Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. I can assure the Deputy Prime Minister that these principals, who I have spoken to, are very unhappy.

I refer the minister to the plight of St Lucy’s, St Edmund’s, St Gabriel’s, St Dominic’s and Kingsdene special schools in New South Wales, which desperately need stable funding arrangements to support their students variously with Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, vision and hearing impairment and other special needs. With parents, many students and the principals here today in the parliament, can the minister explain why the government’s priorities see these schools facing funding cuts and closure while she presides over the disgraceful waste endemic in the school halls debacle?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I really thank the member for his question because as it so happens I have met with the principal of St Lucy’s this morning. And as it happens, Jo, the principal of St Lucy’s, said the following to me about her Building the Education Revolution project. These are direct words from the principal, so I presume if the member is genuinely interested in the plight of special schools he will be interested in the words of the principal of St Lucy’s. She said to me that their BER money had enabled them to install a lift and refurbish the toilets. When the school was first built, it was built as a school for the blind—

Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It had better be good, Chris!

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Oxley will leave the chamber under standing order 94(a).

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The question was about recurrent funding. It is a serious question, and these parents, the principals and the students in particular are interested in a serious answer, not an irrelevant answer on the basis—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am recounting the words said to me this morning by the principal of St Lucy’s. I would have thought that people would want to hear what the principal of St Lucy’s has got to say. What she had to say about the Building the Education Revolution project is that it had enabled them to install a lift and refurbish the toilets. This was important because when the school was first built, it was built as a school for the blind. It now mainly caters for children with autism and developmental delays. The old 1960 toilets were consequently not suitable to assist with the current cohort of students, many of whom are bigger children who are still incontinent. So normal-size toilets did not enable them to have the kind of change facilities that are necessary.

It should not require me to explain to this House why, in a special school, a lift to move students and staff between the floors of the school is important. The words of the principal of St Lucy’s were, ‘It has made such a difference to the staff and the students to have these new facilities’.

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

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. How can capital expenditure be relevant when there is no recurrent expenditure which is going to keep it open?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Mackellar will resume her seat. On the point of order—it may have assisted if I had ruled the final part of the question out as being argument, because the last part of the question went on to compare the lack of recurring funding with the monies that have been made available under other programs. Therefore, on this occasion—with greater confidence than I usually have—I can say that the Deputy Prime Minister is responding to the question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just make the point on funding of BER and special schools—and I think this is an important point, and would be celebrated by people of good will—we deliberately drew this program up so that all special schools could benefit from the greater amount of money available under the Primary Schools for the 21st Century program. So even secondary schools that are special schools can get the bigger grants, which I think is fantastic news for special schools around the country that have not had money for capital for a very long period of time.

I will answer the member’s question on recurrent funding. We have increased recurrent funding for students with disabilities. We provide that funding to block grant authorities. In the case of Catholic schools we provide it to the Catholic Education Office, and it works out the division from the Catholic Education Office to Catholic schools—the identical disbursement system for schools’ money operated by the Howard government. If the member wants to be heard to say that the Catholic Education Office cannot be trusted to properly disperse funds, then I would have thought that was a very controversial call. But, given the Leader of the Opposition has somehow said that he has now converted to paid parental leave, I suppose bashing the Catholic Education Office will be next.