Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry) Share this | Hansard source

Minister, I appreciate the spirit in which you have just conveyed information from the officers. Again, I make the point that I am not directing my criticism at the officers or at the minister at the table. But, with the worldwide resources of this department, I find this incredible. A figure could be provided to the minister on the increase in government expenditure for government schools and she could use that figure in the House of Representatives and in numerous interviews and in other places. Claims could be made as to what the expenditure increase would be in the next quadrennium. Yet those figures are not available for the non-government sector. I find that a totally incredible proposition.

Furthermore, when an undertaking was given to us at an estimates committee that that information would be provided and it has not been, I find the explanation in those circumstances also incredible. We now have a situation where, two weeks later—I think I am right about that; I think it is two weeks—the department still cannot find the figure. This is extraordinary carelessness—that they cannot locate a figure of that type in that length of time. So I put it to you, Minister, that this is not acceptable. And I think that if you were in my place you would not disagree with that proposition.

The government wants this bill and, frankly, we would have no objections to it being passed. But I want that figure. I do not think it is unreasonable for me to seek a follow-up of that nature. The minister may well have the figure already on her desk. In fact, I would find it highly surprising if this figure were not contained in some ministerial brief somewhere already. The minister should be aware that responding to this chamber is not an unreasonable request in these circumstances. This is not an extraordinary amount of work for the department to undertake. It is information that would be provided in the normal course of events. And, given the fact that the minister has sought to make such a political issue of the government’s expenditure on government schools and its claim of a 70 per cent increase, it is not an unreasonable proposition that this chamber be provided with the rest of the information about the government’s education programs.

We understand the nature of education funding in this country. We understand that, in terms of the AGSRC, the rates of indexation are considerably higher than inflation. And, from memory, they have gone around the seven-point mark, with inflation; they have been probably sometimes as much as three per cent above the inflation rate. We do understand the nature of the way that that index is put together—that increased expenditure in one sector leads to increased expenditure in another sector. And it is a profound irony that there could be an increase in expenditure of the type that the government speaks of and that automatically flows through to funding under the current SES system. So I think it is not an unreasonable proposition that this figure would be reasonably available.

Quite simply, we are standing by the proposition that there should be a needs based funding model. We have made the point again and again that under Labor no school will be worse off under our funding arrangements.

We have made the point that the government, which has undertaken a review of its SES funding arrangements, has sought to keep that review secret. The government has not even published what the submissions to that review were. To my recollection they were not even in double figures. Those submissions should have been made public. The government has not done that. We have called upon the government to provide additional support for public education in this country. So I think it is a reasonable proposition that, in those circumstances, the Senate should have the opportunity to appreciate what the level of increase in funding has been. Again, I ask the minister: when will this figure be available?