Obviously some people are so aching to score points here regarding Rudd’s announcement on a shift in policy that they felt it necessary to muscle in on the Baby Congratulation thread below.
Shameful and unmannerly, to say the least. Have at it here instead.
I thought Beazley already “shifted” this policy yonks ago so … whatever.
Was just about to say what Amanda said.
The Age makes that point:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/rudd-axes-rich-list-for-schools-funding/2007/03/18/1174152881532.html
Why’s it news? Would anyone have expected Rudd to do a backflip on Beazley’s move and go back to a Latho policy?
Yep this is a non-story. But what hasn’t been for the past few weeks. It’s still better than hearing about how Kevin Rudd allegedly wore a Panama hat when he was eleven.
No expectation that the ALP would go back to Latham’s policy … before the election.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the various programmes that disburse Commnwealth funding to schools have been massively fiddled. One only has to look at the disproportionate grants made to Exclusive Bretheren schools; grants made despite their antagonism towards computers and the clear requirements that the recipient schools should provide some instruction in IT.
And even without the fiddles, we now have an increasing number of programmes that allocate funding on a competitive rather than needs basis. Inevitably, this means that schools which already have the resources – spare staff time or the capabilities of committed parents – to go chasing this money are the ones who get it.
And then we have these highly questionable ideas like the school chaplains programme. Ask a struggling suburban school what they would spend $20,000 on, and I doubt many of them will nominate chaplains. Tell them they have to go through a complex application process to get money for something they don’t need, and how many of them will bother?
The wise move for the ALP would be to leave all these issues well alone for the next six to eight months, and then – if they win – announce a review after the election. Of course the usual ranters will immediately see this as a signal that the Latham hit list is alive and well, and they may even be right. Whatever might say to the contrary, class envy is still alive and well and politically significant in this country.
None of this is inconsistent with him saying that current fnding levels are safe through to 2009. Even if a review is concluded quickly, there would inevitably be ‘grandfathering’ arrangements which would ensure this is the case. After that …
It was just a dump. At some stage he would have been pressed to denounce “Latham’s hit-list” and it was probably best to get it out the way early. Nothing to see here, move along.
I’ll repeat the congratulations and baby bonuses all round for mums and dads below. Furthermore I’m genuinely glad the littleys will grow up free of “an outdated concept of class warfare that’s just not applicable to the education needs of the 21st century” as Howard with Hair so eminently puts it.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21405494-1702,00.html
About bloody time such littleys can.
Delusional drivel Fairman, because straight from Howard with Hair’s mouth we have-
â??Labor’s schools policy at the last election was too evocative of an outdated concept of class warfare that’s just not applicable to the education needs of the 21st century,â??
Spin that by us all again Fairman.
This should be read in light of the youth support numbers for the Alternative Liberal Party. Just because the little shit deserves to get flushed doesn’t mean some little four eyed bible bashing bastard and confirmed liar deserves to win.
Not happy Kevin.
Vote Greens.
Nicely put, Prof. Harsh but true.
Until such times as government funding is distributed to the parents (or the studnets in the case of the universities), rather than to individual schools via the AEU-dominated bureacracies, the education system will only smell more and more of bacon. And yes that includes the Jewish and Islamic schools!
John, the AEU has coverage only over working teachers, principals, administrators and support staff in schools. The Teachers’ Fed. does the State schools while the Muslim and Jewish schools would be covered by the IEU, a separate union entirely (though different States have different arrangements).
Public servants in the State and Federal education “bureacracies” (sic) would be covered by the CPSU/PSA.
Fiasco
Yes, my apologies on the Teacher’s Federation vs. AEU distinction. So please re-read my post above with appropriate substitutions. My point about the Islamic and Jewish schools was less related to the teacher’s unions than the general pork-barrelling that has overtaken school funding policy.
Fiasco
If you are going to deny that the AEU and/or its individual state subsidiaries does not have significant input into education policy, particularly curriculum development, I’ll eat my hat!
“Just because the little shit deserves to get flushed doesn’t mean some little four eyed bible bashing bastard and confirmed liar deserves to win.”
“Adopting a position likely to anger unions, Mr Rudd says he is more concerned with the quality of education rather than the debate on government versus non-government schools. ” from a News.com.au story
So no class warfare in school funding then.
What about the general commitment Mr Rudd has given about not increasing taxes – something along the line that there won’t be new taxes just a reallocation of spending priorities ? If not education spending what is it that needs this reallocation of funds?
Is Kevin Rudd going to be controlled by a specific faction of the Party ?Or is he going to be making an antipodean version of New Labour and all the spin and dissembling that came to rule under Mr Blair?
I have an awful feeling that John Greenfield is suggesting the best solution to all these concerns is a move to a voucher system.
Eek.
I won’t say that this approach hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried, mainly because where ever it has been introduced it has either rapidly been replaced, or equally rapidly been subject to so many fiddles that it is difficult to assess whether it is having the desired results. Whatever they are. So the best one could say bout education vouchers is that their efficacy has yet to be demonstrated.
What has been demonstrated is that they usually lead to an immediate increase in the cost of education – in terms of both increased fees, as well as the bureaucratic cost of supplying and monitoring the vouchers – without having any positive effect of equity of access. Just because a family from the wrong side o’ the tracks has a fistful of vouchers to go shopping for a private school, doesn’t mean they’re gonna find a school that’ll take ‘em.
The only real way you’re going to be able to put education funding back in the hands of parents and students is to both taxes and state subsidies for schools, and let a deregulated market sort itself out.
Yes that is exactly what he is doing, and his opponents know it, which is why they are frnatically chewing off their own arms and legs trying to get at him. Before everybody goes off and gets too upset about the direction of a future ALP federal govenremnt, there is a little matter of winning an election first. Does anybody here remember Howard’s ‘never ever’ GST promise, and his oft repeated view prior to the elction in 1996, that he was a Medicare convert? Wake up!
I guess John Geenfield wants the curriculum to be written by John Roskam and Kevin Donnelly. You know, you should put that to Howard Mr Greenfield. If he refuses, it just shows he lacks ticker.
polluted skies
Ah yes, that old meaningless weasel word, “equity” once again is slipped in. What is it with teacher’s union types and their abominable abuse of the English language?
amused
Oh please. Enough of the Kevin Donnelly porn. You’ll go blind. Why don’t you change hands and start on Windschuttle?
Correct decision from Rudd and Smith, but a fait accompli as has already been noted.
Why make a silly political stunt out of taking from the rich and giving to the poor when you can just make everyone richer in proportion to how much they need it?
Yeah, one to keep heads down on. Then fund public schools bigtime later. Easy.
Meanwhile, Rudd could park a truck between the contradictions in Howard’s garbled rhetoric on education: 1. “parental choice” (which has led to an explosion of smaller private schools by slashing minimum enrolemnts necessary to start a scbool – Happy clappies and Islamic schools being the main two beneficiaries) and magically, also, 2. his alleged committment to “shared national values” in education.
Just as one leads directly to increased separatism and reduced interaction with people from other communties, based on private value choices; including religion – with the other he claims to be renovating public citizenship education with “shared Ostrayan values”.
And he reckons Rudd wants to be all things to all people…
If that’s the plan, then fine. But if the announcement today signalled the ALP’s true intentions then stuff them. The level of federal defunding of public versus private schools must be one of the first things Rudd addresses if he wins.
It makes sense to take the heat out of the education funding topic, which the Liberals used to attack both Labor and the Greens in 2004.
The ideologies of teacher unions and private/indepedent schools can be difficult to reconcile. What tends to get lost in the perennial debates on funding are the students themselves – and educational outcomes.
In my opinion, a well funded public education is clearly in the best interests of Australia in terms of providing equal opportunity and social justice. However, choice of education is important for many people too.
I think it is important that funding is provided to/for students, and is not based on what type of school they attend.
Hi all at larvatusprodeo.net!
Make money with unusual business ideas. For example read about blog that makes 1000$ in a day
Bye
Still yet to hear a short, sharp and plausible answer to the question – why should my taxes go to private schools?