AUSTRALIAN COUNCIL FOR THE DEFENCE OF GOVERNMENT
SCHOOLS
PRESS RELEASE 430
MAY 24, 2011
THE STATE AID RHETORIC HAS MOVED
ON
On 24 May 2011 a debate was held at the Melbourne Town Hall on the
proposition that ‘Public Funding of Private Schools was Unconscionable.’ Those
speaking on behalf of this proposition defeated those for the defence on both the argument and the vote.
Amanda Vanstone, who was the only speaker for the defence
who actually addressed the proposition had an article
related to her argument published in The
Age on May 23.
She said that:
I
believe in choice. If you want a school that provides a particular religious
instruction with the basic curriculum, why shouldn't you be able to have it?
Should every child who goes to a small local Christian, Jewish or Muslim school
have no government backing?....
Diversity
and freedom of choice are cornerstones of our society. They should be there in
education. And not just for the super-rich.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/school-funding-debate-is-richbashing-20110522-1eysv.html#ixzz1NPk9fS9m
Diversity and freedom of choice are the
cornerstones of a selfish and self-serving aspirational middle class. But they
are not the cornerstone of a democracy, Amanda. An educated, enlightened
citizenry, and a public education system available to all children, represents
that cornerstone.
The ‘choice’
argument was
the best that the defence could do. They avoided the
fact that in both the inner and outlying suburbs of Melbourne like Coburg and Mernda there is no
choice of a neighbourhood public school. Kevin
Donnelly, Amanda’s fellow speaker fell back on thumping a triumphalist
drum – he pointed out that the private sector got rid of Latham and would get
rid of anyone else who threatened them, and descended to incivility toward
Shane Maloney who spoke for the affirmative side of the debate.
The arguments and sub-standard figures of the
private school supporters failed to persuade the audience. The debate has moved
on. It has moved on to the unconscionability of
sectarian school discrimination against children and parents on the basis of
class, creed, geographic location and you name it – they can do it.
All speakers for public education were
exceptional, but it was Shane Maloney who was published in the Age. He bit the
bullet and took on the main protagonist and beneficiary of State Aid to
sectarian schools – the Catholic Church. The following exceprts
are from his article:
May 23, 2011
The church needs to explain why it's
still in the education business.
The
democratic idea of free, universal and secular public education has been under
sustained attack in this country for several decades. Elected officials
responsible for the state school system are keener to wash their hands of it,
or actively undermine its viability, than to stick up for it. Its teachers are
routinely portrayed as incompetent and feather-bedded, protected by unions
whose sole objective is to defend the privileges of their dead-wood membership.
Meanwhile,
under the rubric of choice, bucketloads of taxpayer
money have been poured into exclusionary and segregated schools with scant
scrutiny of how it is used. Government funds, ostensibly provided to make
private schools more affordable, have not been passed on to parents as lower
fees. Some ''elite'' schools, open only to a minuscule
minority, generate huge financial surpluses while loudly proclaiming their need
for subsidies.
This
has landed the task of defending public education on the shoulders of the
parents of the 65 per cent of our kids who are enrolled in our public schools.
And since those parents lack the well-resourced national organisations of the
commercial and religious sectors, their views often don't get heard beyond
their immediate peers.
This is
a fraught and dangerous business. ….
The
Catholic Church could start the ball rolling by providing reasons for its
ongoing expansion into the education business. As someone raised and educated
in the Catholic faith, I'd really like to know. It's an intriguing question. A
mystery, but hardly a sacred one….
The
Catholic Church is now one of the largest commercial enterprises in Australia.
In 2005, BRW estimated its annual
revenues at more than $1.5 billion, tax exempt. Yet for all its wealth, the
church has not been able to retain its members. Nuns and brothers are few and
far between, religious observance among Catholics has fallen through the floor
and priests are so scarce that a diocese in Tasmania imported some from
Nigeria. More than 40 per cent of Catholics students go to state schools.
Enrolments from low-income Catholic families have declined to the point where
Cardinal George Pell admits the church is no longer educating its poorest
members. Catholic school graduates are deserting religion in droves.
So, how
come Catholic schools account for 20 per cent of all primary and secondary
school enrolments? By catering, according to the cardinal, to the huge
Australian middle class it helped to create. Catholicism has become a brand,
pitched to parents who associate it with discipline and non-secular values.
Eastern Orthodox, Muslim, Buddhist - if you can meet
the fees, you're in. In some Catholic schools, non-Catholic enrolment has
reached 70 per cent.
So if,
despite its wealth, the Catholic Church isn't fulfilling its own aims, if it
can't retain its existing followers, if it doesn't cater to the poorest of its
flock, why should the public be expected to fund its schools?
This
month, the bishops are conducting a survey of attendance at Sunday mass to get
an accurate picture of the number of observant Catholics. It might also be an
opportunity for them to consider just how far the church has strayed from its
original justification for state aid. Some may even be prompted to examine
their consciences as closely as they scrutinise their balance sheets.
If I
thought it would do any good, I'd pray for them to do so
The comments online were a mixed bag. Predictably, Shane Maloney was
accused of ‘Catholic bashing’ but not, surprisingly, of being ‘sectarian’. He
had many, many supporters and a number sitting on the fence, wondering just
where the educational future lies in Australia.
One thing is for sure. Australia’s educational and democratic future
never has, and never will lie with the sectarian denominational system. That is
an eighteenth century system for an aristocracy. Our nineteenth century
forefathers discovered that you cannot educate a modern nation unless you have
a publicly funded system that is open to all, one that is publicly owned,
controlled and accountable. The Scandinavian countries, Germany, China, The
USA, and Singapore know this.
The current arrangement in Australia is uneconomic, and grossly unfair to
the vast majority of children, parents and taxpayers. It is unconscionable.’
And
Listen to the DOGS program
3CR, 855 on
the A.M. dial
12 Noon
Saturdays