Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Education and Training, Senator Birmingham. I refer to a statement made last year by the incoming secretary of the education department, Dr Michele Bruniges:

To those who say Australia has poured money into education with little to show for it, let me say the evidence is clear that levels of investment in this country have lagged behind other countries …

Is this statement correct?

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

It is the case that Australia provides above average funding for schools. I am pleased to inform Senator Dastyari that when you consider both public and private investment in school education we have above average funding compared with the rest of the OECD. But what Senator Dastyari and others seem to focus on is a false view that funding equals outcomes. Funding is an input. Of course, the Labor Party have an attitude where they believe that more money is the solution to everything. More money is not the solution to everything.

What we know, just from the most recent NAPLAN data that is out, is that some of those schools who increased their performance in that NAPLAN data had significant growth in funding, but an almost equal number of schools who did so well in increasing their performance had a reduction in their funding. So you can see that what actually happens on the ground matters far more than the amount of inputs going in. It is about the quality of the teachers, the content of the curriculum, and the teaching practices and pedagogies that are applied. These are the things that our government has rightly focused on. We know that funding is important but we know that how you use it matters more.

We know that school funding in Australia is at a record level at present. Yet our results in terms of international comparison and real performance in literacy and numeracy have gone backwards despite record funding increase. So perhaps we should ask the question at present: what more can we do to spend that money better? How can we spend that money better and more wisely to get a better outcome? How can we ensure that children are benefiting from the record investment in funding going into schools rather than simply doing what those opposite propose, which is putting ever more money in without ever asking the question: how do you make sure you get the best results for students?— (Time expired)

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I again refer to Dr Bruniges, who said last year that:

… schools are reporting that they are seeing improvements in student outcomes – not just in learning but in better social and emotional outcomes … We have been able to do this because of the additional funding delivered through the Gonski agreement.

Minister, is this statement correct?

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

If Senator Dastyari had listened to my first answer, he would have heard me say that some schools are doing much better. Equally, some schools are getting record funding but their performance is slipping. What the evidence of the NAPLAN results released most recently demonstrates, and almost every other analysis that is undertaken, is that it is how you use the funding that matters most, and that is what we need to focus on.

That is why last Friday I was pleased to be speaking to a group of highly accomplished lead teachers because we are supporting the professional development of teachers, the development of their expertise and the development of leadership in schools. Those capabilities allow them to use the record funding that is available in the most effective way possible. That is what we should be doing across the board in our education debate. You seem completely fixated on the inputs. We on this side care about student outcomes.

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, why won't the Turnbull government join with Labor and commit to funding the Gonski school reforms on time and in full to ensure that every child can reach their full capacity?

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

Senator Dastyari needs to recognise and realise that we have record levels of investment in Australian schools at present and that the Commonwealth's contribution to that investment is at the highest level ever, and yet we have seen—as I said in the previous answers—performance slipping. That is why we are asking the question of how you can boost performance.

Those opposite have plans where they promise they are going to put much more money in than we are proposing to put in. I acknowledge that. Everybody is committed to a trajectory of growth for school funding, but those opposite want to spend sums of money that they do not know how they will pay for. As the South Australian Labor Premier has said, 'They have no coherent plan to pay for their promises.' Others, of course, have identified that their funding measures simply worsen the structural deficit over time. That only leaves a worse legacy for those students in our school system, who will inherit higher taxes or greater debt because of the promises of those opposite.