Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Australian Education Amendment (2023 Capital Funding) Regulations 2023, made under the Australian Education Act 2013, be disallowed [F2023L01064].

These regulations would increase the capital funding indexation percentage for block grant authorities for non-government schools in 2023, thereby increasing federal funding to capital works for private schools by $21.2 million, up to a total annual sum of $215.7 million. This disallowance would maintain the indexation for capital works for non-government schools at its current rate. This doesn't mean that money is being ripped away from private schools. They would still receive an annual sum of $194 million among numerous other buckets of cash that they have access to. The purpose of this disallowance is simply for the government to prioritise helping our struggling public schools before pouring more money into the private-school system.

Furthermore, we note that there are significant concerns around how block grant authorities distribute these resources, with minimal accountability across block grant authorities leading to some poorly funded Catholic schools being stranded in a system that gives lavishly to private schools for more pools and orchestra pits. Recently, in New South Wales it was reported that two private schools had to pay back more than $23 million in government funding because it turned out that they were turning a profit. It is a total farce that our system allows for these types of things to happen, and that the government can have such little oversight of the goings-on of these schools and the block grant authorities that schools can be making a profit.

It is important as well to really emphasise what money private schools receive. On top of the SRS—and keep in mind that 98 per cent of private schools are overfunded when it comes to the SRS and they get loaded up on a per-student basis—private schools can also add the exorbitant fees that they charge to the money pot. We know that fees have gone up by between 50 per cent and 80 per cent as well as funds such as this one. With the tap never turning off, it's no wonder some school principals decide to indulge in decadent things like plunge pools and new RM Williams uniforms for their students. What's the incentive for them not to? What else does this pot pour into? One of the top Brisbane schools recently flashed its plans to expand with a six-storey building, including an art-science wet space, a library and a dedicated performing arts rehearsal space.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Outrageous!

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure these are wonderful spaces in an amazing learning environment. But that's my problem and why I'm here fighting. When did we stop wanting that for all children so that all students around the country are able to learn in and access beautiful spaces that enrich their education and help broaden their interests? Let's compare that with some of the public schools in this country. One public school in Victoria has 61 demountables—I will say that again: 61 demountables. Another in Melbourne's north-east has 49. This means that instead of building infrastructure governments are saddling state schools with temporary demountables and not anything that's long-term, efficient or appropriate, let alone beautiful and lovely to be in. This means for these students there is no permanent six-storey heritage building with different build-outs. No, instead, they have demountables that get unbearably hot in summer and unbearably cold in winter. I can tell you, having taught in several classrooms like that in Queensland throughout my public school teaching career, that I can confirm that they are absolutely not conducive to young people maximising their learning. I taught in classrooms on the cape that flood every time it rains, and I've taught in classrooms riddled with asbestos that have to be cleared every time there is a bump or a knock on the wall that means they're unsafe.

How can we accept this? How can we ask parent and students to accept this? That is why this motion is so important. It is so critical for us to not shy away from the fights and stickiness in these debates. I'm here because I believe the fight we must be having and that Labor must be having is looking at why some schools can lavish such excess on their students, and why others—kids in public schools—are forced to struggle for the minimum. When did this become the Australian norm? It's completely obvious by now that the system is rigged. The mirage of choice that was pioneered by the Howard and the Gillard governments and other coalition governments has completely poisoned the well of egalitarian schooling in Australia. No longer is it about choice. The true choice is whether or not your parents have the financial choice to send you to a private or a public school.

The biggest determinant of how well a young person does in the education system in this country is their parents' bank balance. And that's a fact.

Instead of expanding and exploring what our public system could be and the ways that it could be shaped differently, we've just ripped that up and we're only dishing out the good stuff to the kids whose families can afford it. This is setting us up to lock an immovable type of inequality into our education system. Instead of broadening the horizons about what we can achieve in our public system, private schools are becoming reliant on the millions and millions of dollars of public money that they expect to receive to keep the wheels turning. While public schools around this country fight for basic amenities, the government continues to pour money into the private sector. We know that public school funding in Australia is well below the OECD average. When do we call this a crisis? Underfunding means one teacher for dozens of kids. It means kids not getting the support that they need. Eighty-five per cent of young people in this country with additional needs are in public schools. It means broken laptops—if you're lucky enough to have them—and out-of-date textbooks, and it is teachers and parents who are making up the shortfall.

Above all, underfunding means kids slipping through the cracks. If we're going to keep wringing our hands about the outcomes of our students and how they continue to fall, then we need to fund our public schools to the bare minimum. Not funding our public schools to 100 per cent of the SRS means failing. It means not setting those kids up for success, and it means widening inequality in this country. That's why I moved this disallowance, and that's why I ask that the Senate support this motion and that the government work with us to ensure that public schools are not falling down around students' heads or riddled with asbestos or leaking or flooding before giving even more money to private schools.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against this disallowance motion. At the outset, I want to place on the record that I deeply respect Senator Allman-Payne's commitment to education during her career and have no doubt that the students who had the privilege of being in her class benefited from her commitment to education. I put that on the record.

The Greens have an ideological obsession against anything which is in the private sector. It doesn't matter what it is, whether it is private health insurance or non-government schools; the Greens have an ideological obsession against it. They have an ideological obsession against private education, against private health insurance, against the private sector, and a complete lack of understanding that Australia has benefited—greatly benefited—from the fact that we have both a public and private education sphere and a public and private health insurance sector. We have greatly, greatly benefited from that balance between the public and the private sectors. But, again and again, they come into this place with their ideological, philosophical obsessions against what has worked well in practice in terms of providing the optimum outcomes for the optimum number of Australians. And this is just another example.

So let me put on the record: I am very happy the Greens have moved this motion because it will provide me an opportunity between now and the next federal election to advise all those families in the Green-held seats of Ryan, Brisbane and Griffith in South-East Queensland that the Greens despise the fact that they save and scrimp and do everything they possibly can to provide their children with the best educational outcomes that they perceive should be provided to them.

I'll provide those parents with every single opportunity to understand that the Greens oppose their right to send their children to a non-government school. I'll make sure I remind them from this day to the next election. They oppose private health insurance and they oppose non-government education in non-government-owned schools, and I'll be reminding those families in those Green held seats in the south-east corner of Queensland.

The second point I want to make in relation to this disallowance motion is that it shows a complete misunderstanding of what is happening with capital construction costs. Capital construction costs have absolutely gone through the roof across this whole country, so the capital cost of building a new school building or facility to enhance the capital services and the environment for students going to non-government schools has gone through the roof. That is the reality, and those sitting on the other side of the chamber are absolutely part of the reason for that, because they took the only handbrake off the CFMMEU construction division. That handbrake was the Australian Building and Construction Commission. So now the CFMMEU is there running just about every single construction site at every single school just about across the whole of Australia, and you can add 30 per cent to the capital cost of constructing any public infrastructure. That is the whole reason why the government had to institute the so-called 90-day review of infrastructure projects, which has blown out by a further 100 days. It's because construction costs in this country have absolutely gone through the roof.

So let's call out this disallowance motion for what it is. It is an expression of the ideological contempt that the Greens political party has for non-government-owned schools. It's their ideological obsession—one of many—against anything in the private sector. They do not respect the sacrifices made by Australian parents to send their children to schools of their choice. Whether it be a religious institution providing a religious based education or any other sort of school in the non-government sector, that is simply not respected by the Australian Greens. So, between now and the next federal election, I look forward to reminding people living in the Queensland federal seats of Ryan, Brisbane and Griffith, including parents who are saving to send their children to non-government schools in those seats—there are many great secondary schools and primary schools in the non-government sector in those three Greens seats—that the Greens have an ideological obsession against the manifestation of their choice to send their children to a school of their choosing. I'll be looking forward to reminding people, including parents, of that fact between now and the next federal election.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will be opposing this disallowance motion. The Capital Grants Program provides funding for non-government schools to improve capital infrastructure where they otherwise may not have access to sufficient capital resources. This program has had long-term bipartisan support.

Capital Grants Program funding is allocated to schools according to identified student need. Indexation of that funding ensures that the value of the capital program is maintained over time. The Australian government is committed to working with the states and territories to get every school to 100 per cent of its fair funding level, and that remains the case. We are obviously strong supporters of public education, and I say that as someone who was educated in public education. We want to see every school get to 100 per cent of its fair funding level, but we need to recognise the choice that many parents make, as is their right, to have their kids educated in a non-government school, and that is one of the reasons for our support for this Capital Grants Program.

We've committed $275.2 million over two years under the Schools Upgrade Fund, and we've already delivered $50 million, under round 1, to more than 1,300 schools. They are schools like Indooroopilly State School in the electorate of Ryan, held by a Greens MP, which received $25,000 for shade structures, and St Joseph's, again in the electorate of Ryan, which received $25,000 for repairs and facility maintenance. If we look at Griffith, also held by a Greens MP, we see that St Martin's and St Laurence's College have received funding through this program. St Martin's received $6,000 for air purification and St Laurence's received $25,000 for a shade structure. Round 2 of the Schools Upgrade Fund is providing $215.8 million for government schools to invest in new facilities, major refurbishments and other capital upgrades. Expressions of interest are now open, and I encourage public schools from across the country to apply to participate. This is the same amount of capital funding as we've provided to non-government schools in 2023.

We need to be very clear that this disallowance motion from the Greens would have the effect of stripping funding from Catholic schools in Greens-held electorates—schools like St Martin's and St Laurence's in the Greens-held electorate of Griffith and St Joseph's in the Greens-held electorate of Ryan. I'm sure there are many other similar examples in the Greens-held electorate of Brisbane. I wonder whether those Greens MPs—Mr Bates, Mr Chandler-Mather and Ms Watson-Brown—are being honest with their constituents, many of whom decided to vote Greens. I wonder if those Greens MPs are being honest about their agenda to strip funding from Catholic schools like the ones I've just mentioned. I think the Greens owe it to their constituents to be honest about their plans to strip capital funding from those schools.

Nothing in what we are putting forward is about taking money away from public schools. Labor governments have always been strong supporters of funding for public education, and I say that as someone who's personally committed to public education. But we do recognise that many parents have good reasons for choosing non-government schooling for their kids. Those schools should not be subject to ideological campaigns by the Greens that seek to remove that funding. I challenge Mr Chandler-Mather, Mr Bates and Ms Watson-Brown to go and face those schools and talk to them about their plans to strip the schools' capital funding because of the Greens' ideological beliefs. That's why we will be opposing this disallowance motion.

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can't support this disallowance motion either. Capital funding under the Australian Education Act is provided to block grant authorities, something that's been happening since 2014. Those authorities disperse money to either Catholic schools or independent schools, but the umbrella of independent schools doesn't just cover private schools for wealthy families. It includes independent schools, special assistance schools and schools for Indigenous students. In Tassie, these include Giant Steps Tasmania, an independent special school in Deloraine for children on the autism spectrum. There are also indie schools in Burnie, Devonport and Glenorchy. Indie schools are alternative kinds of schools for kids who don't learn best in traditional learning environments. They fill a really important gap in our education system, and I think they're amazing. I wish my son had had a chance to go to an indie school program when he was in high school.

I get what the Greens are trying to do here. They're trying to make sure private schools with rich kids aren't better off than public schools. It's something I agree with; education should be as equitable as possible. But this isn't the way to do it, I'm sorry. This would also punish those schools that are applying for grants to look after the most vulnerable kids in the community, the kids that require special care.

The problem I have with the grants is that, for the last four years at least, Giant Steps Tasmania and the special assistance schools that help our most vulnerable students have not received any of this funding. Maybe they didn't apply. If they didn't, my message to them would be to give it a go. I don't think cashed-up private schools need to be given more taxpayer money, but I don't think we should deny independent schools like Giant Steps Tasmania the chance to get a piece of the pie either. That's why I won't be supporting this disallowance motion.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion moved by Senator Allman-Payne be agreed to. A division is required. As the division has been called after 6.30 pm, it will be held tomorrow.

(Quorum formed)