Penny Allman-Payne

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3036 together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 3, page 4 (line 11), omit "20 per cent", substitute "25 per cent".

(2) Schedule 1, item 7, page 5 (line 19), omit "20%", substitute "25%".

The amendments on sheet 3036 seek to amend section 35A of the Australian Education Act 2013 to raise the share of the Commonwealth's contribution to public schools to 25 per cent. It has been over a decade since the Gonski review said that we needed a truly needs-based funding system for our schools.

Since that time, we've had underfunding, with 98 per cent of public schools now underfunded. More than half of private schools are funded at a higher level than our public schools, with government money. Will the government—for the young people of this country and for the teachers who work every day in their schools—commit to finally getting those schools to 100 per cent of the SRS by lifting the Commonwealth contribution to 25 per cent? I commend this amendment to the Senate.

Anthony Chisholm

The government won't be supporting this amendment. The Minister for Education has been clear: there will be no blank cheques, and additional funding needs to be tied to reform.

It is important that this be a joint effort between the Commonwealth and the states and territories. This amendment wants the Commonwealth to bear the entire burden of filling the five per cent funding gap. This ignores the way that funding for our public schools works and how it is a shared responsibility between us and the states and territories.

Sarah Henderson

Minister, I want to ask a question in relation to a provision in the bill in relation to funding. This bill will introduce differential treatment for government and non-government schools by making the funding instrument for government schools not subject to disallowance whilst non-government school funding will be disallowable. Can you explain why that is the case?

Anthony Chisholm

Approximately 40 per cent of non-government schools are transitioning down. Therefore, this amendment would result in additional costs that would require further consideration, resulting in delays. The Australian government intends to continue maintaining the Commonwealth's share of non-government schools at 80 per cent.

Sarah Henderson

That didn't quite address my question. What I want to know is why there is a difference in the bill between the treatment of government and non-government funding. I understand there are different shares, of course, but, as I say, for government schools the funding instrument is not subject to disallowance, yet for non-government school funding it is disallowable. It's a very significant difference. Could you please explain that very important difference and the decision the government has made in this respect?

Anthony Chisholm

A ratchet mechanism isn't appropriate for non-government schools because the Commonwealth's share for these schools needs to be able to transition down to 80 per cent of the schooling resource standard. Approximately 40 per cent of non-government schools are in the process of transitioning down. Should a future government wish to seek a different set of Commonwealth shares for non-government schools, this would be subject to disallowance by the parliament.

Matt O'Sullivan

The question is that the requests for amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 3036 be agreed to.

Summary

Date and time: 8:13 PM on 2024-11-26
Senator Pocock's vote: Abstained
Total number of "aye" votes: 13
Total number of "no" votes: 22
Total number of abstentions: 41
Related bill: Better and Fairer Schools (Funding and Reform) Bill 2024

Adapted from information made available by theyvoteforyou.org.au