Ann Sudmalis (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Here we go again—Labor bleating about the so called cuts to education funding. They pull a political stunt for their union audience and then leave the chamber. Once upon a time, when Labor were in government, they promised a golden Gonski model for funding of our schools. They introduced a whole raft of legislation, like the minerals and resources rent tax, to pay for their golden model, their panacea for educational advancement, but the goblin of reality swallowed it all up and stashed it in the pot at the end of the rainbow. If this sounds like a fairytale, so it should. Because that's the nature of the imaginary funding put forward by Labor as the level of funding they would have allocated if they had been in government. It's about as mythical as Thor, Neptune or the leprechaun.

What amazes me is that some talented and brilliant people are convinced of this Labor representation and really have no concept of how to dissect the reality of true and proper funding. There are no cuts to school funding. Our needs-based funding means students who need the most support will get the most support. Investment is growing fastest for public schools at around 6.4 per cent per student each year for the next four years. The Quality Schools package will deliver an extra $25.3 billion in recurrent funding for Australian schools over the next 10 years. Non-government schools will receive only 4.4 per cent per student.

Education funding is calculated using a complicated model that references a base amount plus loadings to target student and school disadvantage, students with disabilities, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and students with low English proficiency. Commonwealth funding to government schools in New South Wales has been growing faster than state funding. Under the coalition government, New South Wales schools have received $7.2 billion, an increase of 43.7 per cent, and the second-largest increase across government schools in Australia.

Our funding growth means that there's no reason for schools to stop supporting their teachers, introducing new initiatives or extending existing successful programs such as specialist teachers or interventions. The teachers and principals want to know the time they have spent developing new programs or having the training opportunities to grow the professional development and deliver great programs for our children, that that will continue. And even if the funding remained exactly the same from year to year, they would have that certainty. But they are going to get more money.

Let me ask anyone—parent or practising teacher—just how much money will make a difference? We have seen statistics that reflect a reduction in literacy levels, a reduction in numeracy yet Labor says more money will fix it. Well, it won't. There are stand-out cases where the schools have used their needs-based funding for special and great programs. These programs have really made a difference to the children. We need to have certainty of funding, not imaginary funding. As a parent and past teacher, I certainly know this will win over fake promises. But I despair, I truly do, when members in the opposition benches talk of the funding difference between state and federal government. State and territory governments are the responsible level for state and territory schools. Surely they know that. Buildings, playgrounds, equipment and yard maintenance are all the responsibility of the state government. Teachers, student funding allocations, schools formulas and federal government distribution are the responsibility of the state and territory governments.

Overall, the coalition government is growing these investments—not cutting but growing. In Gilmore, every school will be getting an increased amount of funding. The mighty dollar is not the mechanism for educational improvement. It is a tool, but only part of the toolkit. The calibre of the teacher and the inspiration of the school principal are the catalysts for students to be their best and for teachers to adapt and be flexible in their teaching methods.

I'd like to take this opportunity to make special mention of Jeff Ward, of Sanctuary Point Public School, who was exactly that type of principal. Jeff recently retired but, sadly, has passed away. He leaves a legacy of educational endeavour that money could not have bought. He was a major motivator for that school. I was deeply honoured to have known him and send all my best to his family. The students and teachers of that school are an absolute legacy of the energy and the amazing projects that he did in a school where, before he came, the young children walked around looking at the ground, not interested in what they were doing or in being in a classroom. That man inspired his teachers, trained his teachers and gave them opportunity. Each and every person in there, parents included, grew, developed and changed, and it wasn't due to the mighty dollar.

See this speech in context