Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014 today. As with every opportunity to comment on what this government has been doing in the education space, particularly in the school space, sadly, this is yet another example of the betrayal, the deception and the short-sighted stupidity which this government puts into place when it comes to the important issue of the importance of our schools.

If the government had simply kept the promises that they made to the Australian public at the last election, we would not need to be here today, considering many of the parts of this bill. If the government had simply kept their promise to deliver the full disability loading in 2015, we would not need to consider amendments relating to funding for independent special schools. If the government had any sort of clear vision for schools policy and if they actually cared at all about what happens in Australian classrooms, I would not need to be standing up here today, defending the Gonski reforms, standing up for students with disability and arguing for transparency and accountability in our schools funding—something that you would think that all sides of politics could agree on.

In terms of the specifics of the bill before the House, this bill establishes a mechanism to allow the minister to make payments to schools for a reason prescribed by regulation. The government has announced that this will facilitate the payment of around $6.8 million in support to boarding schools in 2014-15, but at this stage it has not provided any funding beyond that period. This will assist schools with more than 50 Indigenous boarders from remote communities or where more than 50 per cent of boarders are Indigenous and come from remote communities. We, of course, support this measure. We know that this is just one of many steps that the government must take to close the gap in the school education.

It is also Labor's position that the first focus of the government should be to make sure that every school is a great school and that every child should have the resources and support to achieve their best, no matter where they live, what school they attend or what opportunities they are given. This is the central principle behind the Gonski reforms. It absolutely applies to schools in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and it is these schools that we must not overlook; we must not just focus on those Indigenous students who have the opportunity to go and stay in boarding schools at existing independent schools. Supporting boarding schools cannot be used as an argument to leave schools and communities behind. On this side of the House, we will continue to fight for those schools and to ensure that we have quality and great schools no matter where they will be.

We know that closing the gap in the educational attainment of Indigenous Australians requires a focus not just on boarding schools but on every school single bush school and every single remote classroom. I know that my colleague the member for Lingiari, who joins me in the chamber today, has been a long-term passionate advocate of this cause. It is something that Labor is absolutely committed to. But, for those students and those communities, who want to use them, boarding schools are part of the solution. For a whole lot of practical reasons, particularly in high school, boarding does have an important role to play in helping Indigenous students access subject choices and the opportunities that can only be provided in a larger school. Support for Indigenous students to attend boarding schools is consistent with Labor's policies in government. Therefore, in the parliament today we support this measure.

This bill also changes the funding transition rules for independent special schools so that their funding is not worse off from next year. It is a change that this parliament would not need to consider and that would not need to be brought before us if the government had kept the very clear promise that they made to implement the full Gonski disability loading for 2015 and to allocate additional resources from that time. We know that, as part of the important school reforms that the Gonski review came up with, there were six additional funding loadings: one for small schools, one for remote schools, one for Indigenous students, one for students with low English, one for students from disadvantaged backgrounds and, importantly, one for students with disability. These loadings were fully defined when the Australian Education Act was introduced, with the exception of the loading for students with disability. We knew that the full implementation of the loading for students with disability was scheduled for 2015. This was to allow time for data collection and further collaboration with the states and school systems to ensure that the final disability loading would give students the resources they needed.

We know that this was a big job. Definitions of the disabilities that attract extra support vary significantly across the different states and territories, and so does the average level of support which is delivered in those jurisdictions. There are ranges from $4,000 to $40,000 per student. Labor funded the $100-million-per-year More Support for Students with Disabilities program to make sure that those students who need the most assistance got the assistance that they needed while work continued to finalise the full Gonski disability loading in 2015.

Before the election, this process, just like the Gonski school funding reforms, had bipartisan support. Those opposite stood before the Australian public and offered support. The education minister promised:

If elected to Government the Coalition will continue the data collection work that has commenced, which will be used to deliver more funding for people with disability through the 'disability loading' in 2015.

That promise was clear and that promise was straightforward. However, students with disability, along with their parents and their carers and their teachers and their principals and their fellow classmates, have been utterly betrayed by this government. In one of the most shameful moves that they have made amongst a crowded field in the education space, they walked away from the students who need that support the most—students with disabilities. That is something for which they should be condemned.

We know that, in this year's budget, the government cut the $100-million More Support for Students with Disabilities program and failed to replace it with the promised additional funds. At the same time, stakeholders are reporting that the government has dropped the ball on the finalisation of the Gonski disability loading. There has been almost no consultation and, when consultation has occurred, it has been rushed and it has been secretive. This means that neither the promised additional funding nor the promised full Gonski loading for students with disability will be implemented next year, and students with disability will have $100 million in support cut next year. This government has been absolutely shameless in pretending that black is white and in rewriting history, in sliding away from its very clear commitments on schools.

However, the most heartless of all broken promises in education is undoubtedly the broken promise to fund the full Gonski disability loading from 2015. The government made many promises to get elected, and then they cut support for students with disability in the budget—and we on this side will not let them forget, or the Australian public forget, and we will keep fighting for these students who need us. Labor will not stand in the way of measures within this bill ensuring that funding flows to independent special schools next year, but we will absolutely be taking the government to task on their broken promises for students with disability.

This bill also seeks to delay, by at least a year, the implementation of school improvement plans. This was a very important component of the school funding reforms—that there would be additional dollars, but there would be school improvement plans to outline exactly how those dollars were being used to improve the education that was offered to students in those schools. While the government will say that this is about tackling bureaucracy, this is really about watering down accountability and getting rid of transparency. It is another step in this government's so-called no-strings-attached approach to school funding, because we know that school improvement plans, at their very heart, are about making sure that the money invested in schools by the federal government actually reaches classrooms—that it actually improves students' results. This is a vital part of the school reforms and our school system. These plans are not about ticking boxes. There are no forms. The evidence that sits behind them has been independently developed and endorsed by all states and territories, Liberal and Labor. It is galling hypocrisy that, on the one hand, the education minister will prance in here and say that money does not matter—that it is not money that makes the difference—but, on the other hand, he does not care if schools actually deliver the reforms which have been proven to boost results.

We could take for example the current situation in Victoria. Despite claiming to be delivering the Gonski reforms, the Victorian Premier has shrouded school funding in secrecy. Victorians do not know if funding is reaching classrooms, and principals have simply no idea if they are getting the needs based funding their school was promised. Instead of following through on Gonski reforms and putting an end to this confusion, the government has decided that they want to keep parents, teachers and principals in the dark, and this Prime Minister is doing absolutely all he can to help out his mate the Victorian Premier to fudge the books and avoid having to prove that every dollar is reaching those schools and those students who need it the most.

It is not just me who is worried about accountability. It is not just me who will argue that this so-called no-strings-attached formula means that we do not know if the dollars are reaching the schools and the students who need them the most. I look towards this media release—not from a particular close friend of mine, but from the Hon. Campbell Newman, as well as his education minister, who has stated, as recently as last week:

Queensland is the only state or territory in Australia that is giving every single cent of this funding directly to schools.

The Queensland Liberal government are saying that funding is not reaching the schools for which it is intended, and this government, through this piece of legislation, is trying to cover that fact up so that there is no transparency and no accountability.

I would not rule out the possibility of making some changes that might make the process easier for schools. That could be a good thing. But that should not come at the expense of the accountability of billions of dollars of federal investment, or at the expense of the central principle of the Gonski reforms—that funding should be based on need and should drive real improvement in the classroom.

That brings me to our fundamental concerns about the government's weathervane approach to schools policy. This is a government that simply does not know where it stands on schools policy. Worse than that, this is a government which apparently does not care at all about schools policy. We know that, since the Gonski report was handed down, they have been prepared to shamelessly adopt any position, to adopt several positions, to make any statement, or to say anything that they think will sound good in that particular 24-hour news service. They do not have values, they do not look at evidence and they have absolutely no vision for Australian schools—which is why we have seen the education minister simply making it up as he goes along.

The coalition's schools policy has been an utter comedy of errors since the Gonski report was released, and it would probably be a little bit funny if it were not for the fact that the consequences are just so serious. If I were to simply describe the contradictions and the backflips, I do not think anyone would believe me. I do not think anyone would believe that one minister could have as many different positions as our very own education minister has put forward, but there have been no fewer than nine positions adopted by the government since the Gonski report was handed down. So I will tell the story in their own words—in the words of the Prime Minister and in the words of the education minister. This parliament can see for themselves that we have a government which is clueless when it comes to schools policy but, worse than that, we have a government which is actively destroying school reforms which have been fought for and hard won.

In government Labor commissioned a review into school funding led by David Gonski. It was the biggest review this country has had into school funding in over 40 years. We know that the review panel received more than 7,000 submissions, they visited 39 schools and they consulted 71 key education groups across Australia. This review identified the problems we face in our schools—growing inequality, falling results, increasing numbers of low-performing students and the decreasing numbers of high-performing students. It set all of this against the backdrop of better school results in many of our neighbouring countries.

This report was painstakingly researched. It was backed by evidence and the Gonski panel handed down a report which was fiercely independent and was in absolutely no way partisan. It was a moment of truth. It was an opportunity for genuine reform in our schools. It outlines the challenges that schools across Australia face but, importantly, it also identified many of the solutions. Those solutions must not be turfed aside simply because this government did not commission the report themselves. Let us have a look at what the member for Sturt, the now Minister for Education and then shadow minister for education said at the time. Just one hour and 45 minutes after it was released he dismissed it out of hand. He immediately denied the reports findings that the Howard government's SES school funding system was broken and, in fact, on 20 February 2012, he launched a passionate defence, stating:

I believe the current SES funding model is the fairest model available.

It was absolutely clear at this point that the member for Sturt had not even taken a cursory look at the report of the biggest review of our school system in 40 years.

Later, in September 2012, it appeared the coalition had finally admitted the old school funding model was broken, that money was not driving improvement and that Liberal state cuts were leading to dangerous downward spirals in future federal funding because of the automatic link between state cuts and less federal money in the future. The member for Sturt then announced a new policy on schools, when he declared in the parliament, in September 2012:

In fact the Coalition is the only political party with a policy to increase funding to all schools by six per cent.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Wouldn't we like to see that! Unfortunately, your current policy is CPI 2.5 per cent.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is six per cent, eight per cent.

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is not at all. You are making up figures which do not stack up. I certainly hope we are recorded in Hansard so we can see that, yet again, those opposite are making it up. It was not long before he undid his pledge for six per cent increases and reverted to his old position of defending the broken Howard SES funding model. In February 2013, the now Minister for Education said:

... the current funding model does work. It's not a broken model.

Then he flip-flopped again, pretending to be so concerned about the declining school funding model, that he declared the prospect of three per cent indexation to be 'frightening'—a comment that came back to bite him very hard when he announced the biggest ever cut to schools in this year's budget and pegged funding from 2018 at CPI, which their own budget papers predict will be just 2.5 per cent. The same person who argued that the prospect of three per cent indexation was frightening has now introduced into this parliament budget papers which show school indexation at just 2.5 per cent from 2018. Several months later, in what had become a very bad version of policy hokey pokey, he said:

I can give you this guarantee: if the coalition's elected, we will keep the funding model for two years, we will keep the current indexation rate which over the last 10 years has averaged six per cent.

That is where things stayed until the lead-up to the election. We know from those opposite that Gonski was a 'conski' and the coalition had the impossible policy of indexing school funding at six per cent and returning—

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The explicit purpose of this bill relates to Indigenous boarding students from remote areas. The member for Adelaide is two-thirds of the way through and has not even mentioned it.

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In response to that, I would say the member opposite might want to listen before he makes a contribution. I have spoken about Indigenous boarding schools. More importantly, he may want to read the bill and not just the speaking notes that the member for Sturt gives him because he will actually see that there are many other measures which this bill addresses, including putting back school improvement plans, which I am addressing.

We know that until the Liberal party decided to face the reality that Australians actually do care about schools and about real education reform, those opposite had to face the reality that parents, teachers and students across the country supported the Gonski reforms, which included the school improvement plans, which this bill is delaying, and wanted a government that would make sure every student in every school had the opportunity to achieve their very best. So just a month out from the election, Mr Abbott back-flipped on his position on schools. He called a press conference and made a clear promise to Australian voters that:

Kevin Rudd and I are on an absolute unity ticket when it comes to school funding.

He was backed up by the member for Sturt, now Minister for Education, who stood in a marginal seat and looked down the barrel of the camera as he declared:

You can vote Liberal or Labor and you'll get exactly the same amount of funding for your school.

Before the election, the now minister was also crystal clear about the coalition's commitment to the Gonski model and to needs-based funding, telling voters:

We have agreed to the government's school funding model.

If that were true, this bill delaying school improvement plans, would not be before the parliament. The now Minister for Education then went on to say:

We are committed to the student resource standard, of course we are. We are committed to this new school funding model.

And finally as Australians entered polling booths on Election Day, they were faced with huge signs which read:

Liberals will match Labor's school funding dollar for dollar.

It really could not get any clearer than that—no asterisks, no small print, no qualifications—that they would match the funding and that they would introduce school funding reforms. But of course we have seen that that did not turn out to be the case at all.

Voters across Australia were absolutely betrayed by every member opposite. Voters across Australia thought that the school reforms, which had been announced and had been implemented, were safe. They thought that they could vote Liberal or Labor and they would get the same school reforms and the same system, which was so desperately needed and overdue. They thought that Labor's Gonski reforms, the biggest reforms in 40 years, would be delivered no matter who won on 7 September. But, unfortunately, that hope was desperately short lived. The government's deliberate deception of voters took just weeks to be revealed, when the education minister declared that he would go back to the drawing board on school funding. Then, just three days later, he said he would keep the Gonski model but for just one year. He promised to develop a new school funding model by early 2014.

He is clearly a man with a very high opinion of himself; I do not think anyone has ever doubted that about our education minister. He thought he would be able to do a better job in just a few months, in coming up with an entirely new school funding model, than education experts and the independent Gonski panel had been able to do over two years of solid work on this matter. Schools, parents, teachers were all shocked. They had been betrayed and they were immediately up in arms. But the government was having none of that and refused to take responsibility for its own broken promises. First, the education minister blamed journalists for not being able to understand school funding. Then, in what will surely go down as one of the most arrogant and condescending comments ever made by a politician, the Prime Minister turned the torch on Australians themselves. In the comfortable atmosphere—for him—of Andrew Bolt's cosy studio, the Prime Minister said:

We are going to keep the promise that we actually made, not the promise that some people thought that we made or the promise that some people might have liked us to make.

It was at this point that the government's trickery, their deception, was totally laid bare. Let us be very clear: the government told the Australian people that they would get the new school funding model and that 'they were on a unity ticket'. The government, through this piece of legislation and through every indication since the last election, have shown that that was nothing more than a ploy to con the Australian people into voting for them, thinking that they were getting school reform.

The following day, after an emergency meeting, the government were shamed into a humiliating backflip. Begrudgingly, and with not one fibre of their heart in it, the Prime Minister and education minister dragged themselves to a press conference. They said they would keep part of what they had promised. But they did not mean it. And they have been undermining the Gonski reforms ever since.

This history is absolutely crucial to the bill which is before us today. It puts into context the government's proposed changes to school improvement plans and funding for special schools. It makes it crystal clear that these changes are nothing but just another step in the government's deliberate campaign to undermine all those elements of the Gonski reforms that they were shamed into just over a year ago, that they have never had their heart in and that they intended pulling apart, even though they were not prepared to tell the Australian public that before they went to the polls.

Since the government's acrobatics in November and December last year—and I think we well remember how many different positions the education minister had in just a few days—the Prime Minister and the education minister have cut all additional funding for the fifth and sixth years of the Gonski reforms. But worse than that, in its first budget, this government has cut $80 billion from schools and hospitals over the next decade, the biggest ever cut to Australian schools. That is what this government has announced in its own budget papers.

Mr Nikolic interjecting—

It may not be in the speaking points that the member opposite relies on, from the education minister, but he should actually take to reading the budget, as he should take to reading this bill, if he thinks it is not about school improvement plans.

The government have also cut $100 million a year more support for the Students with Disabilities Program and have failed in the promise they made both before the election and after the election for more funding for students with a disability through a new loading in 2015. The government have let state governments off the hook by promising not to enforce their funding obligations under the Gonski agreements. How is that for accountability?

This government has locked school funding to just CPI from 2018, with its very own budget papers assuming that CPI will be just 2.5 per cent. At the same time, the ABS Education Price Index currently runs at 5.1 per cent. That is a huge cut in real terms, which will be felt in every single school across Australia. Then, on top of all that, this government had the gall to blame Australian voters for its broken promises on schools and for the complete trashing of the unity ticket on schools, claiming that the Australian public misunderstood when they thought they were going to get the Gonski school funding reforms, that they were explicitly told by members opposite before the election. It is an awful record that is built on absolute deception, falsehood and betrayal. It is a record that has left the Prime Minister's credibility when it comes to education and schools in tatters. But, more importantly, it has left our schools facing the biggest funding cut that we have ever seen in this nation's history.

If some of the provisions of this bill are an indication as to where the government are heading, it is clear that they have zero plans for redemption, that they are just getting started. The government must absolutely be condemned for their record on school funding and on betraying the Australian public. Their pushing back of school improvement plans is yet another measure to reduce accountability and transparency so that they cannot be held to account for the full damage that they have caused. It is of great concern.

We will not hold up this legislation because we know it is important that funding goes to Indigenous boarding schools as well as independent special schools

But we will absolutely point out each and every time this government betrays not just the voters of Australia but also the future of Australia's school system and, in turn, the future opportunities of every young Australian, the future opportunities for our economic development and our productivity, the future of the education system—which should be one of the most important things that this government recognises that we should work together on, after we have had the biggest review in 40 years, which those opposite arrogantly now claim that they know better than the experts and all of the people who contributed to the review, whether it is the academics, the principals, the teachers or the parents. Those opposite claim that the education minister can come up with a better solution—an education minister who has an appalling record when it comes to schools after just a year in government and looks set to introduce yet more damage and more destruction in such a very important portfolio area.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we have just seen is 30 minutes of party political commentary, reliving the 2013 election. We heard the member for Adelaide invoking the name of David Gonski—who, frankly, has disowned the Labor Party's approach to education in all its forms. The member for Adelaide walks out of the chamber, having told this House about promises that were made, knowing full well that the coalition said that we would be committed to the forward estimates when it came to school funding over four years. Contrary to her assertions, education funding and health funding rise each year over the next four years. And, again, we hear these quite mendacious claims from Labor members opposite about cuts, when the budget papers tell a totally different story.

We see once again that tendency of the Labor Party to overpromise and under deliver, and it is not just when it comes to education; it is also the NBN. For three elections we saw the member for Lingiari and his colleagues come forth and makes these extravagant promises about the NBN and never deliver. We also heard about superclinics and surpluses. In 2012 the former Treasurer, the member for Lilley, stood up here in this House and talked about 'The four surpluses that I announce tonight'. Goodness me—four surpluses!

Mr Snowdon interjecting—

It is absolutely outrageous when the other day we learnt that, instead of a surplus this year, we have got a $49.5 billion deficit. The hypocrisy of those opposite beggars belief. They have a history in government of $191 billion in achieved deficits, $123 billion across the forward estimates—

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There was some unparliamentary language coming from the member for Lingiari. Can I ask that he withdraw his comments?

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Lingiari—

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise profusely.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just withdraw. That is all we need.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I withdraw, but I would ask that you advise the member to talk to the legislation. Thus far, four minutes in, he has not even mentioned the education bill.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What's that thing about glass houses?

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Bass was making a point before he got up and spoke, Member for Hume, about people talking on the bill. But the debate has been wide ranging, and I will let that go. Member for Bass, continue.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I look forward to talking about the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014 because there have been some important issues raised. As we saw from the member for Adelaide's contribution, the vast majority of her time was devoted to having a crack at the government, instead of addressing the very important issues in this bill.

It does give me great pleasure to make a contribution on this bill. As I have said on more than one occasion, from a purely domestic or national perspective, there are few, if any, issues as important or as potentially inflammatory as education policy. Regrettably, too often, despite the best intentions of any government, this subject tends to become a political football. For obvious reasons, passions and emotions are easily aroused when wrestling with issues that impact the lives and wellbeing of our fellow Australians. As a proud representative of northern Tasmania, I am keenly aware of the usually linear relationship which exists between education, employment, future and fortune. And, I have no doubt, that such a sentiment places me in good company with many, and perhaps even a majority, on both sides of the House.

We heard at the end of the member for Adelaide's contribution that she was in fact supporting the bill—and I welcome that bipartisan spirit. This amendment bill reflects the very best domestic intentions of the present government. By, and through it, we seek to implement and enact key steps which, if given the opportunity to work, will significantly improve the lives and livelihood of some members of Australia's most disadvantaged and struggling communities. For them, it potentially represents, a life-changing opportunity. Regrettably, Indigenous Australians are a part of our society whose educational standards and attainments have, in the main, lagged and fallen increasingly behind that of wider and mainstream Australia. I acknowledge that this drift has occurred 'on the watch' of successive governments of both persuasions over more than a generation. This government will do whatever it can to arrest this downward spiral to continuing intergenerational poverty. This includes constructive Indigenous educational reform.

Over the long term, any nation which undervalues or fails to invest in education, particularly at the foundation or school level, will eventually incur a severe penalty. This may start as an initially and almost barely perceptible drift from the forefront of national productivity and/or international relevance. Thereafter, the pace of educational decline and concordant social and economic malaise and disharmony will tend to quicken over time, with obvious bleak and all-too-predictable outcomes. Once begun, such a diminution in educational talent or standards on any level—individual, community, state or national—is disproportionately difficult to turn around. The government is exceedingly conscious of such perils, particularly amongst elements of the already disadvantaged.

Most importantly, the government retains a strong commitment to, and preference for, genuine tripartisan negotiation with all members of both the opposition and crossbench towards the passage of this important social amendment. Despite some views to the contrary, ours remains a generous spirit of compromise, negotiation and even consensus, which extends to all quarters of this chamber.

Passage of this bill is, indisputably, in the longer term interest of all Australians—not just those who are Indigenous, or who have children or grandchildren, or those who are themselves affected students who stand to benefit significantly from it. Indeed, the bounty of foundation level education across society, improves the lives of countless Australians in ways too numerous, wondrous and positive for me to enunciate fully here. It is sufficient f to simply say that we are all enriched by education in one way or another—either directly by the process itself or perhaps more indirectly by the society it shapes and influences, and sometimes, simply because it offers to us all a glimpse or snapshot of what is possible and achievable in a nation as unique and priceless as Australia.

Let me highlight and focus on a few key aspects of the bill before the House. The first pertains to the general intention of the bill; the second, to the matter of its precise focus; and the third relates to funding, specifically to the government's four-year funding commitment.

The explicit purpose of this bill is to amend the act. Doing so will directly support the payment of additional funding to schools with large numbers of Indigenous boarding students from remote areas to meet an identified resourcing shortfall. Funding can commence as early as this calendar year. The Indigenous boarding initiative was announced through the 2014-15 budget and will provide approximately $6.8 million in additional funding to eligible schools. Regulations will determine school eligibility and amounts of funding under the initiative.

The bill will prevent funding cuts to students with disabilities and other students in some independent special and special assistance schools which would otherwise occur from 1 January 2015. This will be achieved by ensuring consistent transitional funding arrangements for both these schools and all others under the act. In addition, the bill will address a number of errors and omissions that occurred during the original preparation of the act and which, if left unchanged, would undermine the intended operation of the act, including creating funding and regulatory uncertainty for schools. These amendments will ensure, among other things, the correct calculation of Commonwealth funding entitlements for all Australian schools.

Together this combination of steps and measures is a strong example of what I will call complementary reconciliation, whereby Australians of all backgrounds support and complement the overarching spirit of national reconciliation with constructive, practical steps to the betterment of the lives of our Indigenous brothers and sisters. While this concept is universal, among its strongest applications is education. Furthermore, complementary reconciliation embraces two broad ideas: the first is the need to be mindful of the somewhat chequered lessons of Australia's Indigenous affairs so that they are not conveniently airbrushed by history, and the second is to construct or fashion a more positive experience for current and future Indigenous generations. This bill has been carefully crafted and balanced and gives due consideration to both these things.

I now move to the specific focus of the bill itself, which is Indigenous boarding students at particular non-government schools—a very specific demographic as opposed to a broader target audience. The rationale and logic behind this focus includes the following elements and considerations. Firstly, under the needs based funding provided by the Australian Education Act 2013, all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students attract a loading. Secondly, schools with large numbers of these students boarding have indicated that more funding is required to meet the costs of providing boarding and tuition to cater for the additional needs of the students. Thirdly, the government also considered the findings of an independent review that identified significant additional costs faced by non-government schools with large numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander boarding students. In response to the review's findings, the government provided an estimated $6.8 million in the 2014-15 budget for the Indigenous boarding initiative of 2014; this funding will support eligible schools while a broader welfare review, including a review of Abstudy, is conducted. Finally, this extra funding will allow eligible schools to deliver improved services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander boarding students from remote or very remote areas, and provide effective additional support to boost school attendance and engagement.

Equally as significant and noteworthy is the fact that these intended amendments do not break the government's four-year funding commitment, as was suggested by the member for Adelaide. Rather, they will provide an increase in funds to support Indigenous boarding students while also preventing funding reductions. Such changes would otherwise impact negatively on students with a disability at special or special assistance schools.

In the lead-up to the last federal election, the government promised to maintain the current school funding legislation for the usual four-year funding period. By way of clarification for the member for Adelaide, that means the years 2014 to 2017, not the unaffordable five and six year aspirational promises those opposite made at the time. The government has fulfilled this commitment but needs to make sure the current legislation—the Australian Education Act—operates as intended for the funding quadrennium. The bill's amendments seek to do exactly that and are thereby wholly constructive and honourable in terms of their intent, substance and operating mechanisms.

To conclude: education constitutes an enduring bridge between aspiration and achievement. This observation is universally true in most nations. Education is also significant factor which separates or divides developed from developing nations, and it clearly delineates individual communities within nations. The latter is certainly the case in Australia. These things are true of education at all stages in life, but are especially so at the foundation levels—primary and secondary school—which are the specific focal point and objective of this bill in particular.

By and through this bill, this parliament will literally forge a life-changing opportunity and extend it to a good many Indigenous Australian children. The positive long-term benefits of doing so are truly incalculable. That this bill cannot go further at this time should in no way obscure or diminish its obvious worth and value. It represents parliamentary policymaking at its very best. I therefore take much pleasure in commending to the House the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Education Amendment Bill in part establishes a mechanism to enable the Minister for Education to make payments to schools for reasons prescribed by regulation. The mechanism is put into effect through the insertion of a new subclause, section 69A(1), into the Australian Education Act 2013.

The Australian Education Act came into effect on 1 January 2014 and regulates Commonwealth funding to Australian schools. The education minister has said the first task of the new section 69A(1) mechanism will be to facilitate payments under the government's Indigenous boarding initiative announced in the 2014-15 budget. This provides $6.8 million in what the minister describes as interim support for non-government schools with more than 50 Indigenous borders from remote or very remote areas, or where 50 per cent or more of the school's boarding students are Indigenous and from remote or very remote areas. The government has yet to establish eligibility requirements for this initiative or the funding amounts eligible schools may receive. However, it is stated that it will have an intention to do so before the end of the year. We are yet to see the specifics but we look forward to that.

Access to these schools can benefit some Indigenous students from remote areas. In my electorate of Blair, we have two fine independent schools which accept boarders—Ipswich Grammar School and Ipswich Girls' Grammar School have both taken significant steps in recent years to increase the number of Indigenous boarders. I understand there are currently 20 Indigenous boarders at Ipswich girls' grammar and 53 at Ipswich grammar—its sister school.

At Ipswich grammar, enrolments of Indigenous students have increased steadily since 2000. In 2013, about six per cent of the school's population was Indigenous. These young men come from diverse communities, such as western Queensland, rural and western New South Wales and the Torres Strait. Ipswich Grammar School has reported encouraging progress in terms of retention and completion rates for these students.

I have spoken to Indigenous boarders from Ipswich Girls' Grammar and Ipswich Grammar School who have told me that, invariably, their experience is favourable. Many intend to go back to their communities to work and contribute. Some have also told me they intend to stay in south-east Queensland. However, the funding for non-government boarding schools cannot, and should not, be the only support offered to Indigenous students. Every child deserves the best education we can give them, no matter from where they come. We should not just cherry pick.

This initiative is just another example of the government's singular focus on getting Indigenous kids to school. It is not concerned, really, about what happens when they get there. That is someone else's problem—maybe the state or territory. The government has ripped away $46 million or more from the Remote Jobs and Communities Program to fund a truancy army in remote Australia. The results, according to Senate estimates, are patchy and erratic at best, and are unsuccessful at worst. We agree that every child should go to school. This is fundamentally important. However, we remain concerned about what happens when a child sits at the desk or in the classroom.

Consistently, conservative state and territory governments have ripped away money and resources from schools without a word of criticism from the education minister federally. We know that quality early education is critical to giving kids the best start in life. The previous federal Labor government invested hundreds of millions of dollars to the National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Early Childhood Development to make sure that Indigenous kids would get the best chance in life by establishing 38 children and family centres around the country. These centres provide culturally appropriate early education to children and support services to their parents and to some of the most vulnerable families in remote and regional areas, capital cities and provincial towns in this country. The Abbott government has abandoned these centres, refusing to fund them when the national partnership expired on 30 June this year. Many centres face the real prospect of closure. As Shadow minister for Indigenous affairs, I visited many of these centres.

We understand that kids need a little extra help getting the best educational outcomes if they come from disadvantaged backgrounds. That is why Labor's Gonski school funding model provided a special Indigenous loading to ensure that those schools were properly resourced to provide the best possible education for Indigenous students. Despite claiming to support this school funding initiative prior to the election, we have seen the government abandon it. We welcome the extra support for those few Indigenous kids who will benefit from the boarding school education but we remain deeply concerned about the majority who will not get the support.

Every child deserves the best education we can give, as I say. However, in reality, $6.8 million of funding announced for this initiative is a very dim flicker of light for Indigenous people. This government has ripped over half a billion dollars from Indigenous programs in the 2014-15 budget and refuses to tell Indigenous communities and service providers where these cuts will hit—whether it is a $125 million cut from Indigenous health programs; $15 million from the peak representative body, National Congress of Australia's First Peoples; and $9.5 million from support for Indigenous language, taught so often in these schools when Indigenous children attend.

Recently, of course—when you cannot ignore Indigenous education—there were the cuts to the Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme. This helps universities assess students who go to early childhood education centres, primary schools and high schools, and who, we hope, will come from these boarding initiatives here before this legislation and go to university. Under the former federal Labor government, there was a 26 per cent increase in Indigenous students going to and graduating from university. But this government has cut the funding. Universities will now be forced to competitively bid under the Indigenous Advancement Strategy, with no guarantee of funding. On top of the $5.8 billion in cuts to higher education, this calls into question the Abbott government's commitment to Indigenous education. To make matters worse, of course, the announcement of the ITAS cut took place on the eve of the competitive grant round being put so that those organisations had about a month in which to submit the application under the IAS.

Indigenous community leaders have expressed their concerns about the Abbott government's cuts, particularly in relation with Indigenous education. What we have seen from this Prime Minister, who claims that he is the Prime Minister for Indigenous affairs, is, in fact, a year of disappointment for Indigenous people around the country. And, of course, we have seen the cuts to front-line services. He has a minister in the Senate who claims that is not happening. But we know there have been cuts to front-line health services, legal services and welfare services. But the government refuses to accept responsibility for the cuts. All we have seen from them is to object, obfuscate and fabricate in relation to the claims.

On 16 September, the Indigenous affairs minister claimed that the $165 million cut to the community-controlled health services and health services around the country was, in fact, a cut. During question time on 22 September, the Prime Minister joined his minister in the land of fantasy in response to my question about the possible closure of children and family centres. The Prime Minister said:

I defy members opposite to justify this charge of broken promises. Overall funding for Indigenous programs goes up.

The evidence can be found in budget papers No. 2—pages 184 and 185—which clearly shows a cut in Indigenous funding programs of $534.4 million. If the Prime Minister and the Minister for Indigenous affairs were genuinely interested in this budget's impact on Indigenous Australians they might read the recent Menzies Centre for Health Policy report. The centre concluded, not surprisingly that Indigenous people would be hard hit by the budget. Adjunct Associate Professor Dr Lesley Russell of the centre said:

Already among the poorest, sickest and most marginalised, Indigenous Australians are hit twice: by cuts to specific programs totalling $603.0 million/5 years and cuts and changes to a wide swathe of general programs in health, education, welfare and legal services.

Together these will exacerbate Indigenous disadvantage and set back the already difficult task of Closing the Gap.

This is from a Prime Minister who claims he is the 'Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs'.

The establishment of a mechanism under this legislation to begin payments under the Indigenous Boarding Initiative is just one component of this legislation before the chamber. Subclause 62 subclause (2) item 33 of the bill also modifies the transitional funding rules for independent special schools to index their funding by at least three per cent per year. Without this change, according to the government, about 38 independent special schools face quite significant cuts in 2015.

The education minister briefly touched on this issue in his second reading speech, and appears to connect the prospect of these funding cuts to:

… errors and oversights that have become apparent since the act became operative on 1 January 2014.

The education minister mentions:

Currently, the safety net in place will disappear and these schools will have their funding immediately reduced to the schooling resource standard from 1 January next year because the current work with the states and territories to develop nationally consistent data has not yet been completed.

The 'safety net' the education minister says will disappear, as if he had nothing to do with it, is in fact Labor's More Support for Students with Disabilities program that the minister refused to continue to fund. The $2.4 million required to prevent a funding cut to these independent special schools is needed until:

… the revised student-with-disability loadings are available.

Here, the education minister refers to the extra funding, or loadings, available to students with a disability under Labor's Gonski school funding reforms. The disability loadings were one of six disadvantage loadings created by these reforms. I mentioned another—the Indigenous loading.

Adding a disadvantage loading to the base student funding amount to meet the actual needs of a student was a fundamental aspect of Labor's school funding reforms. In government Labor set an interim disability loading of 186 per cent of the base payment for students in mainstream schools and 223 per cent of the base payment for students in special schools for 2014. The interim loading will allow the time necessary to establish the true level of need for students with a disability in consultation with the states and territories. This would directly inform the development of a nationally-consistent disability loading from 2015. A fair and equitable learning to students with disability is essential for them to receive a quality education.

For a while, prior to the election, the coalition gave the impression that it wholeheartedly recognised and supported these loadings. In fact, the period of coalition support for the Gonski reform package had a precise start on 2 August 2013. Just a day earlier, the education spokesperson and now minister, described the Gonski reforms in his typical fashion: he called them a 'conski'. As the seconds ticked down to the 2013 election, political reality started to bite. The coalition said that they were on a unity ticket with us as the Labor government. They said that you could vote Labor or coalition and that you would get the same funding outcome.

In fact, if there were any doubt in the minds of voters, this is what they said, quoted in The Australian:

We will honour the agreements that Labor has entered into. We will match the offers that Labor has made. We will make sure that no school is worse off.

It was all a bit unedifying, because they felt completely shamefaced. They had brochures all around the place, they had leaflets about it but they backflips when they got into government. We have seen that.

But that backflip is actually typified by the budget. We heard the member for Bass actually refer to increases in funding by the coalition. It is almost as if the budget overview 2014-15 never penetrated the other side of the chamber. I want to quote from it—and this is not our document, this was prepared by the coalition government in the actual budget. The overview of the budget—and I am quoting from page 7 of the overview:

In this Budget the Government is adopting sensible indexation arrangements for schools from 2018, and hospitals from 2017-18, and removing funding guarantees for public hospitals. These measures will achieve cumulative savings of over $80 billion by 2024-25.

So what they are actually doing, in effect, is cutting $30 billion from our classrooms over the next decade, ripping away the fifth and sixth years of the Gonski funding. They are failing to deliver the Gonski agreements and letting the states off the hook in relation to their contributions—the national partnership arrangements.

So let us not hear sanctimony and unction from those opposite in relation to this, because they are part of a government that has let down Indigenous students and let down non-Indigenous students. They are part of a government that has ripped away $30 billion in school funding. And they claim to believe in equality of opportunity and justice for all—what a joke they are!

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Once again we hear those on the other side turning something incredibly positive into an incredible negative. Once again.

While we are at it, when discussing the Children and Family Centres it is a shame that the Labor Party did not think more about how it was going to structure the funding for these particularly important—

Jason Clare (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You're being negative! You said you were going to be positive!

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a shame that you did not do it and that you left the mess for us to clear up. For the record, I have actually been to a couple of the Children and Family Centres in the vast area of Durack and I have indeed seen the good work that they are doing. I can assure those on the other side, and those in the Children and Family Centres in Durack that I am working very hard to try to clean up the mess left behind.

And now to the bill before us. I am pleased to rise today to speak on the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014, which will benefit Aboriginal students within the electorate of Durack. The Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014 will amend the Australian Education Act 2013 to allow payment of additional funding in 2014 to schools with large numbers of Indigenous boarding students from remote areas and prevent funding cuts to students with disabilities and special assistance schools that would otherwise occur from 1 January 2015. This bill will result in approximately 2.4 million more being paid to those particular schools in 2014-15 than would have otherwise been the case. The bill also corrects errors and omissions in the existing legislation and provides funding and regulatory certainty to the schools.

The Indigenous boarding initiative, which is of special interest within my electorate of Durack, was announced through the 2014-15 budget and will provide approximately 6.8 million in further funding to eligible schools. The key objective of the bill is to increase Commonwealth funding for eligible non-government boarding schools with significant numbers of Indigenous boarding students. This initiative recognises the increased cost that schools face in the provision of education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander boarding students from remote and very remote areas of Australia. This special measure will benefit students from remote areas who board in order to obtain equal access to education. It is only available to eligible non-government schools. This initiative helps to provide support to Indigenous students, who must overcome so many challenges, including remoteness, in their efforts to participate in and pursue an education. This is only an interim measure, but nonetheless very welcome. A much broader welfare review, including of Abstudy, is being conducted.

This bill helps to address the extra costs of providing boarding and tuition for some Indigenous students. It is a matter that has been raised by many schools. Essentially the funding will be directed to schools that have more than 50 boarding students from remote and very remote areas of Australia, or where a school's boarding population comprises more than 50 per cent Aboriginal boarders. An important outcome will be an increase in both school attendance and student engagement. There are many, many remote communities in Durack and, as members would be aware, effective participation by an Indigenous students in education has been problematic. One of the key objectives of the Abbott government's Aboriginal policy framework is to ensure Aboriginal children receive an education. This bill contributes in a significant way to help meet that objective.

I remind members that my electorate of Durack, being the largest in Australia, stretches from the tip of WA, being the Kimberley, south-east to Moora and Cunderin and east out past Merredin en route to Kalgoorlie. It is big. For those of you who have visited Durack, you may know that the community of Meekatharra is in the Mid West region, north of Geraldton. Meekatharra is an Aboriginal word—in fact the Yamaji people's word—meaning 'place of little water'. Yes, it can be terribly dry out there. Meekatharra has less than 1,000 people, almost 50 per cent of whom are of Aboriginal descent. Located 764 kilometres north-east of Perth on the Great Northern Highway, Meekatharra services the extensive surrounding pastoral and mining areas.

Karalundi Aboriginal Education Community is a kindergarten to year 12 education boarding school for Aboriginal students and is situated 55 kilometres north of Meekatharra. This is an extremely remote location. Karalundi unashamedly provides a very valuable Christian education in many forms and seeks to bring 'self-sustaining change in the lives of its students, their families and their communities'. The school works on being a 'safe place to grow and learn' and on 'developing leaders to serve others within their communities and on land'. Citizenship and educational excellence are pursued with equal vigour. Karalundi is an Aboriginal boarding school for remote and very remote students and it shall benefit from the passage of the bill as it provides increased funding, and they deserve nothing less.

Karalundi was first established in 1954 and can cater for up to 60 Aboriginal boarding students housed at the educational community. It is indeed a quiet achiever. Students from nearby towns like Wiluna, who also have a large Aboriginal population, form part of the cohort who attend Karalundi. Next week I have the pleasure of hosting the Hon. Alan Tudge, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, who is at the table—yes, I am talking about you—in the town of Wiluna, where I will take the opportunity to arrange for the parliamentary secretary to meet with community leaders in this often forgotten part of Australia. And may I congratulate the parliamentary secretary for agreeing to come to this part of the world.

A second school that will benefit greatly from this bill is based in the Kimberley region of Durack and also in Melbourne and is known as the Yiramalay/Wesley Studio School. Wesley College, Melbourne, and the Fitzroy Valley community established an educational partnership in 2004. They signed a memorandum of understanding that captured their shared promised to lead and to live together, and that that would lead to a broader view and new prospects for all the children and families involved. The partnership is based on 'shared respect for people, language, culture and country'. Ten years since the signing of the MOU, no less than 40 Aboriginal students are enrolled this year. These students come from Fitzroy and communities right across the remote Kimberley.

In this unique partnership, the 40 students of 2014 attend school and board at Wesley in Melbourne for half the year. For the remainder of the year they attend the Yiramalay campus, named after the Yiramalay spring located on Leopold Downs Station, which is around 80 kilometres north-east of Fitzroy Crossing in the Kimberley. Traditional owners, the Bunuba people, operate both Fairfield and Leopold Downs Stations. Their cattle company runs around 20,000 head of cattle on 1.4 million acres. Wesley College provides the educational programs as well as the teaching staff at both sites—Yiramalay, on Leopold Downs Station, and in Melbourne. But of course it is the Bunuba people who assist with the valuable curriculum aspects of Aboriginal language, culture, history and on country activities. They have been innovative: they have developed and published Bunuba and Walmajarri language curriculum resources; they have established Wesmob, a Wesley student advocacy group; they have participated in the women's resource centre bush meetings and also in the Kimberley Aboriginal Law and Culture Centre Festival.

These are just two examples in Durack that have stood the test of time. Karalundi, beyond Meekatharra, established in 1954 and catering for 60 Aboriginal boarding students, and Yiramalay/Wesley Studio School, based in Melbourne and also the Kimberley, established 10 years ago with 40 students involved in 2014. I am very pleased that schools such as Yiramalay and Karalundi stand to benefit from the Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014, which amends the Australian Education Act 2013 to allow for, amongst other things, payment of additional funding in 2014 to schools with large numbers of Indigenous boarding students from remote areas to meet an identified—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The honourable member will have leave to continue her remarks when the debate is resumed.

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The honourable member will have leave to continue her remarks when the debate is resumed.