Page 3457 - Week 11 - Thursday, 15 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
would be aware through the tabling of the second Appropriation Bill, this amount is indexed into the outyear so could be built into the base funding for non-government schools into the future. I am engaged in a number of discussions with the Association of Independent Schools, the Non-Government Schools Education Council and other stakeholders in the independent school sector.
Mrs Dunne: But not the parents and friends whose letters you won’t reply to.
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mrs Dunne.
MR BARR: Mrs Dunne, I had the opportunity to meet with the president of that association at the announcement last week. We will continue to discuss a range of matters relevant to both parties. The indications that I have given in relation to future funding in the education sector are consistent with the election commitments that the government made in 2004 in relation to funding for non-government schools.
Mrs Dunne: Which mostly haven’t been kept.
MR BARR: Mrs Dunne hates it. She has been seething ever since the announcement. Mrs Dunne’s and Mr Mulcahy’s positions on provision of additional money to the education sector stand in interesting contrast. Mr Mulcahy’s position is that the priority should be tax cuts. However, Mrs Dunne says, “No, you should be ploughing more money into non-government schools.” In terms of future funding in the education sector, I have said that the ACT Labor government would like to see more money available for education in the government and non-government sector. We recognise that we form a partnership with the commonwealth government in relation to education funding.
I have indicated to independent schools that I will not be in a position to provide funding certainty for them in the longer term until we have had negotiations with the commonwealth in relation to the next four-year quadrennial funding agreement and that increases in funding for all schools is my objective. But we will have to take into account the outcomes of negotiations with the commonwealth in relation to the next quadrennial funding agreement.
If the Howard government is re-elected—something that is looking extremely unlikely, I am pleased to say—we have the threat of $30 million to $40 million being ripped out of education in the ACT. Minister Bishop is on a particular ideological path around external exams and wants the HSC introduced into the ACT. Minister Bishop is prepared to remove $40 million of commonwealth funding to the ACT education system in pursuit of her ideological agenda. That is a fact. That has been the threat hanging over the next quadrennial funding agreement from the federal Liberal Party.
Fortunately, in all likelihood, it will not be Minister Bishop negotiating the next four-year funding agreement. The federal Labor government has put additional money on the table. I particularly welcome yesterday’s announcement from Kevin Rudd in relation to additional investment in senior secondary education and in early childhood education. It is part of a much needed education revolution at a federal level. It would be very pleasing to be able to work with a commonwealth government that is interested in education; a commonwealth government that has an agenda and sees
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .