Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to Labor’s plan for an education revolution including a plan to encourage young Australians to both study and teach maths and science—core drivers of our economy into the future. Why, after years and years of talk, has the government not acted to address the fact that 25 per cent of science teachers do not have a science qualification and 25 per cent of maths teachers do not have a major in maths?

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women's Issues) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Perth for his question. The Australian government believes that we should focus on where the problem lies in this area. Labor came up with a very hastily put together plan that entirely misses the point in relation to the teaching of maths and science in this country. We must engage young people at a primary or secondary school level. If they are not engaged and studying maths and science by years 10, 11 and 12, they are not going on to study it at university. That is self-evident and it is entirely missing from Labor’s policy.

What the Australian government is focusing on is supporting teachers and schools, scientific organisations and universities to work with the schools through a range of programs that the Australian government has instituted to inspire young people to study science and mathematics when they are at school—that is where the problem lies—rather than coming up with a bandaid approach at the higher education level that has been proven not to work.

One thing I can say about the Leader of the Opposition: he has not had an original policy thought on anything, let alone education. He talks about his education revolution. Naughty boy! You stole that idea, didn’t you?

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The level of interjections is far too high. The minister will be heard.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women's Issues) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You will have to go to the naughty corner, won’t you?

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

Annette Ellis (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Annette Ellis interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Ballarat is warned, and so is the member for Canberra!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This is a serious question—standing order 104.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women's Issues) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One thing we have learned is: the Leader of the Opposition has no original thought when it comes to policy development. He talks about his brave new frontier and education revolution, but guess what? Somebody is back in vogue: What did you learn today? Creating an education revolution by one Mark Latham. So the new policy adviser on education is Mark Latham?