Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President, you can see the people on this side of the chamber are very passionate about ensuring that this chaplaincy program is continued and is funded without any interruption. That is our responsibility here today in this chamber, to pass this legislation. I know that the Greens, for instance, have had problems, and that they do not support the program. But the reality is that this program has been put in place and it has been funded in the forward estimates in the budget. So I am asking people to put the interests of these young people first and foremost.

Of 1,000 new schools, 65 per cent have applied for the services of a chaplain and 35 per cent for a student welfare officer. In fact in the last round of applications the program was oversubscribed by 30 percent. I would just like to share with the chamber a comment from the acting principal of the West Launceston Primary School in my home state of Tasmania, Bev Shadbolt—and I would have to say what a wonderful principal she has been over a long period of time. She said:

We are delighted to learn that our application to seek funding for the appointment of a Chaplain has been successful. In 2012 our school has identified the building of greater community connections as a school priority. We see the Chaplain as working with students, their families and with staff. He/she will be a wonderful conduit for building connections and enhancing relationships across the school community.

I think this appropriately reflects the importance of the scheme to our schools and our community in general.

The High Court determined that the funding agreement between the Commonwealth and Scripture Union Queensland for the provision of the National School Chaplaincy and Student Welfare Program and the payments by the Commonwealth to Scripture Union Queensland under that agreement were invalid. Therefore, the way that the funding was provided, and not the program, was invalid. I think it is very important to make that distinction.

I know that a lot of schools, parents and service providers in the community have been concerned about the future of this program, which is why the government has acted so swiftly to ensure the protection of this good program. The government has taken action which it believes is an appropriate response in the light of the reasons that the High Court found the agreements and payments under the program to be invalid. This means that payments that were due to some service providers by the end of this financial year can go ahead. That is why it is so terribly important that this piece of legislation is supported, and it is.

As I said before, I know that there has been opposition from the Greens in the past, but I sincerely hope that the strategies of those opposite of trying to be obstructionist—as they so often do when they come into this place—will not come to the fore here today. I would urge people in this chamber, before they vote, to consider the real value. There were changes, but we have to remember that this was a program that was introduced by the Howard government. It was then supported by the incoming Rudd and Gillard governments. There have been some modifications to it, which have reflected what has been requested by the community.

I draw people's attention to the necessity and urgency of supporting this piece of legislation, and I endorse the bill.

Debate adjourned.

Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for a later hour.