Page 667 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Association of Independent Schools. The government, the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools of the ACT all agreed that education funding should be distributed equitably on the basis of relative need regardless of sector, “taking into account the general educational needs of every child”.
This ACT submission drew from both a considered analysis of our school system and a strong cross-sectoral consensus on what was best for Canberra students. In it we contended that any new funding model should be simple, effective and transparent, and provide funding based on individual student need. We argued for greater requirements for schools educating a higher proportion of disadvantaged students. We argued for more transparency and more flexibility in the way funding was apportioned to students. We stood up against the unfair fiscal equalisation burden put on our schools by an obsolete commonwealth funding model. We argued that more funding be given so that the ACT can get on with the job of continuing to provide the best educational outcome for our students. In short, and to reference my amendment, we considered the need of all ACT students.
The ACT government agrees with the central premise of the Gonski review—that there is a fairer and less complex way to distribute funding for Australian students. Changes to school funding are needed to make sure our students do not continue to fall behind other parts of the world and to reduce the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students.
I am sure that all education ministers across Australia believe that additional commonwealth funding is required across all school sectors. As put forward in our submission, and recognised in the report, there is also an ongoing need for further funding in a number of individual schools—both government and non-government schools—due to the significant numbers and greater concentration of disadvantaged students attending those schools.
We remain mindful of our ongoing commitment to the needs of all Canberra students before all else in any future negotiations. Yet if the measures suggested by the review and more funding from the commonwealth are the way of tackling these issues, we are supportive of them in principle.
It is also worth pointing out that the review acknowledges that the ACT is a high performing state with high educational standards. It is anticipated that a good proportion of ACT schools will be reflected in the school resourcing standard reference group. This is no surprise. We have great schools, we have great teachers, and we come out on top when it comes to student outcomes.
Many of the design principles of the review are already present in the ACT’s funding formula for students in schools. Aspects such as school size, English as a second language or dialect, and students with a disability are taken into account. Through Labor, the ACT has maintained a strong focus on education, and supported this priority financially.
The latest report on government services, ROGS, shows that the ACT provides around 12 per cent more funding to government schools than the Australian average.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video