Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes the:

(a)   Government's 2014-15 budget contains the biggest ever cut to schools, leaving classrooms across the country $30 billion worse off over the next decade;

(b)   Government has failed to fund the vital fifth and sixth years of the Gonski reforms and has opened the door to state and territory cuts by promising not to enforce their obligations under the Gonski agreements;

(c)   Government has restricted school funding changes to the Consumer Price Index from 2018; and

(d)   importance of equity and quality—for every child in every school—in improving student results and building a prosperous future; and

(2) calls on the Government to recognise the Commonwealth's role in funding schools by:

(a)   keeping its commitment to honour the signed Gonski agreements; and

(b)   reversing its $30 billion cut to schools.

I move this motion because we on this side will not cede to those opposite and their winding back the notion of commitment to education, winding back hard work, developed over a long-term review, to create equity in our school education system.

We are in the last two weeks of parliament for this year, and for me it is critical that, prior to the school term ending, I raise again the issue of the cuts, the dramatic cuts, that this government has made to education. The dramatic cuts that we saw in the 2014 budget were the biggest ever cut to schools, leaving classrooms across the country $30 billion worse off over the next decade.

We all remember broken promises—there has been a lot of talk this week about one broken promise about the ABC. I remember, very clearly, several promises that were made before the election that gave us a Liberal government. I remember promises from our Prime Minister Abbott and from Minister Pyne—promises that there would be no cuts to schools and promises that there would be a unity ticket on education. These promises were made after enormous publicity about the Gonski review and the Gonski reforms that were being implemented by the previous Labor government. They promised a unity ticket. Prime Minister Abbott said clearly, 'Your school will get the same.' Well, it is a broken promise, because that is not what is happening on the ground across the states in this nation. They said they were committed to the Gonski funding for six years, and the first thing they did on getting into government was say, 'Oh, sorry; we meant four years.' You did not mean four years; you meant six years. It was a clear promise to every family in this country that you were as committed as the previous Labor government to making sure that every child in this country got the best education they could have. You made a clear promise that you believed in equity. You made a clear promise that you believed in fairness and would support fairness in our school system, and then we got to the budget and you ripped $30 billion out of education across this nation—$30 billion. And you did this by indexing education funding to the CPI from 2018—no mention of that prior to the election. This is a clear broken promise.

You cut the strings to the states. You cut Gonski in half. You clearly said to the states at that point that the Gonski plan was that we would make a contribution and the states would commit to increasing their funding model from their coffers, joined with the national coffers, and we would go forward to the best education system in the world. We would go forward to equity. But what did you do? The first thing you did when you came into government was cut those strings and let the states off the hook. So your actions say that you do not believe that education is important—that you do not understand how fundamentally important education is for the prosperity of this nation going forward. An educated population will give us the economic advantage going forward. You have shown that you are not committed to that, that you are not committed to needs-based funding and that you are not committed to ensuring disability funding in our schools. These are the things that we are very, very clear on.

I know, because in Victoria it is school awards season, and I am sure parliamentarians across the country are in their schools giving out awards and being invited to graduation nights for grade 6s and year 12s. I know that what I am hearing in Victoria and what I am seeing on the ground is that, under a Napthine Liberal government, there is no transparency. Principals do not know where their Gonski money is. It is their first question. 'Joanne, where is the Gonski money?' they ask in Victoria, because they cannot see it.

Then we go to Queensland, and we show that, a week after the budget, analysis in Queensland showed that, over the period 2014-15 to 2024-25, there will be approximately $6 billion less funding available for Queensland schools under the new arrangement with the Abbott government. Approximately $2.7 billion less funding will be available for the Queensland government school sector. (Time expired)

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is there a seconder for the motion?

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always a pleasure to rise and speak in this House about school funding, because I can assure the member opposite that we firmly believe in funding our schools appropriately. It is interesting to note that, as the mover of this motion, she has not even stayed around to listen to this contribution, which may help educate those opposite somewhat on what is really happening in the school funding space.

Let us first of all clarify a few misconceptions. The money that the member opposite was talking about was never, ever anywhere budgeted for. It was never, ever budgeted for. Explain to your constituents that budgets operate on four-year cycles, and that is what the money is budgeted for. The reality of the fact is that this government has honoured the remaining three years of the funding commitments in the previous Labor government's budget, bringing it to a total of four years. So we have honoured our election commitments that we would match that funding commitment. What we have done is after that—and this shows the complete hypocrisy of those opposite, because they have never said where this extra money is going to come from; never, ever have they budgeted for that.

It is interesting to note that the ABC's Fact Check—not the greatest friend of the coalition government, I must admit—investigated these so-called cuts, and in their verdict they found that we have not cut $30 billion from schools in the May budget.

Honourable Member:

An honourable member interjecting—

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, they don't. The previous Labor government, as I said before, never, ever budgeted for years 5 and 6 of the Gonski funding. It does not appear in their budget papers anywhere. We never saw an explanation of how they were going to fund those supposed increases. It is as good as waving around a bunch of Monopoly money, because they never agreed that they would fund it.

In contrast, we have exceeded the commitment to maintain Commonwealth school funding for the next four years, from 2013-14 to 2017-18, with the record amount of $64.5 billion. This represents a 37.4 per cent increase to all schools from 2013-14 to 2017-18. Within that increase, there is $1.2 billion more than the previous Labor government had, because we had to reinstate funding to Western Australia, the Northern Territory and my home state of Queensland. Queensland will now receive the largest share of this $1.2 billion extra funding—some $794 million of additional funding—and this has been acknowledged by the Queensland government. I know from talking to the state schools in my electorate that have received the benefits from this that they are in the order of more than $3 million that they would never have got if the previous Labor government had been re-elected.

In total, Commonwealth funding to all schools in Queensland will increase by some 46.8 per cent through 2013-14 to 2017-18. If Queensland were left with the funding that Labor gave them, they would be worse off to the tune of $795 million. Unlike the previous Labor government, we have a plan for years 5 and 6, but there will be no cuts. The funding will continue to grow from 2018 by CPI in addition to student enrolment growth in our schools.

Long-term Commonwealth past and projected spending on all schools shows a continued increase. I would make those opposite aware of this graph, which does not show any cuts anywhere. It continues to grow and continues to increase.

In addition to that, it is not only about funding for our education system. Despite the fact that funding has increased each and every year since 2008-09, our PISA results continue to fall behind. The government are focused on doing what we need to do to ensure that we have a quality education system by putting students first, improving teacher quality, increasing school autonomy, engaging parents in education and strengthening the curriculum. Let us not pretend that the coalition government is not providing growth in education or putting students first. We are committed to making a real difference to students.

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am proud to participate in this debate about schools funding. I want to pick up something that the last speaker said before I go to my substantive contribution, and that is around this mythical $1.2 billion in new funding. I say 'mythical' because the Department of Education has confirmed that it is not new funding. It is existing funding reallocated. It is existing funding: $950 million cut from trade training centres and $450 million from a cut to outside-school-hours care. So all they have done is juggle figures within the Department of Education's budget to provide it. Yet again, it shows that the government are only interested in paying lip-service to fair funding for our schools.

The truth is that Gonski revolutionised the federal government's role in funding education. It provided fair funding for every school, equality for every student and targeted resources based on need, including loadings for small schools, remote schools, disadvantaged students, Indigenous students, students with limited English and students with disability. Schools in my electorate of Charlton would have massively benefited from this, partly because four of the six loadings are very common in Charlton and, might I say, very common in neighbouring electorates such as that of the member for Shortland. The truth is that, according to figures from expert sources, my electorate of Charlton would have received $73.5 million in additional funding between 2013 and 2019 because of the Gonski reforms. A few examples of that include: $4.3 million to Morisset High School, $4.8 million to Toronto High School, $2.4 million to Wallsend South Public School and $860,000 to Garden Suburb Public School. The local Catholic schools would also have massively benefited.

This is all gone because of this government's treachery and lies; all gone because this mean and tricky government said one thing before the election and has gone back on its word. You saw the then shadow minister for education say before the election:

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

absolutely untrue. The media release also said:

… your funding is certain. The Coalition will match Labor dollar-for-dollar over the next four years.

All completely untrue; all mendacious; all a betrayal of the Australian people. Do not just take my word for it—that is, the impact on my region will be massive; even the New South Wales coalition education minister acknowledges that. Adrian Piccoli said on 14 May:

Schools in regional areas, as well as disadvantaged and Aboriginal students, will be the hardest hit.

When the coalition state governments are criticising the federal government's cuts, you know they must be deep and hard. What is even worse is untying the funding. The member for Lalor talked about how, by not making it a condition that states maintain and increase their funding, all federal funding does is give an excuse for state governments to pull money back, and we saw this with the WA government pulling money out of its system. What is even worse is the Department of Education acknowledge they did absolutely no analysis of the impact on Australia's education system of this $30 billion of budget cuts that are contained in the budget papers.

This is a massive tragedy. This is a tragedy of epic proportions. We should be investing more in education, giving every student in this country the best start in life and giving funding to students based on their need and not on their postcode. This government are not doing that. Governing is all about choices: you can cut $30 billion from education but provide $63 billion over the next decade for a ridiculous paid parental leave scheme—a scheme that would give $50,000 to women in the seats of North Sydney and Warringah who have babies, whereas women in my seat of Charlton would be lucky to receive $20,000. They have got $63 billion for their paid parental leave boondoggle, but they cannot stump up the $30 billion to maintain their real commitment to Gonski.

When we look back at this period of history we will see the coalition has done a reverse Menzies. One of the key reasons Labor were unable to win elections in the fifties and the sixties was because we were mired in a petty sectarian struggle over federal funding for Catholic schools. We were on the wrong side of history. Well, I would submit that the current government are well and truly on the wrong side of history now because not only are they saying no to needs-based funding for schools they are also saying that the federal government's role in education funding should be limited to supporting wealthy private schools and not state schools or systemic Catholic schools. I am confident that this will be condemned by the public when they get the next opportunity. I am confident that the coalition and their mean and tricky cuts that prevent Gonski will put them well and truly on the wrong side of history, and I well and truly condemn them. I will stand up for the $73 million of extra funding for Charlton schools that would have occurred through a true commitment to Gonski funding.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is very disappointing to have to walk into this chamber and address this most appalling and misleading motion from the member for Lalor. All it does is perpetuate a complete hoax. It actually shows every reason why this Labor opposition are completely unfit to ever sit on the Treasury benches of this country again.

This motion refers to the 'biggest cuts'. Let us go through the facts and look at what is actually happening to school expenditure in this country: this year there is an 8.7 per cent increase; next year it is 8.9 per cent; the year after, it is another 8.9 per cent; and the year after that it is 6.6 per cent. If this government runs its three years, then in the last budget it will hand down it will be a 37.4 per cent increase—and this mob walk in here and claim that is a cut! We know that they have simply failed remedial maths at school: 37.4 per cent more money is going to spending on schools. And you know what? I come from a public school background in New South Wales; and for New South Wales public schools, it is even better. This year, the amount for New South Wales public schools is 10.2 per cent; the year after, 10.6 per cent; the year after that, another 14.4 per cent; and the year after that, 7.2 per cent. In fact, in the next four years, New South Wales non-government schools will get close to 50 per cent more in government funding. This government, in our last budget, will be giving 50 per cent more money to New South Wales public schools than this previous mob opposite did, and they come in here and have the hide to perpetuate this myth that there are somehow cuts to funding. It is simply an absolute hoax.

I had a discussion with someone from the teachers federation about this hoax. I said, 'Can you explain to me why this Gonski funding is back loaded in years 5 and 6? She scratched said and said she did not have a clue. But we know why it is. It is because our forward estimates period are in a four-year cycle. So if you put expenditures in years 5 and 6, you do not have to show where the money is coming from. And that is what this mob opposite have done—a complete hoax. They are perpetuating a hoax on the schools of Australia. They are perpetuating a hoax on the teachers and the parents and, worst of all, they are perpetuating a hoax on children of this country.

We know they believe in magic-pudding economics. But we have to ask: where will this so-called mythical $30 billion come from? I will tell you where it could have come from. If we had not have had the six years of reckless, wasteful and politically motivated spending from this mob opposite, we would not have that interest bill that we have to pay. If we go back six years, we never had to pay interest as a Commonwealth government. We were actually receiving $1 billion a year. But after six years of reckless and wasteful spending from this mob, we now have to find 13½ billion dollars every single year—that is, over $1 billion every month that we have to cut that could have otherwise gone to schools because of this mob's reckless spending, waste and the mismanagement of this country. And those opposite come back into this parliament and carry on about cuts to expenditure. What an absolute disgrace.

It is about time those opposite put our country first ahead of their own political interests and started talking about how we can do best with the limited funding we have. And remember, that limited funding for public schools in New South Wales will be 50 per cent more. We need to encourage our kids and tell them about the great future that they have in this country. We need to talking up those free-trade agreements that we have just signed with China and we have just signed with Korea and we have just signed with Japan. We should be talking to them about the opportunities they have from the growing economy of India. That is what we should talking about. We should be giving incentive to our kids. We should be having entrepreneurial studies as one of the most important things we do instead of this nonsense we have of sustainability—teaching them low growth. We can throw all of the money we want at schools but unless the kids have the motivation to study, that money is wasted. This is an appalling motion. It is an absolute hoax and it should be condemned.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to join with my colleagues, the member for Lalor and the member for Charlton today in calling on the Abbott Liberal government to do what they in fact promised to do before they were elected. In August last year the now Education Minister and Prime Minister has stood next to each other and pledged with hand on heart that you could vote for Liberal or Labor and you will get exactly the same amount of funding for your school. They declared they were on a unity ticket with Labor with education funding. On the eve of the election, we will remember well the Prime Minister again reassuring the Australian people that there would indeed be no cuts to education, to cuts health, no changes to pensions, no change to the GST and, the best of all, no cuts the ABC or SBS. That was the context. The statement was very clear: no cuts. There was no ambiguity then, but fast-forward 15 months and the reality could not be more different. The Prime Minister's word clearly counts for very little these days. So, contrary to the solemn commitments given prior to the election, the Abbott Liberal government has embarked on a series of savage cuts to education, health, pensions, the ABC and SBS, to name just a few, while also starving the states of funds to force changes to the GST. This is a government that says one thing to get elected and then does the exact opposite afterwards, crushing any faith the Australian people had in this government to keep its word.

This is a destructive path for any government—a path that has lasting consequences for democracy. This government's approach to education funding and to investing in our nation's future is especially destructive. Its $30 billion cut to school funding is the biggest ever cut to schools in our nation's history. In my electorate of Newcastle, it is estimated that the cuts will leave schools nearly $196 million worse off over the next decade. So much for the extra $4.4 million that Francis Greenway High School in Beresfield were counting on, or the extra $2.8 million that was going to help Thornton Public School. These schools, like all 65 schools in my local electorate, are now being asked to pay the price for this government's broken promises. No matter how the government attempts to dress it up, $30 billion is a massive cut to education, with lasting consequences for our children.

Make no mistake: all the evidence at hand highlights the need for governments to invest more, not less, in our schools. That is what Labor was doing in government and what the Abbott Liberal government said they were going to do before being elected. The Gonski review, conducted in 2011, was the most comprehensive review of our school funding system in 40 years. It identified the problems within the existing school funding model but also gave us the solutions. The Gonski findings were very clear: too many children were being denied the education they needed and deserved due to a lack of resources under the existing funding arrangements. Gonski recommended that an additional $5 billion a year was needed to ensure that every school had the resources it needed, with the vast majority of that funding going to public schools, where student need was highest. It recommended that the money be used to improve student learning through more individual attention in the classroom, specialised teachers, greater support for kids with disability or special needs, and additional training and classroom support for teachers.

A new national needs-based funding system for schools was created, and new six-year funding agreements with states and territories were negotiated. A key aspect of those agreements was that the states had to maintain and indeed increase their own funding above the rate of inflation. But, to the detriment of our education system, the Abbott government has torn up the Gonski model of needs-based funding, slashed funding to our schools by $30 million and let the states off scot-free. Our schools, school communities, teachers and students deserve better. Every child in Australia deserves the best start in life and access to high-quality education, not just those with big wallets. (Time expired)

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the motion moved by the member for Lalor, and I note that she is not even here anymore in the chamber. This is her commitment to her motion!

Can I just start with Gonski. We have this notion from across the chamber about Gonski and their commitment to Gonski. Gonski was the money we have in the budget at the moment plus an extra 17 per cent. So, whilst Labor want to talk about their commitment to Gonski, what they actually did when they were in government was give their version of what Gonski represented, which was about half of what Gonski was actually chasing. I think the Gonski report was a great document, but it seemed to me, from the bits and pieces I have read of the Gonski report, that the premise of the report was: if money were not an issue—if you did not have to worry about money—what would you do with education?

That is where Gonski came from. It was a great idea but it is one of those things where it would be different if money were not an issue, but money is an issue. No matter what you do, it comes back to money.

The member for Forde summed up our position on education. It comes down to an argument between the two sides of politics. The opposition wants to argue about the quantum of funds, whereas we would always argue that it is the quality of the placement of those funds that is important—getting the decision making closer to where it is needed, getting the decisions made close to the school and empowering school principals to make sure they have the responsibility and the right to attract the right teachers. It is about the quality of teachers and getting parents involved in their school communities. That is how you drive value for dollars.

We can continue to argue about where funds have gone, but, standing here with the member for Forde, in Queensland we are under no misapprehension about what happened to education funding at the last election. In the PEFO, just before the election, Labor took out $1.2 billion. There have been no cuts to education. What we said before the last election was that we were in lockstep with Labor over the forward estimates in relation to funding. Labor pulled that $1.2 billion but we have put it back into the system. In years five and six, Labor had no alternatives available to them because they could not afford to maintain funding. This comes down to the economy. According to Lisa Paul, the Secretary to the Commonwealth Department of Education, in the August 2013 Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, $1.2 billion was taken out not by us, not by Christopher Pyne or Tony Abbott, but by the previous government. That represented the money that those states had not signed up to in that time.

We have to make sure that education funding is sustainable. We have to make sure that we give kids every opportunity to participate in education. I was reading on the weekend remarks by Peter Walsh, the former ALP senator and finance minister in the Hawke and Keating governments. In his valedictory speech in 1993 he predicted that we would never pay off the debt that Paul Keating had left Australia. He said that the danger we had was that first a country loses its economic sovereignty, and if you lose your economic sovereignty you lose your political sovereignty. That was the danger that Peter Walsh saw in 1993. He said we could not pay back the debt that we had then—the $96 billion that Paul Keating handed over to John Howard. Of course the Hawke-Keating governments' reforms during the eighties had a fair bit to do with this, but through hard work and diligence and making sure that we understood the issues, with Peter Costello and John Howard empowering their ministers to make sure they lived within their means, we paid off that debt. On one side of politics we are delivering for education; on the other side of politics we have these pie in the sky issues—the same is the NDIS—which will be funded so far out that we are no longer responsible for it. (Time expired)

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.