Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth, Senator Evans. Given that schools are already struggling with rising power costs, can the minister explain how schools will meet additional costs from the government's carbon tax without the need to raise school fees or require increased assistance from state governments?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Nash for her question. This is very similar to a set of questions that were asked last week which sought to make the accusation that universities would close, that public hospitals would close and that there would be terrible wreckage throughout the economy. I make the point to the senator—through you, Mr President—that the funding arrangements for schools and other publicly supported areas of the economy have formulas which allow for responding to increases in the costs of those sectors. The way that is measured varies across sectors and different indexes are used. Clearly any extra costs that are imposed on schools would be compensated in adjustments that were made in their funding measures.

I point out that if Senator Nash and the opposition were genuinely interested in schools they would have supported our huge investment through the BER in every primary school in Australia. That is $16 billion of new facilities. It is interesting: there has been $16 billion of investment in every school in Australia, yet, despite opposing those things in this parliament, when they turn up at the openings there is no mention of their opposition.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Evans, I draw your attention to the question. You have 15 seconds left.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question, Mr President, referred to funding for schools. No government in the history of the Commonwealth has done more to fund schools in this country than this govern­ment—good investment in the future of our kids.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a supplementary question. Given that the minister does indeed know that my interest in education is entirely genuine, what guarantee can the minister provide to the Senate that schools, particularly those in regional Australia, will not be left behind should the states not meet increased costs with additional funding?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The senator's genuine interest in education does not defend her asking a really quite inane question that is part of a political argument to again try to scare Australians. The reality is, as I explained to the senator, that the indexation arrangements will provide for any increased costs that schools incur. If the National Party were really interested in the imposition of electricity costs on schools, they would have a chat to governments like the Western Australian state government, which has put electricity prices up by over 50 per cent in the last three years without one cent of compensation to anybody. So for the coalition to come into the parliament and say, 'We're really concerned about compensation for an approximately seven per cent increase in electricity,' means that quite frankly they have no credibility. It is a silly, political tactic. Interest in schools means supporting serious investment in schools, which is what this government has done.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a second supplementary question. I ask the minister: given that schools in remote Australia rely on air transport of goods, what will the minister do to address the concerns within the remote school community that the carbon tax will blow out costs because of the inevitable rise in aviation fuel?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Talk about a fear campaign on a fear campaign on a fear campaign. Now it is the cost of aviation fuel that might impact on goods to regional schools. Let's be serious. If you want to talk about investment in rural education, look at this government's massive investment. Look at the $500 million EIF round we have just opened for investment in rural and regional higher education—$500 million available to ensure that universities in regional Australia get support.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order on relevance. I specifically asked the minister about remote school communities that I have visited, and I would be interested to know whether the minister has as well. It is on relevance: I specifically asked about what he was going to do for those remote school communities.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has 28 seconds remaining.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we are doing is investing in every regional school and every remote school. They have all got BER funds to help them build extra classrooms, extra libraries, extra school halls—extra facilities. So the schools you are talking about, Senator Nash, all have a BER project that provided facilities. There has been $16 billion of funding and you want to talk about the price of aviation fuel? Get serious, because quite frankly you are not behaving very seriously now.