Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Collins very much for that extraordinary outburst! I think that is the first time I have heard the word 'fraud' used with regard to Gonski. That is absolutely extraordinary—no, it was the word 'corruption'; the corruption of the original Gonski report—when you consider that the report was presented by the Labor Party in its original proposal. What the coalition has presented in its school funding reform package is in fact the original Gonski proposal, the original Gonski measures and the original Gonski meaning, which was genuine needs-based funding—transparent, nationally consistent needs-based funding. Every school and every element of the Australian school system benefits from the coalition's school funding reform. It has overwhelming public support, yet those opposite clutch at straws, desperately searching for an opportunity to criticise the coalition, which, overwhelmingly, is being supported for its proposals.

The Turnbull government is introducing genuine needs-based funding. It will increase investment and it will give Australian students the quality education that they deserve. It is committing an additional $18.6 billion for Australian schools over the next decade, starting from 2018—an additional $18.6 billion. That $18.6 billion is distributed according to a model of fair, needs based, transparent funding tied to school reforms which are proven to boost students' results. This landmark Quality Schools reform package means Commonwealth funding for Australian schools will grow from a record $17.5 billion this year, 2017, to over $30.6 billion in 2027. More than $2.2 billion in new funding just in the next four years is included in this year's budget, and that follows on from an additional $1.2 billion in last year's budget.

The coalition's school funding model has the imprimatur of David Gonski himself, who is also preparing an updated report for the government on how best to spend the money to improve student performance and improve student results.

A child's education should never be dependent on any particular sector's lobbying abilities, yet under the previous government, the now opposition, there were 27 separate deals and special arrangements. The opposition did not have the political courage to deal with those particular lobbying groups, those particular sectors, and their demands.

This coalition government has the political will and the political courage, and it has the imprimatur of David Gonski himself—and not just David Gonski but other members of the Gonski panel. Ken Boston was a Gonski review panellist, but he is also a very strong supporter of public education and is a former head of the New South Wales education department. Ken Boston said:

Five years after the release and subsequent emasculation—

they were his words—

of the Gonski Report, Australia has a rare second chance …

There are no grounds for opposition to the schools funding bill in principle, and every reason to work collaboratively towards its successful implementation and further refinement in the years ahead.

He also said it would be a 'tragedy' if the government's bill is voted down. In fact another former panellist, Kathryn Greiner, said it would be a disaster if the current model remained in place.

A child's education, as I have said, should never be dependent on a sector's lobbying ability. It is imperative now that we grab the opportunity to implement the true Gonski reforms—fair, needs based funding—with both hands. I urge the opposition to reconsider its recalcitrance and embrace those reforms, if for no other reason than on the grounds of equity.