, as we consider some of the problems in this debate on the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006, which have been identified by the member for Jagajaga in her second reading amendment, that a school which has a large proportion of Indigenous students tends not to operate like a school which does not. By that I mean a school with an Indigenous population is often the lightening rod for the disadvantage that their communities suffer. The pressures on the students in the school are often of a greater order than they are for children in schools where there are not many Indigenous students. More often than not, the kids are coming from backgrounds which have experienced some form of trauma—sometimes dislocation in their family and sometimes they are from backgrounds where education, regrettably, has not been strongly emphasised. There is absolutely no doubt that, on the whole, Indigenous parents want their kids to have a good education. They recognise from their own lack of education how important it is that their kids be educated, that from education comes employment, from employment comes economic sufficiency and from economic sufficiency comes good health. I think everybody in the House agrees that this productive virtue of education is one of the most important and critical issues that we face in redressing Indigenous disadvantage generally.

I do not fully share the Prime Minister’s view that the road to rekindling the hopes of the 1967 referendum lie through education. I spoke about this in another forum today. Important as education is, there are other important measures and issues that pertain to the prospects of Indigenous people being able to live full lives, to not suffer the levels of measurable disadvantage in health and education et cetera and to have a true, just and lasting commitment to reconciliation is part of that.

Labor support the bill, but we have moved a second reading amendment. We note that the bill provides an extra $43.6 million over 2006-08 for Indigenous education and training. We have raised concerns by way of the amendment and in debate in the House that the funding criteria and the program administration issues that have arisen during the consideration of the bill have not been adequately addressed. We note, for instance, that there is an underspend of $126 million on the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Program. I can well understand that there are some good reasons for that. When you look at the difficulties that we face in driving policy through bureaucracies both out of this place and out of state governments, you see that underspends or funding lags are often a function and a feature of that process. However, I do not think the parliament should contemplate that an underspend in an area as critical as this should be at all acceptable.

In addition, Labor is very concerned that more red tape will be attached to the provisions in this bill and that, as a consequence, we will see a decline in the involvement of Indigenous communities—in particular, families in the Parent School Partnership Initiative. It is absolutely critical for the success of any amount of money or for any programs that are introduced into Indigenous education that participation by Indigenous parents is fully encouraged. If you do not have that, then it will be extremely difficult for programs to have enduring and long-term success.

I refer at this point to one of the aspects of intervention in early childhood education, which this bill addresses. There is absolutely no doubt that the earlier intervention is made the more likely are the chances of successfully assisting that child in getting into the education stream so that they can enjoy the education process, not fall behind, graduate and become a member of the workforce. The earlier the intervention, the earlier the involvement, the earlier support and resources are made available to them the better.

It is extremely important, particularly under this bill, that we do not have a situation where the money is being spent after the problems have been identified and the problems cannot be rectified in time. That is absolutely critical. Labor have raised a number of issues in relation to the bill. In particular we note that this assistance here restores some support that was previously made available under the Aboriginal Tutorial Assistance Scheme, which provided tuition at all levels in an effort to achieve educational outcomes for Indigenous Australians equal to that of non-Indigenous, and we note that the funding guidelines of the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme, ITAS, actually restrict access for students in urban centres. As somebody from an urban electorate, I have to say that that must be one of the deficiencies of the legislation.

The guidelines for the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme state that funding will be based on an assessment of students’ needs and availability of funding, and that students in remote locations will be given priority. I think that is understandable, given some of the statistics that we have in terms of absenteeism and failure of students to complete primary school and high school education, particularly in the Northern Territory. But, notwithstanding that, the Indigenous community is a diverse one, and there are large numbers of Indigenous kids who are going through their education system in cities and towns. They face a range of problems, sometimes not on the scale or magnitude that perhaps some kids in some parts of rural Australia face but they are nevertheless real. Labor believe that funding should be available to all students who need assistance, not just to those who live in remote locations.

I note that general recurrent grants for tutorial assistance from the government are paid on a per student basis, but we believe that the same criteria should apply to the most disadvantaged students in the nation. Because the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme continues to be linked to year 3 literacy and numeracy test results—so consequently you cannot take any action until year 4—this means that you are not capturing students at an earlier age. It really is a deficiency that has been identified in the amendments because it means that it will be a little late to pick up the sorts of problems that kids are having with literacy and numeracy at that year 4 stage. There is overwhelming evidence from educational research of the importance of the early intervention that I have referred to. With only 20 per cent of Indigenous kids in remote areas achieving national reading benchmarks in year 3, we strongly believe that delivering assistance to this cohort before they reach this failure point is critical.

Additionally, I want to point out the concerns that have been raised about the parent-school partnership program and the additional levels of bureaucracy that attach to this program—the amount of paperwork, form-filling and so on that attaches to it. This is always a problem in Indigenous education. The provision of materials and the requirements to fit into guidelines and frameworks that in some cases are imposed bureaucratically are always difficult issues, particularly for parents coming into the school environment. While there have been improvements to the application process—and Labor acknowledge those improvements—we still note that schools are complaining that the funding arrangements require the schools themselves to undertake a considerable amount of work to access most modest amounts of funding, and quite often they are not successful.

Mr Deputy Speaker Causley, I am sure you would agree that any measures which are aimed at targeting Indigenous assistance should not be of such a complex order that they actually have the opposite effect and make it more difficult and more burdensome, particularly for teachers who have pretty strong demands on them as well. I note too that schools complain they are spending more time in submission writing and paperwork than they are in designing the best educational programs for their students. Welcome to the world of funding, regrettably. Nevertheless, this is something which should be noted by the government because it really is an issue of some importance, not only on the matters that relate to this bill but more generally in education.

Many critics cite education as the key to improving the gap between life expectancy rates. In fact, a principal of a remote Indigenous school was quoted as saying that, in relation to Indigenous students, those who leave school early die early. That is the stark reality of failing to make sure that Indigenous kids have an adequate and comprehensive education. There is no doubt that there are positive examples and some inspiration that we can draw on in this respect. Dr Chris Sarra is a good case in point. He was given the job of turning around Cherbourg State School, which had tremendous issues of truancy and staff who did not share his views. He wanted to turn around literacy levels, and he set about delivering on the Cherbourg motto ‘Strong and Smart’.

I have heard Dr Sarra speak on a number of occasions. I think he is a very impressive Indigenous educator. He remarked that the first thing and the most necessary thing to do was to challenge the community mindset that being Aboriginal destines a child to failure. We need to be able to say, and we need to provide teachers with the confidence to say, that education is absolutely critical for Indigenous children and that if they come into the education system they will not automatically, as a matter of course, fail. In fact, in his first year as principal, the number of unexplained absences dropped by 94 per cent. By 2004 more than eight in 10 students were in the average band in the state. One of the major reasons for Dr Sarra’s success at Cherbourg was that he instilled in students a sense of pride in being Indigenous, in being Aboriginal, and he gave them a belief that they could be successful. My experience is that this is absolutely critical.

When you have contributions such as that which we have seen by a former Labor member of this House, Gary Johns, writing for the Menzies Research Centre a report on Aboriginal education in remote schools and an assertion that we should not preserve Indigenous culture in our schools, then you realise that there is some thinking that is way out of whack. I was surprised, frankly, that the new education minister saw fit to launch that particular research, which was very quickly howled down by those who have firsthand experience of what is needed in education and in making sure that Indigenous kids are able to progress well in their education lives.

In my electorate of Kingsford Smith, we have an Indigenous community program called HIPPY. It is the Home Interaction Program for Parents and Youngsters. Again, it is based on the principle of early intervention. It is based on the principle of teaching parents to familiarise Indigenous kids with what going to school is about and how to organise their pens and paper—providing them, if you like, with a bit of cultural referencing before they come into the school system so that they have confidence when they come into the school system. From that position of confidence, they are able to go forward and participate and complete their studies.

I do acknowledge that the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Minister Brough, has provided some level of support for HIPPY. It is actually a nationwide program. It feeds very much into the bill that we are considering this evening because it talks about how important it is for there to be good relationships between families and the schooling system, where people go into the schooling system with confidence and a feeling that they are welcomed, where kids believe that not only is learning important for them but it can actually be fun, and where kids are targeted at an early age so that they get into the educational frame of mind and begin the task—which for them can sometimes be a pretty difficult and onerous task—of completing their education.

The education statistics in our country for Indigenous people are very poor. It is critical that the amended Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Act that we are considering is a piece of legislation without default, without deficiency—that it does the job that it is intended to do and that it provides the benefit and the assistance that is needed both for kids in that early period and for the year 9 kids who will also benefit under this program. I know that all members present recognise how critical education will be for Indigenous kids, who are facing a long and tough struggle in some instances but whose future very much depends on them receiving education which is comprehensive.

We have brought an amendment to the House. It is a constructive amendment. We do hope that the government will take some heed and some notice of it, because there is no question that the decisions that we make today will affect the prospects for kids in the future. (Time expired)

Barry Haase (Kalgoorlie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to support the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2006. The purpose of this amendment bill is to appropriate additional funding of $43.6 million over the 2006 to 2008 calendar years for tutorial assistance, community festivals for health promotion, activities which address substance abuse, and school based sporting activities for Indigenous youth. Education prepares children for life and participation in society. These projects will assist Indigenous pupils with their schooling, and I commend the Australian government on this amendment bill and its lofty ideals.

However, the number of children these funds will assist is relatively minimal and will continue to be so unless there is a fundamental shift in the attitude of Indigenous people themselves towards education. It may surprise members in this place to know that there exists an unacceptably large cohort of children not even enrolled in the school system, within the Indigenous population. These children are therefore out of the education system and often the social system completely. This situation can lead to nothing but negative, wasteful and tragic outcomes. The obvious drawcards of substance abuse and crime aside, there is also the lure of welfare dependence and the baby bonus grant.

The baby bonus is something that this government very rightly takes a great deal of pride in. We now offer new mothers $4,000 tax-free to assist with the cost of a child. However, in communities where young people are out of the education system, this assistance is having an adverse impact, leading to an increase in the number of under-age mothers and therefore an increase in the number of welfare recipients. Worst of all, all these young people have no chance of breaking the cycle of poverty.

Enrolling children in school and ensuring that they attend every day for their primary school years is the single most important action parents can take to solve the crisis of the unemployability of Indigenous youth as a result of failed primary education and everything else that follows. School attendance for at least primary school years must be made compulsory for every Australian child. I have been deeply committed to this principle since I first heard of the herculean struggle Indigenous children face for a positive life without an education. Addressing the issue of truancy among children is fundamental to the future prosperity of Indigenous people and, I believe, their salvation.

Last year a trial project addressing this issue was set up in the town of Halls Creek in my electorate. Halls Creek has been in the spotlight in recent weeks because it is a microcosm of the wider issue. The project’s aim was to suspend the Centrelink welfare payments of those parents whose children did not regularly attend school. Parents had to go into Centrelink and explain why their children were not attending and ask for support. This trial was working incredibly well, with school attendance jumping from 54 per cent to 80 per cent in two months. Unfortunately, the project was cancelled because its legality was questioned. I worked very hard to get that trial reinstated and it was, but unfortunately in a weaker form. Political correctness once again dealt a blow.

We anticipate the release of the report on that trial, and I hope to see a strong recommendation for no school, no welfare and that not to send one’s child to school is tantamount to child neglect. Some members may feel that is a strong statement, and it is. It is also a true statement. For decades we have equipped Indigenous communities with more than adequate educational resources—that is to say, we have tossed money at the problem. If members feel that that approach has been successful, they are mistaken. We need a change in attitude, and the cultural reasons children do not attend school must be addressed if we are to make any progress.

No one reason is more important than another, and I will begin with the dependence on welfare. Over the past decades we have created a culture of welfare dependence among Indigenous communities. Measures must be taken to wean people off this dependence, and the most significant impact will be made by education. The concept of mutual obligation needs to be mentioned. The taxpayers of Australia expect this government to spend money in a reasonable way. Surely, if we are prepared to continue to pay welfare dollars, the recipients should best equip themselves to break the welfare cycle. Across Indigenous communities a culture of illiteracy has been created. Children have no role models because in many communities no-one in their family has been educated since the time of the missions.

Generally, little importance is placed on learning and improving one’s situation through education. There is also the question of funeral attendance and sorry time, which involve extensive travel and taking the children out of school for such long periods of time that it seems to them pointless to return. Cultural matters have priority over what is considered to be the importance of education because, currently, political correctness is paramount. Too many teachers have a romantic idea of teaching in Indigenous communities: learn the language and culture, embrace the community members, stay a short time and dine out on the experience forever. When they return to their cities they should have left something behind, other than the children. Too often they take from the community rather than contribute to it. When you consider that they are charged with the responsibility to improve the ability of these children to engage in society, combined with the reluctance to attend school on a regular basis, it is little wonder that we have such difficulty in finding real employment for community based people.

Government does not have a responsibility to embrace Indigenous or any other culture. Government has a responsibility to equip all its people for a fulfilling life. The dictates of modernity define that as being a basic education, health care, security under the law, equal opportunity and the opportunity for participation in meaningful employment to gain financial independence and contribute to society. Too often, currently, we not only excuse but condone a culture that says, ‘School attendance is not important.’ It is simply not morally just to espouse the view that one ought to be sustained by society without contributing to it.

This bill provides an additional $25.7 million for tutorial assistance for students in year 9 and for those undertaking vocational and technical education. These two groups need support. Year 9 has been identified as the level at which many students drop out of school, and vocational and technical students are few and far between. Indigenous children who attend school are too often not given educational support at home. So those struggling with their studies tend to simply give up. Providing funding for tutors to assist with difficult subjects means that these children are more likely to stay at school.

Most recently the media has focused on the endemic culture of violence and sexual abuse. Under this ever-present threat within the home, women are unable to concentrate on the appropriate care for their children. We need to create an environment where Indigenous parents, predominantly mothers, feel secure and confident, allowing them to encourage their children to gain an education. We need to make mothers more secure in the knowledge that their children will not be abused as they were, and unfortunately still are. There needs to be a greater and local abundance of agents genuinely concerned with the welfare of children, providing realistic support for the mothers of those children.

There need to be a sufficient number of advisers on basic domestic health and Western style domestic standards. There needs to be a law enforcement presence which will give a sense of confidence that the family unit can be divided for the duration of the school day. Parenting skills need to be taught which include the value of a basic education, because that education is the foundation of a meaningful future for all Australians. Generational unemployment and the resulting boredom leads to all manner of cheap and easily alternative preoccupations, such as substance abuse. Substance abuse takes priority over school attendance. If you have been brought up in a community without the example of employment participation, the theoretical perfection of education, training, employment, financial independence and self-esteem is totally absent.

The bill provides $1.5 million for educational efforts to discourage abuse amongst children in the remotest regions and to try to break that cycle. Whilst that does not seem substantial, it is just one of a number of projects, and even if it prevents only a small group of children from becoming substance dependent it will be a success. Substance abuse, combined with neglect and a dangerous home environment, means that Indigenous children are often left to fend for themselves.

This bill also includes $9.1 million for 18 school based sporting academies, which will provide direction on how to occupy those children in a productive and positive manner. I add that only this afternoon I had the good fortune to meet with Peter Holmes a Court, co-owner of the Rabbitohs. I am pleased to say that the Rabbitohs are well focused on Indigenous participation in their team, and I am told that there will be something in excess of 25 per cent of members with Indigenous heritage in the team next year.

Debate interrupted.