House debates

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

Matters of Public Importance

Education

3:43 pm

Photo of Robert OakeshottRobert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, the Father of the House is highly agitated. Part of that promise being committed to means more disadvantaged students will have less opportunity to engage in education. If the Father of the House is going to say we delivered on our promise, he has to acknowledge that part of that promise relates to a choice—there are cuts in education of $1.7 billion and that has implications for the standard of living in many communities right throughout New South Wales and other states where similar cuts in education have been occurring.

So this is a problem. We are trying to get agreement on a new funding model in schools. We are working in the post-Bradley environment to lift aspirations for vocational and tertiary education engagement. Early success stories are happening in that post-Bradley environment. The point of the exercise was to target those three areas—educational disadvantage, engage better, change funding models—and put some pressure on universities. Early results are saying that is delivering. Gonski is a similar model. It is basically targeting those three areas and placing some pressure on the education system to engage better than it has done in the past. So why in New South Wales would we introduce cuts when we are trying to change the funding model, add more money and really lift education outcomes for all has me and I know many in this chamber completely stumped.

As a local member I have worked hard in making education central to the strategy of not only lifting aspiration and opportunities for the disadvantaged but also, in parallel, driving to get better employment outcomes in the local area. The Mid-North Coast now has the lowest unemployment figures in the history of the electorate of Lyne. My view is that a big part of that is that many locals have participated in three education and skills forums that are now operating in three different communities. They have been trying to be strategic by getting the highly competitive schools sector working more closely together and the schools sector and the vocational and tertiary education sectors working more closely together, and actually trying to give meaning to many of those cliched lines like 'collaboration not competition' and 'building pathways', turning them into something of a practical nature that does deliver.

We have purposely through this process targeted many people who are the first in their family to ever go to a university. On the Mid-North Coast, surprisingly to some, only 12 per cent of 25-35 year-olds have a bachelor's degree or higher. That may be a different story in seats like the one the Father of the House represents, and therefore he may not understand what on earth I am talking about when I refer to engaging disadvantaged communities through education. It is a huge challenge. To be the first in the family to walk through the door of a university is a big step, a challenging step, and a step that quite often is easily lost through something as simple as paperwork, something as simple as some of those procedures like when to put in a form, how to put in a form or who to talk to. Many in this chamber may take that sort of thing for granted because they have been through that whole tertiary education experience. Targeting first in family has been a big part of our local strategy—that lifting aspiration within individuals, within households and within communities has been a big part of that strategy.

Yesterday's announcement does not help a zack—it pushes it backwards. I am frankly astounded that it is a National Party education minister and the National Party in New South Wales that has allowed this to happen. This is supposed to be the National Party market—the regional, poor and Aboriginal sectors are all supposed to be National Party heartland; they are all mainly, by comparison, populations represented by National Party MPs at a state level. It is time for them to step up. The state National Party MPs must fight their National Party education minister in New South Wales because it is their communities who are going to be hit most by these cuts and it is the children in those communities who will miss out on their opportunities in the short and the long term.

Education matters. Everyone says that, but what are we going to do about it? We have to invest in it and fight against cuts like those that happened in New South Wales yesterday and that have occurred in the Queensland budget and in the Victorian TAFE sector. These cuts seem to be happening right across the board with too much frequency. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments