AUSTRALIAN COUNCIL FOR THE DEFENCE OF GOVERNMENT
SCHOOLS
PRESS RELEASE 442
GONSKI
FUNDING REPORTS AVOID THE OBVIOUS
:
ONLY PUBLIC SYSTEMS PROVIDE EQUITY
15 September 2011
The ALP and Gonski Committee are involved in a hopeless exercise because
they studiously avoid the obvious truth:
Only public systems of education can provide equitable outcomes.
They are politically correct in avoiding
the public/private ideological divide,
concentrating on ‘schools’ not systems and their underlying objectives.
Forty years of ‘Needs’ policies and pages of statistics later, all
Reports have discovered that the current funding arrangements have failed to
provide equitable outcomes. Surprise! Surprise!
All ‘independent’ Reports reveal a
growing tail of disadvantage in Australia.
These inequities are far greater than any confronting the nation in the
1960s, and occur in the public school systems.
Why?
Because since 1969 private religious systems have been provided
with billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money to divide children on the basis of
creed, class and culture.
No-one, except the DOGS and ordinary public school parents, have the
plain guts to spell out the obvious. If you subsidise the wealthy, the poor get
poorer.
SO…with the reports commissioned by Gonski we are looking at evidence of
obvious failure of the various versions of “Needs’ policies. Yet, because ‘no
school will lose a dollar’, the citizen
taxpayer is left with recommendations
for ‘more of the same’.
i.
The Allen Report talks about
a school resource standard for all schools. with added weightings for specific
needs. This is favoured by the sectarian systems.
But:
Without open accountability for all private school financial resources,
this will quickly descend into a voucher system - and greater disadvantage. The
added ‘weightings for disadvantage’ will
lead to continued rorting by the sectarian sector.
ii.
The ACER Report reveals the
need for a substantial long term investment in schools with disadvantaged
students, primarily government schools.
But :
This rehash of the ‘Needs’ policy will be open to abuse by
‘needy’religious schools.
The ACER Report also suggests that residualised schools
should be targeted with ‘significant investment funding’ above and beyond recurrent
funding for a five to ten year period.
But:
This assumes that schools are cogs in a market economy, rather than an
essential local community resource, part
of a system provided by governments out of taxpayer funding.
iii.
The Nous group suggest reconsideration of funding for elite private
schools that are proven to not be value-adding to student performance, and
pressure on wealthy sectarian schools to take disadvantaged students.
But:
This assumes that education is a ‘charity’, not a ‘right’.
To be fair, however, the Nous group do draw distinctions between
Australia and countries that do not subsidise sectarian systems of education.
They even refer to three distinct ‘sectors’. However, they do not distinguish
between the objectives of public and
sectarian systems.
iv.
The Deloitte report recommends a streamlined and co-ordinated
approach to funding and notes that the
effect of funding maintenance for the private systems has negated the SES (
Needs) model. The allocation of funds using students’ home addresses as a proxy
for socio-economic status is also criticized as a ‘crude measure’.
But:
Deloitte does not take the next step and point
out that only a public authority accountable for public money and responsible
to parliament can provide certainty of educational outcome.
It is unlikely that the Gonski Committee will confront the obvious as
they manufacture statistical and sectarian obscurities according to their terms
of reference.
The plain
facts are these:
i.
The basic ideological
differences between public systems open to all and sectarian systems that
discriminate is not going to go away.
ii.
Only a public system is
available to all and can tackle disadvantage.
iii.
Only a well funded public
system can provide the nation with an educated and skilled citizenry.
iv.
Only a public system is
publicly accountable for public money.
v.
Other countries with
equitable systems do not subsidise sectarian systems
vi.
All Australian attempts
at ‘Needs’ policies have failed because
the sectarian systems have shamelessly abused them – quite legally . There has
been and still is little or no public accountability for the billions of
dollars poured into these systems on an annual basis.
LISTEN TO
THE DOGS RADIO PROGRAM
3CR
855 ON THE AM DIAL
12.00 NOON SATURDAYS