Page 736 - Week 03 - Thursday, 22 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES: Under the latest Hawke Government proposal, which, of course, impacts very directly on the Australian Capital Territory, Commonwealth funding for schools in funding categories 1 to 7 will be frozen. This policy will mean that the squeeze on parents of pupils in non-government schools, which began in 1984, will not only continue but will also be tightened. Four and a half thousand ACT students - more than a third of the pupils in Independent Schools Association schools - will be disadvantaged by the next round of assaults on non-government schools.
The most objectionable aspect of this program is its sectarian approach. The chairman of the Association of Heads of Independent Schools of Australia, Father Greg O'Kelly, said that the new policy clearly favoured Catholic schools and would stifle the funding of new Protestant schools. He was concerned that the new funding proposal had every appearance of being sectarian and would - - -
Mr Wood: It favours the poor schools.
MR HUMPHRIES: Well, poor or rich they are still sectarian, Mr Wood. This would reopen the controversy to the detriment of harmony and unity in the Australian education scene. Father O'Kelly is no Orangeman - he is a Jesuit priest and the headmaster of St Ignatius College, Riverview - - -
Mr Wood: Not exactly a poor school!
MR HUMPHRIES: He said that the new policy would favour Catholic schools over Protestant schools - that is the point he was making. He was not saying it would not advantage him, but that it would disadvantage other schools in the system.
I have to say that I am impressed by the cooperation between Catholic and Protestant schools on other issues. I would have thought that the Labor Party would have learnt the lesson of the great state aid debates of the past and accept that the community as a whole is supportive of a two-tier system, with government and non-government schools supported equally on a non-sectarian basis. I think the Federal Government's approach contrasts very strongly - - -
Mr Wood: It was supported on a needs basis.
MR HUMPHRIES: Be that as it may, Mr Wood, the impact of this proposal by the Hawke Labor Government is sectarian in nature. I think that is unfortunate; it contrasts with the Federal policy which is committed to providing a basic per capita grant for additional needs-based funding, and I would hope that the ACT would not have to endure the pain and suffering that undoubtedly will be inflicted should this Government be re-elected and should this policy be implemented.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .