Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

That final contribution is probably where I'd like to start. I rise to support Senator Urquhart's motion before the Senate.

Senator Ruston interjecting—

Senator Ruston, your factional boss, the Honourable Christopher Pyne, said on 21 August 2013 that 'every single school in Australia will receive, dollar for dollar, the same federal funding over the next four years whether there is a Liberal government or a Labor government after 7 September'. It is straightforward: to get elected, particularly in South Australia, he promised exactly the same funding into the future which you're now running away from. Let's look at other contributions from South Australia. On 21 September 2016 former senator Nick Xenophon said: 'Together with my colleagues Senator Stirling Griff, Senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore and Rebekha Sharkie MP, we stand by the full implementation and full funding of Gonski. In particular, we support the current system of indexation and we'll oppose any move to change it.' So, two of the contributors in this debate in South Australia appear to have walked away from their electoral promises and commitments.

But what does all that really mean? Prior to 2011, I wouldn't have been able to contribute in this debate. But as a senator since then I have visited a number of schools, particularly in the electorate of Grey—Roxby Downs, Port Pirie, Coober Pedy, Andamooka, the Pitjantjatjara Lands, Ellerston, Cummins, Port Lincoln, Ceduna and Port Augusta West. Port Augusta West is one of the most disadvantaged schools in the state. Extremely good work is done by those teachers and principals. They are really delivering, and they are combatting some of the extreme examples of disadvantage in our society. Those are the places that are going to get cut. Those are the places that are not going to get the additional funding promised. And it's scandalous. It really is. The total electorate of Giles would suffer diminished funding of $5 million.

What did the kids at the Amata Anangu School in the APY Lands do to deserve lesser facilities, lesser training and lesser services to get them into a functioning economy or to literacy of a high standard? What about the kids in the Andamooka Primary School, the Coober Pedy Area Primary School, the Cowell Area School, the John Ayers School and the Ernabella Anangu School? These are real schools which are combatting rural disadvantage. In the APY Lands we have really significant challenges which we need to address. I think those on the other side understand that, but they made this razor gang decision to cut back on the education spend and put in place a smaller increase. They're putting in place a small increase. They are not going to take on the real challenges that we face. They're not going to fund the real challenges we face in some of these areas. I could go shallow political partisan and say Prince Alfred College, St Peters and Rostrevor, where all their kids go to school, are okay because they charge $25,000 or $30,000 in school fees. But there is real work to do in the public education system. There is real work to do to get kids, particularly those from Indigenous and disadvantaged rural areas, to a higher degree of literacy so that they can get into the economy and contribute. That's what closing the gap is all about.

In the area of Giles, five and a bit million dollars will be ripped off schools that, in a lot of cases, are dealing with people of real disadvantage. In the electorate of Newland it is $4.2 million. What did the parents and students in that area do to get diminished capacity to get educated and fulfil jobs in the new economies that are coming? In the electorate of Torrens it is $2.1 million. There is more again if you go over the page and look at the electorate of Lee, which is $3 million. Grange Primary School, Hendon Primary School, Seaton High School, Seaton Park Primary School, West Lakes Shore School and Westport Primary School—why did these people have to suffer diminished funding and, therefore, diminished opportunity to participate in an education system delivering for the 21st century?

Let's walk over the road and have a look at the other great institution in education in Australia: the Catholic education system. It's probably not well known, but the first building they built in Australia was a school. They knew what got people into the economy: education. They are absolutely incensed at what this government is doing. They have threatened to campaign against the Treasurer himself if he doesn't restore the parity funding that they were promised. These people are not particularly political in their contributions, but they are very vehement about delivering in their education system. I have visited a number of higher education and primary schools run by the Catholic education people and I've got to say that they are a startlingly good example of what can be achieved. They are not happy with this model. Catholics are warning MPs on school funding. They've said:

The National Catholic Education Commission has warned Coalition MPs they will be targeted if the government doesn't use the 2018 budget to reverse a '$1.1 billion …

I don't think that's an idle threat. I don't think that they come to the argument without really good credentials. You only have to spend a modest amount of time at a Catholic school anywhere in your state or territory to know that these people are committed, that those schools are well run, that those schools are thrifty and that they do educate some of the most disadvantaged people in the community to a very high standard.

So it can't be just: 'The Labor Party are making it up. The Labor Party have been there too long.' All of the concerns coming out are from the true practitioners and stakeholders in the education sector. Senator Birmingham and Senator Ruston have been given the argument: 'We're increasing funding. We're not funding it the same as the full Gonski. Go out there and sell it.' They're doing what their superiors in cabinet tell them to do, but it's not washing.

One of the real great honours that I have is to travel around the electorate of Grey. Having done that for nearly seven years now, I have sorted out a couple of things here and there. People talk quite genuinely and openly about the challenges they face. The challenges they face, particularly with kids from disadvantaged regional parts of South Australia, are immense. There are areas of excellence where people are achieving really good outcomes—and Port Augusta West Primary School is one of those areas. Despite the challenges they face, they are doing really well. Another area is Ceduna. There has been great debate here in this chamber about whether the cashless welfare card is a success or not. We know that school attendance is up in those areas. We also know that, if the kids can get to school and get a reasonable start in their educational life, there's a much greater chance that they will participate genuinely in the workforce.

The Liberals in South Australia have said—it's part of their corflute material and all the rest of it—'We will match Labor dollar for dollar.' It's just that they haven't fulfilled that commitment. The Hon. Christopher Pyne, a consummate politician, has been able to articulate many positions over his very long career. I suppose he'll probably go on for another 10 years shifting shape, shifting positions and managing to weather the respective storms. But I think it is really low of the coalition to say that the ALP in South Australia, the Catholic education system nationally, the Australian Education Union and others are all wrong—that we're actually doing better than what was promised—because it's clearly not the case. The facts are not shared.

Senator Ruston mentioned the TAFE system. I suppose, if you're going to throw an egg, you might as well get one that's rotten and see what you can do! But what was the contribution that Senator Birmingham gave to former Senator Day? It was a $2 million grant without a lot of strings attached—very few strings attached—to train probably about 20 people. When it suited them to do accommodations in here, there seemed to be largesse that was exercised in that particular area. It's a matter of public record that the $2 million grant was given with minimum strings attached and minimum scrutiny, and we're still waiting to see what the outcome of that investment was.

We know that Peter Vaughan, the former CEO of Business SA, chaired the TAFE SA organisation. What I know from talking to people who are actually in that sort of industry is that the failings were more in governance and Australian standard qualitative assessments rather than failure of delivery of professional courses. It's just that there is a whole series of ticks, checks and balances in the qualitative assessment of those courses which may or may not have been followed—we'll soon find out, I suppose. So they are throwing a few red herrings being thrown here and there.

I totally refute the allegation that Premier Weatherill doesn't care about regional South Australia. I have spent a reasonable amount of time there; when we're not in Canberra, I make a point of visiting regional South Australia. He has ministers out there working in this sector, and they are visible. They do make decisions and, from the feedback I get, whilst no-one gets everything they want, things are on the improve. There have been problems in all sectors of the country, I think, in the running of these very ambitious education programs. But to say that he doesn't care about it and there are no votes in it is totally wrong. We hold the electorate of Giles. It is a Labor seat. We have upper house members of the South Australian parliament who get a vote from regional areas.

The South Australia Liberal Party's problem is that it can't win enough seats to find its way into government. You've got a leader over there, Mr Steven Marshall, who at the last election, in front of the TV cameras, exhorted everybody to vote Labor. 'I think a vote for Labor would be in order here'—those were his words, or thereabouts. You've got a hopeless leader. You've got a duplicitous situation about funding. You've got the Hon. Christopher Pyne saying: 'We'll match Labor dollar for dollar. It makes no difference whether it's a Liberal government or a Labor government—this is going forward.' That's what on his corflute; that's what his DL has said. But, when the Liberals got into government, he had to quickly back down. They had to do their razor gang cuts, pull back the estimates and send their people out to sell another argument. It's truly disgraceful.

But, as Senator Ruston said, on 17 March there'll be a choice. People will make that choice. The Labor Party is confident that its position in respect of education is superior. It's superior for this reason: we're on the side of the angels. We're on the side of the people who need a leg-up in the economy. We're not on the side of Prince Alfred College, St Peters and all of those privileged areas where all of the landed gentry and the Liberals go to school. We're on the side of people who go to the Amata Anangu School and the Ernabella Anangu School. We're on the side of those who need to get greater resources into these schools so they can get the education they truly deserve as Australians and go in, compete and get jobs in the economy. That's why we'll be successful; that's why our funding is necessary. Those on the other side would do very well to look at what they promised and assess it against what they delivered. Don't come into the chamber, implying this side of the chamber is playing untruthfully or without— (Time expired)

Question agreed to.