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

Senator Lambie, thank you for your question. The resource board is intended to be an ongoing entity under the legislation. In that sense, it is expected that it will always be there. It is expected that it will have representation from, and therefore the confidence of, the states and territories, the Catholic education system representatives and the independent school system representative bodies to make sure everyone has a seat at the table. But, importantly, there will be flexibility there in terms of the numbers of members, such that the government of the day will be able to make sure that there not only are representatives bringing particular stakeholder perspectives to the table but also is independence around that table as well, which I think is critical and essential, and the government would want to ensure that that is the case.

I also think it is critical that the combination of those nominated by the government and those nominated by the other stakeholders will be broadly representative of the community to make sure that we have, for example, younger people having their voices rightly heard through a process such as this so that, indeed, those who perhaps have a more contemporary understanding of life at school actually have a seat at the table as well. It is important, of course, that a clear understanding of those who have come from different walks of life will also be reflected there—especially people who understand that educational services in parts of our country have to confront a whole range of circumstances of disadvantage and challenge that not only are fixed in a school community but also require, of course, the engagement of the school community with the entire community, and people who understand how it is that the funding, the resourcing, the support and the actions within schools and their systems helps to support those communities who need it most.

We want to make sure that the recommendations, the process et cetera of this body will be transparent, which is why we have made sure that there are provisions in here for copies to be provided to all of the relevant stakeholder groups and for their reports and findings to be presented within the parliament so that they are public, for the world to see, and, therefore, governments of the day are held to account with regard to any recommendations contained in the reports of the body. The statement I have given already is that the first body of work it would undertake relates to the SES methodology and its interactions with the capacity to contribute arrangements. We have given a commitment that it will have a look at disability loading arrangements and the continued implementation of the NCCD—in particular the striking of those different loading levels across the three different categories for students with a disability to ensure that they are receiving the type of adjustment support necessary for their full participation in schools.

I think it is important to highlight as well that this body, over time, would clearly be undertaking work in terms of whether or not the types of loadings, the types of structures and the funding arrangements were actually getting and delivering improved outcomes in schools. I know that has been a topic of debate. We already have the review taking place through the second half of this year, identifying how funding should be used to achieve educational excellence in schools. That will inform the types of conditions that are set out in proposed section 22(1) of the bill, where states and territories will enter into agreements around school reform to make sure that expert evidence around the implementation of school reforms is committed to by the states and that they then follow through on them.

Good examples, I guess, of where we want to ensure that commitments from the states are acted upon are the important issues of teacher quality, teacher training and so forth, on which we have existing agreements with all states and territories, through the COAG Education Council process, to enhance teacher training at our universities, to have primary school teachers undertaking subject specialisation and to ensure minimum standards in terms of the literacy and numeracy skills of teachers leaving university, getting registered and going into the classroom. I think it is only appropriate that we should expect the states and territories to be held to account to follow through on those sorts of things they have already agreed to do.

But, Senator Lambie, to come back to your question, I do think that it is essential in terms of the composition of the board that we make sure that, yes, there is suitable expertise and experience but also that it is suitably representative of the need across the Australian education landscape and is not, if I can put it this way, just the usual faces but ones that actually bring a degree of fresh perspective to these debates as well so that everybody can have confidence in the future that they are truly focused on student outcomes—what is best for kids and what is best in schools—not necessarily just the technicalities of funding formulas.