Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Hansard source

The old saying goes: lies, damned lies and statistics. But, perhaps, the saying should be updated to: lies, dammed lies and speeches from Australian Labor Party senators. What we have just heard, and it has continued throughout the day, is a hysterical reaction from the Labor Party—a reaction that is completely based on mistruth.

I think it is important, in relation to this topic, that we do try to have a sensible discussion. Certainly the government is trying to have a sensible discussion with the Australian states and territories about how the federation operates, about what our responsibilities are as a Commonwealth and what the responsibilities of the states and territories are, and how we make sure that we eliminate waste and duplication and get the best possible results in terms of the delivery of services right across all of the areas of government responsibility, including, and especially, good educational outcomes for students, and school students in particular.

Let us have a look at the discussion paper that has triggered this wave of outrage from those opposite. I will give you a few quotes from it. Firstly it says: 'The Constitution by virtue of section 51(xxiiiA) and section 96 has allowed the Commonwealth to increase markedly its involvement in education which is generally regarded as a state and territory responsibility.' It goes on to say:

… the current arrangements have … undoubtedly blurred the lines of accountability to the general public …

As result it is not always clear who ultimately is responsible for the delivery of high-quality services. This shared space on policy and funding has also led to duplication, waste and poor targeting of investment and effort. I would hope that those opposite, that anybody who cares about the future education of our schoolchildren and the management of our school and educational system, would want to eliminate duplication and waste and would want to make sure that investment and effort was well targeted to get the best possible outcome for students. This of course is framed as part of a broader discussion, though. This is not just a review in school funding; this is a review of the entire federation and how it operates. It is having a look at the health sector, it is having a look at the education sector, it is having a look at revenue—how governments have the revenue to access funding for the future.

Through all of that, it is trying to find a way to ensure services are delivered in the most efficient and effective manner possible without having that waste and duplication that we have seen. The problem with this level of waste and duplication and this lack of clear accountability for who is responsible—because currently you have every level of government tipping funding in different and disparate ways to every different level of education—is that nobody ends up being held effectively to account for outcomes. What we have seen, as this discussion paper goes on to say, is:

Spending by all Australian governments grew by 37 per cent, in real terms, in the ten years between 2002-03 and 2012-13.

But we now have fewer higher achievers and more low performers than a decade ago and average scores have declined. We are now equal 17th in mathematics; we were equal second. We are equal eighth science; we were equal third. And we are equal 10th in reading; we were equal second. So, while how much funding schools get is important, it is not the silver bullet to achieve better results. How it is spent matters more.

Senator Wright interjecting—

I will happily take that interjection, Senator Wright—and where it is spent, indeed. So, as a federal government, we have tried to make sure that a lot of our education reforms are focused on the 'how it is spent' question—how it is spent to make sure that we do deliver the appropriate policies that increase school autonomy, ensure that our curriculum is robust and relevant, promote parental engagement in children's learning and improve the quality of teaching; things the Commonwealth can clearly do. We are providing record funding—$69.5 billion to schools over the next four years. So the funding is there in record levels, but we are trying to tackle the policy measures that can help to ensure it is spent in ways that get better outcomes and redress the decline in our performance over the last decade.

We also want to make sure that the funding is used as wisely, effectively and efficiently as possible. That is why we have in this discussion paper, as it is across all elements of the Federation, canvassed the whole range of options that are available. Option 1 that is canvassed here is that states and territories become fully responsible for all schools. Of course, if that were to happen—I hear the hysterical reaction already—you would need to make sure that states and territories had the funding streams to be able to fund all schools, that they actually had the revenue to make up for where the Commonwealth was stepping back, and that of course would be part of any structured arrangement around Federation reform. Option 2 is that states and territories are responsible for funding government schools and the Commonwealth is responsible for funding non-government schools. That is essentially a finessing of current arrangements where the states and territories take the bulk of responsibility for funding the government school sector and the Commonwealth, as it has for decades, takes the bulk of responsibility for funding non-government schools. Option 3 is that there is reduced Commonwealth involvement in school programs—essentially, a level of maintaining the status quo in terms of some of the funding but with less Commonwealth interference in how schools are operated. Option 4 is that the Commonwealth is the dominant public funder of all schools on an equal and consistent basis. Option 4 would be saying that the Commonwealth would take a much greater role in terms of the amount of funding it would provide to education. Of course, the Commonwealth would need to consider how and where it got that revenue from and how it delivered this. But you can see from those four options that the whole spectrum of scenarios is there under consideration, yet we have an opposition—and, frankly, it includes the Greens and the unions on this topic—that is hell-bent on a misleading campaign suggesting that this is part of some strategy for the government to cut school spending.