Gillard's funding promise cannot be believed
6th August 2010

In today's The Punch I argue that Gillard's decision to extend the current school funding model for one more year is crisis management and that she cannot be trusted (also below).

Can Julia Gillard be believed on school funding?

On face value, Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s decision to extend the current non-government school funding model for an additional year looks like a plus for Catholic and independent schools.

The socioeconomic status (SES) model is due to expire at the end of 2012 and maintaining it for one more year will give some satisfaction to non-government school parents.

In fact, Gillard’s decision on school funding is just another example of desperation politics and of a government lacking conviction.  It’s apparent that the Prime Minister will do anything to win the election and that she is only concerned with short-term political gain.

The ALP government is trying to bury the school funding issue until after the August 21 election and to present itself as a friend to Catholic and independent schools.  It’s understandable why.

Mark Latham’s hit list of wealthy non-government schools taken to the 2004 election, along with the infamous handshake with John Howard, have gone down in political folklore as electoral suicide.

The reality is that over 30% of primary school students now go to non-government schools, with the figure rising to over 40% at the secondary level.  Education is a real BBQ stopper, especially in marginal seats where parents, at great expense, are voting with their feet and choosing the non-government school alternative.

Non-government school parents that pay taxes for a system they do not use, in addition to schools fees, expect some level of government support and since Robert Menzies introduced state aid, the history of Australian elections is one where parties that support school choice win votes.

The ALP leadership was so worried about the issue leading into the 2007 that Kevin Rudd as leader of the opposition guaranteed, if elected, that his government would maintain the Howard inspired socioeconomic funding model and assured Catholic and independent schools that funding would be maintained in real terms.

When Minister for Education, Julia Gillard also adopted a pragmatic approach to funding, arguing, “the Rudd Government has given a set of guarantees to the non-government schools… Those guarantees are that we would maintain the SES model, we would maintain the status of funding maintained and funding guaranteed.  We’d maintain the way in which the Catholic system is funded and we would maintain indexation arrangements”.

On taking over from Gillard as Minister for Education, Simon Crean, repeated assurances that all would be well and implied that non-government school parents could safely vote for the ALP when he stated, “There is no schools hit list for those who want to run a scare campaign… No school will be worse off.  Not a dollar will be taken away”.

Reality check.  In addition to Prime Minister Gillard simply trying to bury the issue, if the ALP is re-elected there is every chance that Catholic and independent schools will lose funding when the new model is introduced post 2013.

While Julia Gillard, when Minister for Education and now as Prime Minister, portrays herself as a strong advocate of school choice her support cannot be relied upon.  Not only does she refuse to guarantee that any new model will maintain funding in real terms, she is also on the record as admitting support for the current funding model, now set to expire at the end of 2013, is only temporary.

In a March 2008 interview, on being asked whether an ALP government would support the SES model on an on-going basis, the then Minister for Education, replied, “No, no, our commitment Tony was very, very clear.  It is only for the next schools funding quadrennium (2009-2012), for the next four yearly period”.

In a recent interview, reported in The Australian July 31, the recently appointed Commonwealth Minister for Education Simon Crean also refused to guarantee that funding to non-government schools will be indexed on an annual basis and that funding to Catholic and independent schools will keep pace with government school costs.

Extending the SES model for an additional year is just another example of political spin and crisis management.  While Gillard’s decision makes her government appear more voter friendly to non-government school parents, it does nothing to guarantee that any future ALP government will be committed to properly resourcing Catholic and independent schools.

Doubts about the ALP’s back-flip on funding are underlined by Labor’s preference deal with the Greens and the fact that there is a real chance that the Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate after the election.

The Greens’ policy includes adopting a hit-list of schools, reducing government funding by the amount schools raise locally and removing the link between the amount non-government schools receive and what governments provide to state schools.

Unlike both the Greens and the ALP government, the Abbott-led opposition has promised, if elected, to endorse the SES model and to ensure that Catholic and independent schools are properly resourced.


Responses to this Post

As Julia Gillard goes from one self-administered I.Q. Test to the next, failing badly on each as she struggles to keep faith with Left Wing Teacher unions, and still seem to be offering a sound education policy, educated Australians must feel sick at heart.

As "enticements", she offers $100,000 to schools which lift their literacy and numeracy games, and promises to regenerate the old teacher "payment by result" chestnut, which was scrapped in the 1920s because it was educationally unsound - pernicious indeed - and, assuming she wins government this election, these are 'some of the things that will happen', but only if the electorate votes for her again in three year's time!

There are cogent, pragmatic reasons to support the introduction of a national Australian curriculum, not least among which is the advantage of seamless and less disruptive transfer of a student from, say, The Northern Territory to Tasmania. But the Gillard model is simply not a "curriculum". It has no substance in "content", and thus none in "pedagogy", instead of which two fundamentally necessary educative characteristics it offers nothing more than individual school-based floundering and indecision of the kind that since 1971 has [un]systematically brought Queensland Education to be acknowledged among the worst in the world.  

Gillard's offering therefore cannot be "national" - or even common among schools in the same general location as each other - and does not deserve to be called a "curriculum". Education is by its very nature "elitist", and an equalitarian, egalitarian "Education System" is a contradiction in terms; in concepts.  But that aside, the labour movement simply cannot devise a sound education system, because it cannot envision what might represent a reliable path towards "becoming educated"; if it could do so, its members would not identify with the beliefs and hostilities nourished in general by the labour movement, they would instead espouse conservative views.

As things now stand, Julia Gillard is clutching frantically as a grab-bag of intellectual absurdities, and offering a new one each day as her "kam-pain". Makes one think that one-year parliamentary terms may be the way to go. The only time governments 'promise' to do anything is at election time. We need to get rid of "kam-pains", and replace these with platforms setting out how, if elected, each party would "govern", for just one term, initially, not two or four. Necessity may produce effective government, based upon genuinely-intentioned social and fiscal policies; then who knows, Education may benefit purely by accident.  

Bruce Manning
Wishart, QLD

Gillard's promise of cash rewards to schools or teachers who "improve literacy and numeracy" in their schools is unfair,pointless,stupid and potentially divisive.
First, it is unfair because schools already having good standards will never qualify for any reward.
Second, it is pointless because instead of focussing on good curriculum across all subjects teachers will be under pressure to coach for the "tests"-whatever they might be,to determine who "wins".
Third, it is stupid because it will divert time and resources within schools to qualify for money grants which on balance of probabilities will not be won. Fourth-and worst- it will lead to rivalry and popularity contests within schools, nominating teachers on the basis of who is "liked" by students (code for easy marking,lollies and movies),instead of who sets a rigorous and challenging standard in the classroom. This can be serious and horribly destructive in places like the ACT where there is no external or uniform assessment across the schools.
People should dismiss all of it as desperate election giveaways which will very likely not be honoured anyway.

vivien Johnson
Macarthur, ACT



Archived Posts

> Tame the black dog
> Non-government school win the day
> National curriculum review
> Cultural-left rules education
> Fix rowdy classrooms
> Beware the black dog
> Meritocracy good - OK
> Overcoming depression
> Rudd government removing barnacles
> Purpose of education
> Judeo-Christian values ignored
> Myths, fables and legends
> No more victimhood
> Gillard wrong to copy Blair
> Media bias against non-government schools
> Direct Instruction best
> Cultural literacy rules
> UK curriculum back to basics
> Bonus pay for teachers - a bad idea
> Gonski Report released
> Non-government schools in danger
> Gonski a threst to school funding
> test
> Gillard's education revolution a failure
> School choice good
> Why gays/lesbians should not marry
> Garrett endorses school choice
> Gonski research papers a danger to non-government schools
> School funding and politics of envy
> Wheeler Centre public/private school funding debate
> Julia Gillard fails as Prime Minister
> Mad as a cut snake as insulting as meow!
> Wheeler Centre school funding debate
> Gillard budget 'F' for education
> Non-government schools deserve funding
> Rude students destroy teaching
> PM Julia Gillard not a social conservative
> My School 2.0 will be used to cut funding to non-government schools
> Gillard cannot be trusted on school funding
> 'F' for teaching standards
> Australia - celebrate Western heritage and Christian tradition
> Rudd/Gillard education revolution - fail!
> Non-government schools promote equity
> Non-government schools promote equity and success
> Faith based schools have the right to discriminate
> National curriculum should not be compulsory
> Gillard Government drops education revolution
> Gillard cannot hide her socialist past
> Myths and lies about school funding
> Give all schools autonomy and promote school choice
> ALP can't be trusted on school funding
> Islamic curriculum one sided and biased
> Julia Gillard's Geography new-age and PC
> Julia Gillard left-wing and as guilty as Rudd
> Julia Gillard - political opportunist
> History wars
> ALP's education revolution flawed and counter-productive
> New York example has failed
> national testing educationally unsound
> High social mobility in OZ
> I often have doubts about..
> History curriculum PC and dumbed down
> national curriculum English C+
> Gillard refuses to support non-government schools
> testing and ranking schools is flawed
> Similar to Australia, where many..
> School league tables bad
> Published in Education Review..
> Is there an educationa..
> In the following article posted..
> The problem of badly behaved students..
> Extract from book in Weekend Australian..
> School autonomy the way to go
> Julia Gillard, the Commonwealth..
> Why I left the lefties
> Why I am a conservative
> Why the Bishop is wrong on faith and rights
> test2

Sign in and have your say


Latest Blog

6th August 2010

In today's The Punch I argue that Gillard's decision to extend the current school funding model for one more year is crisis management and that she cannot be trusted (also below).Can Julia Gillard b...
Read Full Post!


$20.00 plus $6 postage
(within Australia).

Latest News

1st January 1970

Read entire article...

Sign up to our Newsletter...