Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A letter has been received from Senator Fifield proposing that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

The Gillard Government's missed opportunity for real school education reform.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today's debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought this matter of public importance should start out on a generous note. I believe the government, particularly the Prime Minister, is concerned about the quality of education for Australian schoolchildren. Last year, I listened to the Prime Minister's address to the National Press Club and she spoke about the transformative power of education. She was passionate and she was sincere. All that you can take as given. But my initial enthusiasm for the Prime Minister's speech—some might even say my joy for the speech—was somewhat mixed with a certain trepidation. How, I thought, are improved learning outcomes going to be achieved? How are they going to be implemented? And also, how much is it all going to cost? Listening to the National Press Club address by the Prime Minister, I had to swallow—and I swallowed very hard—and I thought, 'Oh no, here goes the Labor Party, yet again.'

What is it about the centre-left agenda ever since World War II, whether it be in health, welfare or education—I could add telecommunications but I am generous this afternoon, so we will not go there—that somehow the policy response has always got to be to spend more money, to throw taxpayers' money away at a problem. Haven't we learnt since World War II that in health and welfare—particularly in Indigenous welfare—and now in education that throwing around money is not always the answer—it is just an easy policy prescription. Labor always suffers from a sort of optimistic belief that if we just spend a little bit more, just a few more billion dollars, we will finally get there. Finally, student learning outcomes in this country will get better, if we just spend a little bit more.

You will recall the Building the Education Revolution school halls. We spent $16,000 million on school halls, and what happened to learning outcomes? They went down. We spent $16 billion and learning outcomes went down. Then the government's contribution to laptop computers was a cool $2 billion. What happened to learning outcomes? They got worse. Now we have the Gonski proposals: a National Plan for School Improvement premised on Mr Gonski's report. A sum of $6 ½ billion per annum is the cost of this one. We are told by the Labor Party: 'This time trust us. If we just spend it, it will be okay. This time we will get it right. This time learning outcomes will improve.'

The director of the Grattan Institute's School Education Program, Ben Jensen, recently said that the government's Gonski funding model:

… retells the same old, and failed, story of Australian education: that the only way to fix our schools is to spend more money and to change the way it is divided between schools and students.

Mr Jensen noted that in the past decade—this is terribly important—education spending has increased by nearly three times as much as the proposed Gonski increases, yet Australia is just one of four OECD countries where 15-year-olds went backwards according to international testing results between 2000 and 2009. It worries me to death that the government has spent $16 billion on school halls, $2 billion on laptop computers and yet, when the last round of international testing was done in December of last year, it showed that a quarter of year 4 students in literacy and a third of year 4 and year 8 students in maths and science performed below minimally acceptable international standards. That is not good enough. We have thrown a fortune in this country at the problem and now we are going to throw another $6½ billion dollars a year at it, and apparently that will be enough. Finally, we will get it right. The money will be worth it. That is Labor's argument. I do not think that it is enough and it will not do the job, and I am very worried about.

Finally, I will concede that the Minister for Education, Mr Garrett, finally seems to understand that teacher quality is important. The shadow minister for education, Mr Pyne has been talking about this for some time now, and Mr Garrett is now talking about it too. Mr Garrett did say that the government would look at improving teacher quality—and Senator Kim Carr has mentioned this in question time as well—and he did say that there would be more rigorous and targeted admissions into university courses and a national approach to teacher practicum. I accept that these goals are welcome—it has taken a long time to get this far but they are welcome—but still there is no implementation plan, and again the devil is in the detail. We have had plenty of plans in the past from this lot, but no improved outcomes; that is the problem.

While the Gonski report recommends a range of proposals to give school leaders and their communities the ability to more flexibly provide for the needs of students—including more power for the principals to hire staff and control budgets—what does any of that mean? After all this Labor still has no agenda and there is still no way of getting there. What conclusive evidence do we have of the government's plans for educational reform? Well, we do have something. We have a bill. It is nine pages long and is about 1,400 words in length. It is called the Australian Education Bill 2012. I like this bill; it is my sort of bill. It is very short and very sweet. It reads like a UN declaration. I will quote from section 3, the objects of the act. It says, 'The objects of this act are for Australian schooling to provide an excellent education for school students and for Australian schooling to be highly equitable.' Well, yeah. It also says in the preamble, 'The quality of education should not be limited by a school's location, particularly those schools in regional Australia.' Yeah. I agree with all that. It also says, 'It is essential that Australian schooling be of a high quality.' Yeah, I agree with that. It is essential for Australian schooling to 'be highly equitable in order to create a highly skilled and successful workforce, strengthen the economy, and increase productivity, leading to greater prosperity for all'. I agree with that too. That is great. It goes on and on. Section 7—reform directions for the national plan—says:

Australian schooling will provide a high quality educational experience …

This is just a motherhood statement. It reads like one of those appalling Nigerian-sponsored human rights documents the Cubans, Nicaraguans and El Salvadorans used to put out.

This is where we are. This bill is a legislative enactment. This is what the government's reforms thus far have come to: this flimsy nine-page document and 1,400 words—all rhetoric, worse even than my contributions to the Senate! What is even worse is section 10 of the bill. I have never come across this in more than a dozen years in the Senate: 'The act does not create legally enforceable obligations'. That is the heading. Subsection 1 reads:

This Act does not create rights or duties that are legally enforceable in judicial or other proceedings.

So let me get this right. We have a bill before this parliament that does not create rights or duties. Oh. I am not a very good lawyer, but I have never come across a bill that states that it does not create rights or duties. If it does not, what is the point of it? Why do we sit here debating very poorly written rhetoric? This is not Abraham Lincoln.

In the end, we have a government that has spent an absolute fortune on education and results keep getting worse. The problem with this government since it started has been that it cannot implement anything. There is a litany of failure in that direction. But it comes to one thing that the Labor Party has never got over: they can spend money all right but have never been able to spend it well and get value. That is their failure. (Time expired)

Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no doubt that the Labor government is now teetering on the brink of missing a once-in-a-generation chance of real school education reform of what is a broken funding model.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But before I address this in more detail I do want to speak briefly about the breathtaking hypocrisy of the coalition on this issue—you will be happy to hear about that, Senator Mason!

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You started so well!

Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Frankly, I find it puzzling as to why the coalition would be indulging in such faux outrage about the government missing opportunities for school reform when their own shadow education minister, Christopher Pyne, is continually saying that there is no need for school reform. It was just two weeks ago that Mr Pyne argued that Australia already has a world-class education system for all students regardless of location, income and school selection. So Mr Pyne must be either ignorant or in denial about the state of public education in Australia to be able to make such a demonstrably false claim with a straight face. Mr Pyne says that the current Australian schools funding system is not broken, but numerous studies, including many of those cited by the comprehensive Gonski review of funding for schools, which marshals national and international evidence, have shown wealth and background are the best indicators of educational achievement in Australia in 2013. So how can Mr Pyne possibly call that a satisfactory system?

The claim that there is no inequality in our schools in the face of all the evidence is extreme, dangerous and wrong. On one hand we have the coalition shadow minister saying there is no need for reform, which is simply false, and on the other Liberal Party senators today decrying a lack of action on school reform—a total inconsistency. The double standards here are staggering. Indeed, the coalition is so unconcerned about real school education reform that they have actually proposed to continue the current model, which is leaving so many students in disadvantage every year, for a further two years at least.

However, the Australian Greens are undoubtedly concerned and are clearly on the record about the sluggishness of the Gillard government in acting on the Gonski school funding recommendations. The Gonski review is a watershed document which represents the most comprehensive review of Australian schools in two generations, but we have been waiting for action on Gonski for over a year now, and the government is leaving its run perilously late. So far the Labor government has done little more than spruik a set of aspirations. They have been busy selling the need for school funding reform, but there has been little more than talk about how we are going to give every student the start in life that they need. Unfortunately, the inaction on the recommendations from this review is now seriously risking the chance of real reform in the life of this parliament. It is risking a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fix chronic underfunding of public schools.

The Gillard government's management of the Gonski review recommendations has been alarming. Yes, this is complex law reform. It does require a dexterity of handling and careful, respectful negotiations with state and territory governments because we need all levels of government to work cooperatively and collaboratively in the best interests of Australia's students to make sure that we end up with a world-class, equitable school funding system.

The negotiations have also required a serious commitment of serious money. Gonski, as we know, recommended $5 billion per year investment in school funding. In today's terms that is closer to $6.5 billion. It is a serious commitment, so we needed to see a Prime Minister who was embarking on a crusade for better education, determined to make the strong decisions necessary to fund this serious commitment. Instead, since February last year we have seen mismanagement that has alienated state governments and put at risk the biggest chance Australia has had in decades to fix a failed school funding scheme and to make an investment in our children, in our future. Rather than working together with the states, momentum for these crucial reforms has been lost as, one by one, state education ministers have come out after being continually kept in the dark on funding contributions. Many now are threatening to pull out, as we have heard in the past few weeks. There is no room for losing this opportunity. We must be acting cooperatively and responsibly in the greater national interest. There is nothing more important in a country than educating the citizens of the future. Our wellbeing, our social cohesion and our productivity rely on it.

The Gonski review clearly indicates the areas in which Australia's schooling regime is failing, pointing to declining levels of achievement internationally and the pronounced inequity which is a characteristic of our system in 2013. There is now a staggering gap of up to three years in performance between the most advantaged and disadvantaged children in Australia in year 9. This is not related to their inherent ability; it is related to the opportunities they have when they walk through the doors of the school they attend. We simply cannot ignore this. This is not something we can put off to a later date.

Other indications of disadvantage include a growing body of evidence that the composition of a school's population has a significant impact on the outcomes achieved by all students at the school so that concentrations of disadvantage accentuate underperformance, even for those children from a more advantaged background. There is evidence that schools with high concentrations of disadvantaged students tend to have fewer material and social resources, more behavioural problems, fewer experienced teachers, lower student and family aspirations, fewer positive relationships between teachers and students, less homework and a less rigorous curriculum. Has Mr Pyne been visiting these schools? Over 80 per cent of students who did not reach the level required for proficiency to participate in society in reading and mathematics are in government schools. In relation to reading literacy, the gap between students from the highest and lowest economic, social and cultural status quartiles was approximately three years of schooling. The average performance of Australian students from the lowest quartile is significantly lower than the OECD average.

Of the little detail we have heard from the Gillard government, any funding to fix our schools will be well short of the $6.5 billion cash injection the Gonski review showed we needed to start helping these children. The Gillard government's plan to back-end the lion's share of the funding until 2019 is just not good enough, particularly for those disadvantaged students. Whole cohorts will finish primary school or high school before this government will begin fixing the problems we know are there.

The Australian Greens are not just here to lament the government's handling of the matter so far, or even the parlous state of this debate today. We have a solution for how we can get on with Gonski without any delay, and we must not miss this opportunity. Real school funding reform would see a system where differences in educational outcomes are not the result of differences in wealth, income, power or possessions. Opposition leader Tony Abbott's and shadow spokesperson Chris Pyne's coalition do not believe these reforms are needed, despite all evidence to the contrary. The Labor government may believe in the need, but has so far failed to provide a detailed, funded plan for reform.

The Gonski review has shown that the current school funding model is broken and is failing our most disadvantaged students, but it has also shown us how to fix this. We need the money and the political will, and we need them right now. We need to move beyond political games at every level of government. We need to consider what is best for Australian children and for the future of our country in an increasingly globalised 21st century market. The Australian Greens have been saying consistently that standing up to big business, standing up to the mining companies and plugging the holes in the mining tax would raise significant amounts of money—billions over the forward estimates; enough to fully fund the Gonski reforms. So far the Australian Greens is the only party prepared to stand up the big mining companies to find the money we need to give our children a world-class education. We will all benefit from that; not just the haves but also the whole society. Failing our citizens of the future will impoverish us all.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to this matter of public importance on education reform. I wish that Senator Wright would heed her own advice in this respect and move beyond playing political games, because that contribution by Senator Wright did exactly that: it attacked the government for what it wanted to do and it attacked everybody for wanting to do something and putting in place significant reforms. Somehow, it said that only the Greens political party would be able to do that, yet we have seen no evidence and no demonstration of any serious commitment. I commend Senator Wright personally—I know she is very committed at a personal level to public education in this country—but she ought to come into this place to have a serious debate about these matters and not play the political games which she accuses other people of playing.

Education is the key to innovation and enterprise. It is the foundation of our present prosperity and it is the foundation for our future prosperity as a nation. That is why this government is so committed to education. That is why this government initiated a serious reform and review of the funding process called the Gonski review. It is something this government initiated because we knew that the system in its present form is not delivering the funding to where the education needs of our Australian community are. It is the most comprehensive reform with the most comprehensive set of recommendations that has ever been undertaken in education in this country. It is a difficult process, one that has to be worked through. Senator Wright is not here to hear this, but it has to be worked through with state governments and other stakeholders. There is a lot at stake. The future of the education system in this country is at stake. Those negotiations are happening—they are continuing—and this government is committed to getting an outcome and bringing all participants and all stakeholders with them.

This financial year the Labor government will invest $13.6 billion in our schools. I know it was a little while ago, but compare this with the last year of the Howard government, in which $8.5 billion was spent. This is a significant investment by the Gillard government. It comes on top of record amounts invested in the first four years of the present government—over $65 billion in schools and around $22 billion for early childhood measures by the end of 2015-16.

It is why we are driving reform in respect of the national curriculum. It is why we are driving reform in terms of transparency. It is why we are driving reform to assist those who I think are very professional teachers to become even better equipped for the challenges of classroom teaching in this country. We have in this country a world-class education system but it can be better, and that is why this government has set a goal of being in the top five international education systems in the world. We are confident that we will achieve those goals, given the amount of spending, the amount of reforms, the amount of professional development and the amount of assistance we are going to give our educators in achieving those goals.

We have delivered the most significant education improvements in living memory. They are based on Labor's values of fairness, equality, accountability and transparency. Thanks to this government every Australian student will have access to a great education, no matter where they live or the school that they attend. This is something that has been lacking in this country for too long; we must move to the areas where the need is most. We need to ensure that the low-performing tail in this country—which is too large—is brought up, and close the gap between the lowest-performing students and the highest-performing students. Unfortunately, a lot of that is based on where you live—on your postcode. We want to ensure that every Australian child—regardless of their background, or how privileged their upbringing may have been or how educated their parents may be—has the ability to fulfil their education abilities.

One of the great hallmarks of this government—I think one of the great legacies that will be remembered for generations to come—is the Building the Education Revolution, particularly during the global financial crisis. When it came time for the Australian government to invest back into our economy to support jobs we chose, as one of our watershed expenditures, to support jobs and to support the economy—and only a Labor government would do this—building and rebuilding schools in this country. We invested more than $16 billion across nearly 10,000 primary schools, rebuilding classrooms, building school halls, upgrading facilities, building science labs, and libraries—facilities that had been neglected—and we did that in every primary school across the country and in many secondary schools too. The Catholic education system regularly said to me, when I was involved in the opening of those facilities, that this was a once-in-a generation opportunity for them. The plans that we were able to put in place to build those facilities were things that they would never have been able to do over the next 20 or so years. It will be a long, important and lasting legacy.

But, of course, our reforms have not been simply about building facilities. They have been about assisting teachers to deliver better programs and more targeted programs to get better educational outcomes for our kids. Our parents and school communities now have more information about schools than ever before through the MySchool website. Schools and students are benefitting from the $2.5 billion we are spending in the Smarter Schools National Partnerships, helping to improve literacy and numeracy, to boost teacher quality and to provide extra support to low-SES schools. We have invested an additional $243.9 million in improving literacy and numeracy in a new national partnership to build on the successes of the Improving Literacy and Numeracy National Partnership. We are investing $2.1 billion in the Digital Education Revolution, which has delivered more than 967,000 computers—one for every student in years 9 to 12—tools of the 21st century.

Australia now has the first ever national curriculum from foundation to year 12, starting with English, maths, history and science from foundation to year 10 and $2.5 billion is being invested by this government in trade training centres, giving high school students access to industry-standard training which is helping them to complete school and to get a job.

We have committed an extra $200 million to help students with disabilities to get the best education possible. One thing we do know for sure is that if people with disabilities get a good, adequate and proper education—and that is what they deserve—then their employment prospects and their future prosperity is underpinned by those things. We are investing in that, and we have been investing in it.

We are rolling out the first phase of the Empowering Local Schools initiative to 926 schools across the country, giving principals more local decision-making powers over things like staffing and budgets. We as a government—as a Labor government—are delivering an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan to states, territories and non-government schools. We have invested $128.6 million to help boost school attendance, literacy and numeracy skills, strengthen the education workforce and provide extra resources to schools that are in most need of help. These are the things that the Labor government is doing.

Indigenous students in the Northern Territory will benefit from the $583 million Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory national partnership, which will focus on attracting high-quality teachers to Northern Territory schools, introduce a new Improving School Enrolment and Attendance scheme and provide funding for a School Nutrition Program so that children are getting access to healthy meals.

We are spending more than $706 million over four years investing in the National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions to help more young people stay in school and successfully transition to work or further education. We, as a Labor government, introduced the first ever national certification process for highly accomplished and lead teachers based on the first ever set of nationally agreed professional teaching standards. And while we are on teaching, let me just say that I think Australia has a fine professional and excellent teaching profession in this country. We want to help make that even better and improve the learning outcomes for all our children.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

May I firstly applaud the tone of Senator Marshall's address, given that Senator Wright before him commented and deliberated on the parlous state of the debate on this particular matter of public importance. I thought that was quite a striking observation to make during her own speech. But I will leave it for others to make their own judgement on that.

I would also like to share one thing with the comments that Senator Marshall just made and that is that, without question, education is the key to unlocking the potential of our young people for decades to come. There is no question about that. I think we would all support the fact that it is the key to unlocking the potential of our young. But what I do not support—and I have been listening for probably a good three or four minutes—and where I fundamentally disagree with Senator Marshall and the government is that you do not achieve that by throwing a bucket of money at it. You actually have to see an outcome for what you are doing and then ensure that that money is invested wisely so that it does genuinely unlock the potential of young Australians.

The current Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, was the Minister for Education under former Prime Minister Rudd. Since she became Prime Minister she has not been particularly consistent in public policy in too many areas. But the one area I will commend her on, the one area where she has been consistent, has been her rhetoric—screaming and shouting, if you like, from the rafters—about her commitment to education. It is all rhetoric; it is all spin. But she has certainly been consistent in the way she has continued to pursue this. In fact, when Julia Gillard became Prime Minister she referred to herself as, and assured the Australian public that she would be—and I quote—the 'Prime Minister of education'. Those were her words.

What extraordinary hubris, these meaningless words. But what is more tragic is the way in which she has continued to fail Australia's children and our leaders of the future. Since 2007 she has been decrying the neglect of the education sector and the lack of appropriate resourcing, and all we have seen is a continued denigration of students' standards across the board. Not surprisingly, for more than five years we have seen a demonstration that the Labor government, as I said earlier, has a total lack of understanding—that you do not throw a bucket of money at something to come up with the right solution. There has to be a clearly crafted framework to advance the education standards that we have here in Australia.

One of the initial claims of the Prime Minister when she was education minister was that every student would have a computer on their desk. Then she massaged that message and it was changed to 'Every child from year 9 onwards would have a computer on their desk.' In the last few months we have seen not only that that is not the case but also there is no more money to ensure that every child does have a laptop on their desk.

This is a consistency of approach that we are seeing time and time again not just in education but also in other areas. I think it is incredibly tragic for those in the education area. As Senator Marshall and Senator Mason before him pointed out, $16.6 billion was spent in building school hall monuments to Prime Minister Gillard. To my mind, there could not be a greater example of money wasted in terms of investing in the education sector and, essentially, the opportunity that has been lost by that money being directed in that way instead of being spent in far more effective ways.

Senator Thistlethwaite interjecting—

Senator Thorp interjecting—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I remind senators on the right that Senator Kroger has the right to be heard in silence.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. The truth hurts. The fact of the matter is you only have to read the Auditor-General's report on the Building the Education Revolution—

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I remind senators on my right that, under standing order 197, senators will not be interrupted except on a matter of order or to call a quorum.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. As I said, the truth hurts. You only have to go to that review, that independent audit, and you will see it specifies that value for money was never a consideration. Value for money was never a consideration. I also attended the report and the input into that. Senator Thorp, you can try to change the facts as much as you like, but you just have to read the report—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Kroger, you will address your remarks through the chair.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. As a Victorian senator I particularly raise the fact that, last year, figures were released that showed that many schools, including government schools, would be worse off under the government's plan. In one of my patron seats, Deakin, there are no fewer than eight schools that will be worse off. In Chisholm, there will be 15 schools that will lose money.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That was values of modelling.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And the government's repeated claims that no students would be worse off just do not hold water, Senator Collins. And, as a Victorian senator, all Victorian senators should be—

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, I remind you that, under standing order 197—

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She invited me.

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators have the right to be heard in silence and they will not interrupted except on a matter of order or to call attention to a quorum.

Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a tragedy that not all Victorian senators are looking after their constituents. The Catholic education sector, in particular, has valid concerns about the funding they will receive under the government's model and the likelihood that funding cuts will force an increase in school fees, which parents simply cannot afford. Clearly I am one of the few Victorian senators who listen to principals in the state of Victoria. The principal of Aquinas College in Ringwood, Mr Tony O'Byrne, recently wrote to the parents of that school, and I will very briefly read out a chunk of what he has written. He wrote:

It is important that politicians from all political parties understand the requirement that Catholic education continue to be funded at least at its current level plus any indexation for rising costs. Parents will be well aware that currently Catholic schools operate on approximately 90 per cent of the financial resources that are available to government schools and it is clear in negotiations that the government is seeking to discount what might be available to Catholic schools.

Matt Thistlethwaite (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak on this motion which has no basis whatsoever in fact—another wonderful example from the Orwellian group of motion writing within the Liberal Party. I visit many schools throughout New South Wales—it is one of the great pleasures that you have as a senator—and I find that you can always tell a good school about 10 minutes after you walk into one. Some of our schools are struggling, particularly some of those public schools in rural and regional areas. That is reflected in the objective international comparison of performance of our students. The Programme for International Student Assessment is based on an annual testing which looks at the rankings of educational systems within the world. Australia has been declining relative to other countries in terms of our international rankings. That decline began under the Howard government, under the previous Liberal government. In 2003, Australia ranked fourth when it came to reading literacy and we ranked eighth when it came to mathematics. In 2006, in reading literacy we had dropped to seventh place, and we had dropped out of the top 10 when it came to mathematics. In 2009, the decline continued. We fell to ninth when it came to reading literacy and 15th when it came to mathematics.

We have a problem in our education system, and the problem is declining standards. Objectively, that is the issue we have to deal with as a nation. Why is it that we are declining? All of the studies show us that other nations are investing more in education, more per income in education. We need to heed those results, particularly what many of our Asian competitors are doing when it comes to funding education. There is a need for reform and Labor is delivering that reform. We have invested $243 million in improving national literacy and numeracy through partnerships with the state governments. We have introduced a national curriculum so that we have a set of standards across Australia to assess the performance of our students. We have invested $2.5 billion in Smarter Schools National Partnerships. We introduced the My School website to ensure that parents had objective information about schools in their local areas and, importantly, that the government had information regarding the performance of schools and which areas needed additional funding. We have introduced computers into schools—950,000 throughout Australia, and national partnerships for improving teacher quality.

But, most importantly, on the issue of funding and addressing this problem of declining standards, we consulted with the experts. We set up an enquiry chaired by Professor Gonski, to have a look at these issues. It included the likes of educational expert, Ken Boston, and Kathryn Greiner. They went around the country talking to principals, experts, academics, teachers and parents, working out the best way to improve results in educational standards in our country. They came up with a report. It is commonly referred to as the Gonski recommendations.

What are we to do as the government? Are we to ignore those recommendations; ignore all that work that has been undertaken by the experts and which international comparisons tell us is the basis of Australia's failing performance? We would be a government that is ignorant if we failed to heed those recommendations, but that is what the opposition expects us to do. The government is developing a new funding model so that no school will lose one cent of funding and we will see better results throughout the country. That includes base funding with loadings for disadvantage, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, for disability and for low socioeconomic areas. We are delivering this plan. We have a plan to improve results, to stop the rot that began under the Howard government.

But the opposition are doing what conservative governments do. They do not want the system to change. The opposition education spokesman, Mr Christopher Pyne, has said that the current system is adequate. They keep saying that we are throwing money at the problem. But their argument is deficient because, if money were not the issue, why do parents pay a lot, particularly those who send their kids to private selective schools? Why do they pay that extra money? They pay that extra money because they want their kids to get a better education, because they know if they make that investment with that extra money their kids will have a better opportunity at a better education. So their argument about throwing money at the issue is deficient. We have seen what Liberal governments do when it comes to education. They cut services and they cut funding. In New South Wales, in my state, they have cut $1.7 billion from the education budget, and the effects of that are beginning to be felt throughout schools in my state.

Senator Kroger mentioned the Building the Education Revolution. This is one of the programs that I am most proud of as a member of this government—$16 billion invested in new facilities throughout this country. I often tell the story of East Maitland Public School. I had the great fortune of opening their new BER facilities last year. This school received $2 million from the Gillard government to build two new special-needs classrooms. They have a wonderful principal at that school, Sheree O'Brien—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Thistlethwaite, resume your seat. I remind senators on the left that senators have the right to be heard in silence.

Matt Thistlethwaite (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sheree O'Brien is passionate about special needs education. She fought with the education department to ensure that the BER funding that the school received went into building special needs classrooms for kids with profound Down syndrome and autism. I went to the school and opened these wonderful new facilities, and I met the teachers, the students and their parents. At the afternoon tea that occurred afterwards, one of the parents came up to me and said, 'I want you to go back to Canberra and thank Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd for what they have done for our local school.' I asked her, 'Why is that?' She said, 'I have a son with profound autism. We moved our family from Perth to get our son into East Maitland Public School.' They did that because they found out about how passionate Sheree O'Brien is about special needs education. She said, 'You have no idea what a difference it has made to my son's education and to his relationship with his family—in particular with his two younger siblings who are also students at the school.' That is real change for the better that probably will not show up in any of the educational statistics that you see when you compare international students.

What you have to understand about special needs education is that there is never just one teacher in the room. Teaching special needs kids requires additional resources. There will generally be two teachers, at the very least, and a teacher's aide working with them. When you talk about $1.7 billion worth of cuts to education from the New South Wales budget, guess what will be the first positions to go at East Maitland Public School? It will be the teacher's aides that assist with that special needs education. That is the difference between a Labor government and a Liberal government when it comes to education. The $2 million that went into building special needs classrooms at East Maitland Public School, which will give these kids a better chance at an education, is referred to by Senator Kroger and the opposition as waste. They have referred to the Building the Education Revolution program as waste for the last three or four years in this place. Ask the parents of those special needs kids at East Maitland Public School—and at every other school throughout this country that has benefited from the Building the Education Revolution funds—whether they think that the money that this government has invested in their kids' schools is waste. I think you will find that they have a different view to those opposite, and it perfectly highlights why those opposite are out of touch when it comes to education funding and education policy in this country. That is the difference between a Labor government and a Liberal government. In New South Wales we are now facing the prospect of some of these schools losing their special needs support staff and losing some of their programs because $1.7 billion is being cut from the education budget.

I reiterate the point that has been made: if money is not the issue, then why are schools in other countries that are spending more per capita on education than we are moving ahead of us each year? The answer is simple. It is because they invest more in their future and more in their education system. That is what this Labor government is seeking to rectify with the Gonski reforms, and that is why those opposite should support them.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to contribute to the debate on the Gillard government's dismal record on education reform and the missed opportunities that this government has had—for the entire period of time that it has been in government—to actually attain real change in our Australian schools. It was interesting to hear Senator Thistlethwaite's contribution in which he brought up the Building the Education Revolution. When we look at my own state, Victoria, and the waste that that program delivered on the ground—and I see Senator Thistlethwaite shaking his head as he leaves the chamber—that waste was not evident where the school system was able to choose their own method of spending. For state schools, they had a prescribed list of educational resources they could access, and they had to go for it.

When I think about missed opportunities and real education reform, I think about the first missed opportunity. As a former lecturer in education training, I know that our universities' capital infrastructure needs have been severely lacking. The former government recognised that and set up a fund to take us forward: the now-defunct Higher Education Endowment Fund. I think that the first missed opportunity of this government was to not spend it all on capital infrastructure for higher education. Similarly, in another missed opportunity, there was a federal Labor commitment of $16 million to stem the shortage of maths and science teachers by fast-tracking bankers, accountants and engineers into classrooms. By the way, those three particular cohorts of people—we have all got friends in those cohorts—are in classrooms now. Think about it. There is a reason that they did not choose education as their first choice of career. It has been an incredible, expensive failure with just 14 participants recruited. Those who are experienced in banking and who are highly successful engineers and accountants may be able to perform certain types of arithmetic, but I would doubt their capacity in terms of flux equations and partial differentiation.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced the Teach Next scheme during the 2010 election, promising that Labor would over four years recruit 450 mid-career professionals to teach. However, just 14 participants have been placed into schools, after two intakes, and every state and territory, except Victoria and the ACT, has either not participated in the scheme at all or has pulled out. The computers in schools program blew out by $1.4 billion. The school hall program, mentioned earlier, blew out by $14.7 billion to $16.2 billion. The blow-outs in these two programs alone are more than double Wayne Swan's projected 2012-13 now-dumped surplus—

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I remind you to address members in the other chamber by their correct titles.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you—Minister Swan.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Swan.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Minister' will be fine. Taxpayers' money was spent on these programs instead of on real education reform, and that is because of waste. Just throwing a lot of money at a problem does not mean you are actually going to fix it, and when we look at educational outcomes in this country over the whole period of time that this government has been in power we can see that money definitely has not fixed the problem. The air bubbles, thought bubbles and media releases to tackle the perceived educational issues have not actually fixed them. If the government is serious about improved learning outcomes for students, the rhetoric has to end. We saw that in MYEFO the government actually cut money out of education. So there are missed opportunities throughout this federal government's tenure. With the Prime Minister being the former education minister and purporting to have such a strong and passionate commitment to education, I am befuddled as to how we can have so many botched schemes.

As a Nat, I am predominantly concerned with the close to a million students—young Australians—studying at private and public schools throughout our nation. Over 687,000 of our young Australians outside our capital cities are studying at public schools. So I am excited by the thought of a highly equitable and effective education system being delivered to our students attending public and private schools, and I note we have some fine young Australians up in the gallery watching this debate at the moment. I talk specifically about the Gonski legislation before us. The lack of detail in this bill is incredible. There are aspirations galore but not a shred of detail on how it is going to happen and what metrics are going to be used in certain sections of the legislation. The areas that we are targeting are areas of disadvantage, and the coalition is so supportive of ensuring that the taxpayers' dollar is well spent and spent in areas of need, on students that are experiencing disadvantage, but we do not know what the metrics are. But the AEU, in evidence before the Senate inquiry into the bill, were very confident that it is all going to be fine. But, from my perspective, this government has form in not getting it right in education and not getting it right for regional Australia. So, when I talk about the over 600,000 young Australians attending government schools outside capital cities, I want to ensure that the loading mechanism in the Gonski legislation actually delivers for them. Given this government's poor track record on the youth allowance debate and its inability to draw lines on a map that result in effective public policy, you can sense the concern of many stakeholders in this debate. Similarly, there is no idea about the other loadings. We have only just come with a definition of 'disability', and this is for a funding model that is going to fund our schools next year. It just does not wash, and it is so very typical of Labor. (Time expired)

Lin Thorp (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nelson Mandela was spot on when he said, 'Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.' An effective education system has the capacity to mitigate disadvantage and elevate all young Australians to achieve their potential. Education is an issue about which I am passionate, as someone who has spent many years working as a teacher. I have long believed that our school funding needs to be directed towards public schools, especially towards schools in our most disadvantaged communities. Every single Australian kid has the potential to live a full, rich life and to be a contributor to our country's economic and social wealth. Every school needs to be a great school. Every school needs to have inspired and inspiring teachers who are passionate about their jobs and their students. That is why we cannot afford to have huge differentials in the funding and outcomes of our schools.

This government proved its commitment to a fair education system when it commissioned the Gonski review, the most comprehensive investigation into the way schools are funded in over 40 years. This financial year, the Labor government will invest $13.6 billion in our schools, compared to a shameful $8.5 billion spent by the Howard government in its last budget. This comes on top of record amounts invested in the first four years of the Gillard government: over $65 billion in schools and around $22 billion for early childhood measures by the end of 2015-16. We have delivered the most significant education improvements in living memory based on Labor's values of fairness, quality, accountability and transparency, and we also recognise that there is so much more to do. Thanks to Labor, every Australian student will have access to a great education no matter where they live or which school they attend.

We have built or upgraded school facilities throughout Australia, and I do take exception to some of the outrageous statements that have recently been made in this place about the spending of the BER funds. Coming from the state of Tasmania, I can absolutely guarantee to this place that those funds were spent where they were needed and spent very well. In fact, there was a commendation by the Auditor-General of the administrative group that oversaw the spending of the BER funds. The group saw the spending come in under target, and they were highly commended for doing so.

Students and schools are benefiting also from $2.5 billion in the Smarter Schools National Partnerships. We have invested an additional $243.9 million in a new Improving Literacy and Numeracy National Partnership to build on the success of the Literacy and Numeracy National Partnership, and $2.5 billion is being invested in trade training centres—and I hope those opposite do not think that the trade training centres have not been an extraordinary investment, giving high school students throughout the country, many of them in regional Tasmania, access to industry-standard training which helps them complete school and get a job. More than $706 million over four years is being invested in the National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions to help more young people stay in school and successfully transition to work or to further education. And that is not all. This year the Labor government will finalise a National Plan for School Improvement to ensure that all students at all schools get a great education. We have also introduced the Australian Education Bill into parliament.

It seems a bit disingenuous to me for the opposition to suddenly turn around and pretend they actually care about the quality of our education system. It is clear that the opposition education spokesperson, Christopher Pyne, does not care, as he has not bothered to ask the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth a single question in parliament since 2010. Last year the shadow minister found time in question time to ask 38 questions. Not a single one was addressed to the education minister and only one had any relevance to education.

Last year Mr Pyne confirmed that the coalition would keep in place a broken funding model that could result in cuts of up to $5.4 billion from Australian schools. He also dismissed the findings of the Gonski review, which has been welcomed elsewhere across the country, not to mention plans to sack one in seven teachers, squeeze more kids into classrooms and slash funding to disadvantaged schools. The Liberal Party does not care about education. Labor works on the principles of fairness and equity, not privilege and elitism. The Liberal mantra requires a system that produces workers to produce wealth for a few; Labor sees every Australian as a valuable contributor to wealth for all.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for the discussion has expired.