CHURCH  ORGANISATION LAYS DOWN RULES FOR ACCOUNTABILITY FOR FEDERAL TAXPAYERS' MONEY

HAVE DOGS FOUND AN EXPLANATION FOR THE COLLAPSE IN ACCOUNTABILITY IN YEARLY MINISTERIAL REPORT IN RELATION TO STATE AID TO CHURCH SCHOOLS?

DOGS have recently discovered  very interesting information on the National Catholic Education Commission webiste at

http://www.ncec.catholic.edu.au/ncec/accountability2001.htm

In a paper entitled Educational Accountability and Catholic Schools, 2001-2004 the NCEC, in part, lays down the following conditions for accountability for expenditure of public funding to Roman Catholic Schools. We quote:

"Catholic Education authorities commit to....

• Rejecting accountability mechanisms that are designed purely to make comparisons between individuals, schools or systems/sectors which NCEC finds inappropriate and unacceptable. ...

• Negotiating with the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs on additional measures where reporting is to the Department rather than for publication."

and

" ..the NCEC has identified the following commitments which Catholic education authorities can make in respect of educational accountability:...

• Funding agreements that include a confidentiality clause that clearly sets out the basis upon which data can be used by parties to the agreement ( that is, Commonwealth and States/Territory Governments and Catholic education authorities). Catholic education authorities do not agree to publication of data that allows unfair and unacceptable comparisons to be made."

The DOGS refer readers back to our  Press Release No. 26  in which we stated:

"In 1998 there was a dramatic change in the information published and provided to the public. The Green Book in 1997 contained 92 pages whereas that produced in 1998 contained only 26 pages. In addition, in the 1997 Report there were 62 pages of information about money going to individual schools in the states and territories. This has been reduced to 8 pages in the 1998 report. This reduction is a gross abdication and abnegation of parliamentary responsibility and accountability."

DOGS suggest  Australian citizens who believe in representative democracy and separation of Church and State ask their local politicians the following questions:

1.    Is the dramatic loss of basic information available on public funding of church schools to the public linked to the any agreements between the National Catholic Education Commission and federal bureaucrats with the agreement  of federal politicians?

2.     Are federal politicians contented with levels of accountability being in inverse proportion to the increase in massive levels of public funding now provided to church schools?

3.    Does the Church now tell our elected representatives what they can and what they cannot inform Australian citizens about the expenditure of public funds on church enterprises?

4.    Who is the junior and who the senior partner in Australian Church State relations? Who is the organ grinder and who is the monkey?

5.    Is the National Catholic Education Commission fearful of comparisons being made between public funding of church schools and funding of other sectors, for example public schools?

6.    What would a proper economic/efficiency comparison between public funding of church schools and public funding of public schools reveal, school on school ?

DOGS believe that there is no way of obtaining public accountability while State Aid goes to church schools. The only way forward for proper accountability is to only fund a public system which is public in :

• public in purpose

• public in benefit

• public in access ( for pupils, teachers, administrators, citizens and geographically)

• public in control

• public in ownership

• public in accountability

• public in funding.