30 April 2009

The most pointless whinge in history?

| johnboy
Join the conversation
218

Here at RiotACT we consider ourselves connoisseurs of the fine art of complaining.

But we doff our lids to Steve Doszpot’s latest effort:

    Shadow Minister for Education and Disability, Steve Doszpot, has today condemned the Stanhope-Gallagher Government for failing to acknowledge the rights of 411 students with a disability currently enrolled in the non-government school sector.

    The ACT Education Act 2004 clearly states that education should aim to develop every child’s potential and maximise educational achievements, this would also apply to non-government students also.

    “The ACT Human Rights Act 2004 also applies to all students with a disability, not just the government sector.

    “Why then are one quarter of the population of students with a disability being ignored in the recent Review into special education needs in the ACT?

And there I was thinking the non-government sector was all about choice.

So if you choose to go to the (here’s a hint Steve) “Non-Government” sector it’s somehow the Government’s responsibility to deliver all the other services they deliver in their own schools?

Give me a break.

Join the conversation

218
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Pommy bastard said :

BerraBoy68 said :

But that’s only part 1 of the problem also PB. Part 2 is how you would react if they said, ‘No, we won’t do it’ in response to your request?

There needs to be some reason for them to react positively. Carrot or stick, I don’t care but a ‘request’ can also draw a ‘nil’ response.

Oh I think a few well placed newspaper reports, along the lines of: “Cashgrab High Private School refused to conduct investigations into the needs of disabled kids in their care,” would be an incentive?

Good thoughts PB but I don’t think that goes far enough. Private schools have demonstrated an immunity to community criticism in relation to other complaints made against them in the recent past (another story for another time) but that’s more about protecting their money, which they seem to value higher than their reputation. I believe stopping taxpayer funding (which such school receive in for the form of grants in the ACT) may have some affect, however. The other way to think about it is the carrot approach (i.e. what incentives can they get for doing the right thing – other than cash handouts obviously).

Pommy bastard said :

BerraBoy68 said :

But that’s only part 1 of the problem also PB. Part 2 is how you would react if they said, ‘No, we won’t do it’ in response to your request?

There needs to be some reason for them to react positively. Carrot or stick, I don’t care but a ‘request’ can also draw a ‘nil’ response.

Oh I think a few well placed newspaper reports, along the lines of: “Cashgrab High Private School refused to conduct investigations into the needs of disabled kids in their care,” would be an incentive?

not just the newspaper, get it on the airwaves. radio would do more damage, especially if the piece played at 3.00pm…

Pommy bastard12:58 pm 05 May 09

BerraBoy68 said :

But that’s only part 1 of the problem also PB. Part 2 is how you would react if they said, ‘No, we won’t do it’ in response to your request?

There needs to be some reason for them to react positively. Carrot or stick, I don’t care but a ‘request’ can also draw a ‘nil’ response.

Oh I think a few well placed newspaper reports, along the lines of: “Cashgrab High Private School refused to conduct investigations into the needs of disabled kids in their care,” would be an incentive?

BerraBoy68 said :

Part 2 is how you would react if they said, ‘No, we won’t do it’ in response to your request?

Threaten to kill them.

I think the bigger problem would be ensuring that a survey of private schools conducted by private schools remain free of bias. It would be all too easy for the schools to slap themselves on the back and say how wonderful they are while eliding any potential problems that do exist (I can tell you from experience that private schools are particularly good at doing that).

If there was a review of private schools provision of special education for disabled children in their care, it should be conducted impartially.

Only offered up when invited to offer an alternate solution though PB….*Sheesh*:)

But that’s only part 1 of the problem also PB. Part 2 is how you would react if they said, ‘No, we won’t do it’ in response to your request? There needs to be some reason for them to react positively. Carrot or stick, I don’t care but a ‘request’ can also draw a ‘nil’ response.

Pommy bastard11:33 am 05 May 09

Hmmm…

The Govt should request that all private schools conduct, (within a given time scale,) a review of their provision of special education for disabled children in their care, using the same criteria as the Govt has used for children within public schools.

God, I’m good…..

johnboy said :

*sigh*

It’s very simple. The ACT Government was not surveying non-Government schools BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SCHOOLS OPERATED BY THE ACT GOVERNMENT.

What we’ve come back to is Doszpot still unable to get a coherent thought to the end of a sentence, and then a bunch of middle class rent seekers sticking their hands out for money that would be better spent elsewhere.

Even simpler JB – Private schools can be included in the survey as they are still subject to ACT law and they must act within that law. Maybe this was an oversight by the ACT Gov’t but it can be rectified. After all both public and private schools operate under the same laws. I’m not sure what you think goes on in Private schools but they are not sovereign territories where teachers and kids can carry on free of any broader social responsibility. As I say the laws that effect St Thomas Aquinas Primary and Marist College are the very same laws that effect Aranda Primary and Narrabundah College. In fact, by not including Private schools in the review the Gov’t would be holding Public schools to a higher standard that those of Private schools. And that would be blatantly unfair.

Trust me, the ACT Gov’t can and does get involved in other matters pertaining to issues occurring in Private schools, so there is no reason to expect that can’t also get involved in this case. I also disagree with earlier comments that Steve Doszpot is making an attack on Private education. What he is saying, and I can state this as I clarified this with him, is that private schools must be held accountable, the same as public schools. If the Government won’t do this as part of their ‘showpiece’ review, then who will? Who could? Again, letting Private schools get away with not implementing the law is blatantly unfair and the usual critics would have a field day (and so they should).

I am curious though to find out who these ”rent seekers’ are that you’re referring to? I’ve not seen anybody talk about wanting money. In fact the only people talking about money were those that read the press release a certain way, which has now been clarified as being incorrect.

*sigh*

It’s very simple. The ACT Government was not surveying non-Government schools BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SCHOOLS OPERATED BY THE ACT GOVERNMENT.

What we’ve come back to is Doszpot still unable to get a coherent thought to the end of a sentence, and then a bunch of middle class rent seekers sticking their hands out for money that would be better spent elsewhere.

Jim Jones said :

But this does seem to inevitably raise the question: if private schools aren’t sufficiently addressing the needs of special needs children, what happens then?

And that, JJ is Mr Doszpot’s point! The current Government Review needs to look at this issue as part of its Terms of Reference and offer realistic, workable and effective solutions (noting obvious community concern that taxpayer funding of issues within Private schools isn’t always the answer). There a lot of interested parties taking part in this review many of whom would be, dare I say it, clever. Surely some good ideas can be put forward.

Good work BerraBoy.

Obviously we got off track in discussing the whole funding of private/public schools. But it’s still a very important discussion to be having, particularly in relation to complex issues such as this, and the issues raised are no less valid because they don’t pertain to the Dozspot case.

I don’t think anyone would argue against the idea that all schools should address the needs of special needs children.

But this does seem to inevitably raise the question: if private schools aren’t sufficiently addressing the needs of special needs children, what happens then?

Lest there be any misunderstanding in this issue, I have spoken to Steve Doszpot (his office appears to have both a phone and very friendly staff!) and it has been confirmed to me that this issue is NOT about taxpayer funding of special needs at Private schools at all. Rather, as previously suspected it is a call to have the Government as part of their review to look at various ways of ensuring Private Schools address the needs of special needs children where they attend such a school. So enough about more taxpayer monies going to private schools, please.

Also for what it’s worth, I don’t think anybody has been aggressive in this debate as much as passionate. As I said in an earlier post, Granny lives with this issue everyday of her life so she is bound to be passionate and determined about this. It is extremely personal to her so she is bound to have a strong emotional investment. I’ve met several other families in similar situations to Granny and if you knew the services they were not getting for their kids you’d be concerned (or at least I hope you would). This is particularly galling where the provision of such services falls under the remit of the ACT Gov’t but they don’t have the will or inclination to do anything about simply because the issue isn’t high profile enough (read: not enough votes in it) to address.

I don’t.

I think you’ve been the most aggressive commenter here Granny.

I think you should read back over what you’ve written and ask yourself, “Would I talk to my friends that way?”

You’ve been writing in anger and I really don’t understand why that’s been necessary at all.

Our friendship actually meant something to me.

Pommy bastard7:39 pm 04 May 09

Granny, I have not been “mean” I have tried to keep on topic within the debate.

I have not made up stuff, but rebutted your actual words.

Well, you obviously have a greater understanding of disability issues. What the hell would I know?

I don’t have the hours to sit around rebutting every point you make. And why post something just to have to wade through another whole ream of snide comments about what I’ve written?

I am most disappointed because I had come to see you in a different way, particularly in light of your recent posts.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with me, I just don’t understand why you have to be so mean.

Pommy bastard6:19 pm 04 May 09

My apologies to all, I really mucked up the formatting of that last attempt. (I was very cross at the time)

Here we have it again.

Well that’s the whole thing about it, Pommy Bastard.

The student’s educational needs are complex because their life needs are complex. But try being a teacher at even a special school where the child has no wheelchair or no communication device

Again, if the child needs a wheelchair, or a communication device it is not the job of the school, but of the health authority, to provide these. (By the way, how do these disabled kids cope outside of school without disability aids?)

Do you not understand the basic premise of disability aid provision?

or where you’re trying to give a lesson and suddenly it’s all hands on deck while one kid has a seizure, except that there are never enough hands. Try teaching literacy and numeracy while you, the teacher, are also spoon-feeding them lunch, changing their nappies, executing therapy programs from physios, OTs, speechies, hydrotherapists and behavioural management strategies from counselors.

So now you’re telling us that each and every private school should have physios, OTs, speech therapists, hydrotherapists and behavioural management counselors, all paid for by the taxpayer?

You think it’s funny that a special school doesn’t have learning software for special education?

You think it’s absurd for me to say that a school needs to be equipped with the resources necessary to achieve its purpose?

Yes, if it doesn’t have the basic resources it needs it’s exactly like opening a mainstream school without any equipment and resources. What is absurd about that?

You can laugh at me all you want, but these things are true nevertheless and you can ask any parent or carer out there, and they’ll tell you the same.

Please don’t make up imaginary things which I have not said, and do not think in order to bolster your arguments Granny.

If you want to argue about what I think, or feel, or believe, then please quote me.

Everyone here can read what I have posted.

I have not mentioned “special schools” as the debate is not about them.

I have not laughed at you, nor have I said that you are absurd, I have not said that I find anything about a lack of provision for disabled kids is funny.

Here is my answer to the problem posed by the topic at hand;

The Govt should request that all private schools conduct, (within a given time scale,) a review of their provision of special education for disabled children in their care, using the same criteria as the Govt has used for children within public schools.

Pommy bastard6:04 pm 04 May 09

Granny said :

Well that’s the whole thing about it, Pommy Bastard.

The student’s educational needs are complex because their life needs are complex. But try being a teacher at even a special school where the child has no wheelchair or no communication device

Again, if the child needs a wheelchair, or a communication device it is not the job of the school, but of the health authority, to provide these.

Do you not understand the basic premise of disability aid provision?

or where you’re trying to give a lesson and suddenly it’s all hands on deck while one kid has a seizure, except that there are never enough hands. Try teaching literacy and numeracy while you, the teacher, are also spoon-feeding them lunch, changing their nappies, executing therapy programs from physios, OTs, speechies, hydrotherapists and behavioural management strategies from counselors.

So now you’re telling us that each and every private school should have physios, OTs, speech therapists, hydrotherapists and behavioural management counselors, all paid for by the taxpayer?

You think it’s funny that a special school doesn’t have learning software for special education?

You think it’s absurd for me to say that a school needs to be equipped with the resources necessary to achieve its purpose?

Yes, if it doesn’t have the basic resources it needs it’s exactly like opening a mainstream school without any equipment and resources. What is absurd about that?

You can laugh at me all you want, but these things are true nevertheless and you can ask any parent or carer out there, and they’ll tell you the same.

Please don’t make up imaginary things which I have not said, and do not think in order to bolster your arguments Granny.

If you want to argue what I think, or feel, or believe, then please quote me.

Everyone here can read what I have posted.

I have not mentioned “special schools” as the debate is not about them.

I have not laughed at you, nor have I said that you are absurd, I have not said that I find anything about a lack of provision for disabled kids is funny.

Here is my answer to the problem posed by the topic at hand;

The Govt should request that all private schools conduct, (within a given time scale,) a review of their provision of special education for disabled children in their care, using the same criteria as the Govt has used for children within public schools.

Jim Jones said :

johnboy said :

The right to private education…

The rot of middle class welfare takes another step towards the downfall of our society.

Yep.

If there is a ‘right to private education’, that is only limited by one’s ability to pay (per post 138), then presumably every Australian also has a right to own a Corvette (this right only being limited by one’s ability to buy the damn thing).

[\quote] Yes they do, JJ so what’s your point? Should someone not have the right to a private education or a Corvette if they can afford it? If so who would you nominate as not having this right? I don’t think anybody here is arguing that taxpayers should have to fund anybody elses lifestyle (I’m certainly not). The real argument is that a)how the Government can ensure all schools provide basic human rights to those in their care and b) where private schools are not meeting this requirement what can be done to remedy the situation.

For info: my folks sacrificed a great many things to be able to afford private education for me and my brother. We were most assuredly working class (unless there is some parallel universe where working on the docks makes you middle class) and we never accepted any Gov’t handouts to get by or pay for any school fees, etc… even when I required specialist treatment a kid. If we couldn’t afford it – we never got it, simple.

However, many comments in this the Thread seem to offer some belief that private schools should be exempt from public scrutiny, fairness and other social tests that are imposed on public schools on the basis that if discrepencies are found then the dear old taxpayer has to front up to remedy any deficiencies found at those schools.

Now I’ve read Steves Doszpots original media release several times I can’t find one sentance that explicitely states that taxpayers should have to pay for anything to do with private schools. At best there are one or two sentances that can be read either way and this may be the root of the problem here. What Steve is calling for (to my reading of the release) is simply that the Government review also look at measures to ensure private schools provide the basic human rights for any special needs child enrolled at those schools. While noting this can be acheived several ways without direct recourse to government funding, someone cried out ‘oh no, more taxpayer funding of private schools’ early in the thread and everybody else resorted to the typical private v public school argument. The real issue is basic human rights and how the Gov’t can ensure these are being met – funding is just one of many possible solutions.

If this review was about elderly patients being ignored/abused at Calvary hospital I beleive many Rioters would be demanding the Government do something to hold the owners of the Hostpital accountable, but because it’s about special needs kids at private schools shots are being fired all over the place.

Other than looking at just one possible solution (i.e. taxpayer funding)to the problem posed by Steve Doszpot in his release why not offer up other workable solutions for discussion?

Except that nobody is proposing this anyway.

johnboy said :

The right to private education…

The rot of middle class welfare takes another step towards the downfall of our society.

Yep.

If there is a ‘right to private education’, that is only limited by one’s ability to pay (per post 138), then presumably every Australian also has a right to own a Corvette (this right only being limited by one’s ability to buy the damn thing).

As a concept of a ‘right’, it’s meaningless. I can only wonder what other ‘rights’ come with this caveat. Free speech? Sexual equality?

No one is arguing that it isn’t better for disabled kids to have the support they need – the only argument seems to be over who pays. But invoking the concept of a ‘right to private education’ is ludicrous and seems to me to degrade the very notion of rights.

johnboy said :

The right to private education…

The rot of middle class welfare takes another step towards the downfall of our society.

I never accept the right to private education. I was from a low income family, my parents would have loved to send me to private school, but we couldn’t afford it, so I didn’t go. I went through the public system.

I want my children to have every opportunity in their lives. If it means a second mortgage for their schooling, so be it. I would prefer that they had the chance to exceed their potential.

The middle class welfare that you mention includes me and my little family. I work several jobs, I have about 5hrs sleep a night, and we receive the family benefit. I am not looking for handouts or access to extra govt money, in fact, I am embarrased by the tiny amount that we do receive. I would rather not receive it, but then, we would be broke really, really fast.

We don’t go out often to dinner, maybe once a month or two. My wedding anniversary was on friday – we went to maccas for a mc cafe coffee and cake. A family friend babysat for us. My sons turned 2 yesterday. the party was a low key affair, and we couldn’t invite more people and give them nothing.

I count myself lucky that my children have no known disabilities. I do, but I can mask them well.

The problems that parents with children with disabilities face is a lack of support from the general community and the schools. A child in a wheelchair is still a child. And we should allow them to be a child, with their friends if we can, if not, in an atmosphere that allows them to excel and grow. ramps and rails aren’t everything that they need, but it is a start in the right direction.

The right to private education…

The rot of middle class welfare takes another step towards the downfall of our society.

there is a product on the market called the comfypc. our kids are using it now, and the skills that they are developing are simply amazing…

Well that’s the whole thing about it, Pommy Bastard.

The student’s educational needs are complex because their life needs are complex. But try being a teacher at even a special school where the child has no wheelchair or no communication device or where you’re trying to give a lesson and suddenly it’s all hands on deck while one kid has a seizure, except that there are never enough hands. Try teaching literacy and numeracy while you, the teacher, are also spoon-feeding them lunch, changing their nappies, executing therapy programs from physios, OTs, speechies, hydrotherapists and behavioural management strategies from counselors.

You think it’s funny that a special school doesn’t have learning software for special education? That the teacher has no means of communicating with the child they are entrusted to teach?

You think it’s absurd for me to say that a school needs to be equipped with the resources necessary to achieve its purpose?

Yes, if it doesn’t have the basic resources it needs it’s exactly like opening a mainstream school without any equipment and resources. What is absurd about that?

You can laugh at me all you want, but these things are true nevertheless and you can ask any parent or carer out there, and they’ll tell you the same.

If you imagined sending your child to a school in the third world, they would still be better equipped to get an education than what a child with certain disabilities is here.

It’s amazing what you can teach if you have basics like communication in place, and how impossible it is to educate someone without it.

Pommy bastard said :

Do you think that sending your kid to a school which cannot cater to their disability is the best way of helping them achieve their highest potential?

Education has many aspects to it, and if you find a school that meets most of your childs needs as opposed to one that meets few you should be able to choose. You are painting a black and white picture on a subject that has many shades of grey.

Or are you saying “I want the best education for my kid, but I want the taxpayer to fund the extra help they need, but in a school of my choice”?

And the taxpayer will pay for the total cost at a public school as opposed to a share of it at a private school. Is that what taxpayers want to do ?

BTW: my PC always seems to be about 3 seconds out of time between me hitting the keys and the the letter showing on the screen. Sorry for the bad spelling.

PB – you seem to be arguing that parents who place their kids in private schools then argue about the lack of facilies to assist their special needs child should just suck it up as they made their choice and should just ive with it. As I said earlier I am yet to find the perfect school (public or private)that can deal with every childs specific needs. Even some public schools struggle to provide good quality equipment to aid their students education (e.g. just ask the music Dept’s of various ACT high schools who try to teach music with broken instruments).

When it comes to equality, however, it isn’t a matter of simply asking for taxpayer funding, rather it’s about protecting and enforcing human rights. This is within the ACT Governments responsibilities even when it comes to Private education. I would argue you are right though that private schools should be able to afford much of what is required out of their own budgets. In fact you’d be surprised what they can fund when they have/want to.

I’m not having a dig at you personally PB (honestly!) but what I’ve been uncomfortable about thoughout this discussion is the cavelier attitude some Rioters seem to have towards those with a vested interest in this issue. While it’s all good fun to comment on various Threads of interest occassionally a Thread pops up that solicits real passion and emotion. I think we have to recognise that for some rioters, such as Granny, the issue of human rights for special needs children isn’t just a way to spend a few hours on the internet. Such struggles are their and their childrens reality, 24/7 every day of their lives. While I’ll admit to more than a passing interest in this issue myself, I won’t criticise or critique Granny’s, or any other posters, comments where the issue under discussion impacts the life of their family members. Unless you are intimately involved is such struggles you can’t understand the passion involved. There but for the grace of God….

Pommy bastard11:39 am 04 May 09

Whatsup said :

So you are saying that parents of special needs children should not have the choice to send their child to the school in which the child will reach their highest potential.

Do you think that sending your kid to a school which cannot cater to their disability is the best way of helping them achieve their highest potential?

Or are you saying “I want the best education for my kid, but I want the taxpayer to fund the extra help they need, but in a school of my choice”?

Pommy bastard said :

Why go bleating to the taxpayer that your child is in s school which cannot provide for their disability needs, when you placed them there out of choice. (A choice which most people with kids in public schools cannot exercise!)

So you are saying that parents of special needs children should not have the choice to send their child to the school in which the child will reach their highest potential.

In some cases the Public system has not been able to offer the child the appropriate environment for learning. In this scenario putting in them in a public school costs the taxpayer more and has a negative impact on the child. This is lose-lose for the taxpayer and child if the parents aren’t wealthy enough to provide the extra funding.

What happened to your proposed compromise PB

… how about a compromise?
The parents of disabled kids who attend a private school should be means tested before any taxpayer funding is provided for whatever increased support/structural changes/extra classroom aid/whatever is given.

Pommy bastard8:20 am 04 May 09

To find out what actual services the DET provides, and to get an idea of the sort of services which are withing its remit (as opposed to the provision of wheelchairs etc) the DET website is most useful.

http://www.det.act.gov.au/school_education/special_education

General Developmental Playgroups

Communication and Social Awareness Playgroups (CASA)

Therapy and Education Playgroups

Early Intervention Units (EIU)

Autism Intervention Units (AIU)

Language Intervention Unit (LIU)

Early Childhood Centre (ECC)

Early Childhood Units (ECU)

Support programs in regular school settings

Support Teachers – Vision

Support Teachers – Hearing

Support Teachers – Inclusion

Inclusive Technology support

Support Classes – Language

Post School Options Support

Special School programs

This is also worth reading.

http://www.disabilitycoordinationoffice.com.au/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/gid,9/

These are provided in the public sector. Is it not reasonable that anyone with a child with special needs should take advantage of them?

Which brings us back to the original point of the debate, almost; If you have a disabled child, and want to place them in a private school, is the onus not on you to ascertain whether the school has sufficient facility for your child?

Why go bleating to the taxpayer that your child is in s school which cannot provide for their disability needs, when you placed them there out of choice. (A choice which most people with kids in public schools cannot exercise!)

Pommy bastard7:43 am 04 May 09

Granny said :

Deezagood, this is rubbish. Even public schools don’t have to supply the wheelchair. Wish they did, but they don’t.

Why should schools provide wheelchairs, they are not medical facilities?

To me, the way the system is right now in special education, is the equivalent of if the government built a school and opened it with no chairs or desks or books or resources or whiteboards and said, “Ok, kids, come on in and learn. Here’s your school. We’ve given you a school. What are you complaining about?”

Reductio ad absurdum.

Deezagood, this is rubbish. Even public schools don’t have to supply the wheelchair. Wish they did, but they don’t.

To me, the way the system is right now in special education, is the equivalent of if the government built a school and opened it with no chairs or desks or books or resources or whiteboards and said, “Ok, kids, come on in and learn. Here’s your school. We’ve given you a school. What are you complaining about?”

Pommy bastard said :

Whatsup said :

This is not about religion, its about meeting childrens individual needs at the appropriate school.

Where does the funding come from… the parents who are already paying. Some might be able to afford more, others wont and they will be forced back into the Public system.

I disagree with this, how about a compromise?

The parents of disabled kids who attend a private school should be means tested before any taxpayer funding is provided for whatever increased support/structural changes/extra classroom aid/whatever is given.

Yeah, if the parents are rolling in cash they could contribute more. If they aren’t then the support should be available if the school is right for their child. Its an option indeed.

Pommy bastard9:20 pm 03 May 09

Whatsup said :

This is not about religion, its about meeting childrens individual needs at the appropriate school.

Where does the funding come from… the parents who are already paying. Some might be able to afford more, others wont and they will be forced back into the Public system.

I disagree with this, how about a compromise?

The parents of disabled kids who attend a private school should be means tested before any taxpayer funding is provided for whatever increased support/structural changes/extra classroom aid/whatever is given.

deezagood said :

So by your own argument, the government should fund these things at private schools, because it is ultimately saving them money? And if the government funds all of these necessary things for all private schools, what exactly makes them a private school?

A private school is where the parents pay some of the bill for educating the children as well as the government contributions. The government will never be asked to fund everything.

A public school is where the government pays most of the bill and hopes that some parents might contribute with a voluntary payment. The shortfall between this income and the expenses falls on the P&C to try and make ends meet. Some parents declare its the governments job to educate their kids and pay zilch.

Wouldn’t they then just become ‘special agenda’ government schools? The government already DOES provide these facilities for kids with special-needs (perhaps not as well as they should) – at PUBLIC, government-funded schools. Why on earth should they fund private schools too?

Because I am aware of children that have moved to the private school system as not all children with special needs are / can be looked after in the public school system. I am also aware of some children who are in the public school system and their needs are better met there. Not all schools suit all children and therefore parents should have the option to make the best choices for their child. This is not about religion, its about meeting childrens individual needs at the appropriate school.

The schools themselves must of course provide these facilities; from their own funding.

Where does the funding come from… the parents who are already paying. Some might be able to afford more, others wont and they will be forced back into the Public system.

I wonder, what else should the government pay for at non-government schools?

Lets stay on topic shall we. Children with special needs should get assistance at which ever school they attend.

Hells_Bells743:57 pm 03 May 09

deezagood said :

But whatsup, you could apply that argument to every single aspect of a child’s education; ALL children need teachers, ALL children need libraries, ALL children need classrooms. So by your own argument, the government should fund these things at private schools, because it is ultimately saving them money? And if the government funds all of these necessary things for all private schools, what exactly makes them a private school? Wouldn’t they then just become ‘special agenda’ government schools? The government already DOES provide these facilities for kids with special-needs (perhaps not as well as they should) – at PUBLIC, government-funded schools. Why on earth should they fund private schools too? The schools themselves must of course provide these facilities; from their own funding. I wonder, what else should the government pay for at non-government schools?

You have a convincing argument there Deezagood.

Deadmandrinking2:00 pm 03 May 09

As a person with a disability (albiet minor), I’d have to say that, sorry, but it is up to the private schools to provide disability support. If I was still a primary/high school student, I would not go to a school that did not provide the (small) support I needed.

If they want the right to have Chaplains and force students to go to church, then they’re gonna have to pay for it out of their own pockets. If they don’t have enough, then it is up to them to get donations from parents who want their children at religeous education schools. We have separation of state and church for a reason (in fact, I don’t think that philosophy is employed enough in this country, considering our classification boards).

It’s not about disability rights. There are already services for the disabled of all ages that are a lot better than many other countries. Yes, they still have waiting lists and some shoddiness to them, but simply trying to branch it out private schools isn’t going to help. This is simply the liberal philosophy of trying to privatise everything so the rich in this country can have more to buy and feel better about themselves with.

Whatsup said :

Why should private schools have to find their own funding to support special needs children ? These children require resources regardless which school they attend and will already be costing the government less if the parents decide to share the financial burden by sending their kids to a private school. You have experienced a Christian school that in your opinion did not apply funding where you expected they should due to their religious values. Are they all like that ?

But whatsup, you could apply that argument to every single aspect of a child’s education; ALL children need teachers, ALL children need libraries, ALL children need classrooms. So by your own argument, the government should fund these things at private schools, because it is ultimately saving them money? And if the government funds all of these necessary things for all private schools, what exactly makes them a private school? Wouldn’t they then just become ‘special agenda’ government schools? The government already DOES provide these facilities for kids with special-needs (perhaps not as well as they should) – at PUBLIC, government-funded schools. Why on earth should they fund private schools too? The schools themselves must of course provide these facilities; from their own funding. I wonder, what else should the government pay for at non-government schools?

deezagood said :

I think that private schools (referring to stereotypical schools, not special-needs private schools) however, being private, should channel their OWN funds into providing these facilities, leaving public funds for improving facilities at public schools (which you, yourself, admit need a lot more funding).

Why should private schools have to find their own funding to support special needs children ? These children require resources regardless which school they attend and will already be costing the government less if the parents decide to share the financial burden by sending their kids to a private school. You have experienced a Christian school that in your opinion did not apply funding where you expected they should due to their religious values. Are they all like that ?

Granny said :

There are kids in special schools because they went missing from their public school, Deezagood, and who could have been very badly hurt, and many other ways in which the public schools they tried first were not able to cater for their special needs.

Why are only ‘god’ schools supposed to care?

And, by the way, non-government does not necessarily equal religious.

Granny – you have misunderstood me … I believe that ALL schools absolutely should care enough to accommodate special needs kids; what sort of school are they really if they don’t? I only highlight Christian schools , as I would question the values of any Christian school that does not actively fund/prioritise the facilities/care required for special-needs kids.

And regarding funding; schools (private or public) that are especially designed to help the needs of disabled students absolutely should receive the necessary government funding, especially if the private schools only exist due to the inability of the government schools to meet high demand.

I think that ALL public schools should be extremely well-funded to provide the very best of care/facilities to their special-needs students. I think that private schools (referring to stereotypical schools, not special-needs private schools) however, being private, should channel their OWN funds into providing these facilities, leaving public funds for improving facilities at public schools (which you, yourself, admit need a lot more funding).

Hells_Bells7410:03 am 03 May 09

a) would be so sensible.
b) Govt incentives to assist them in improving for the decency of all?
c) is the old way.
d) is cruel.

Pommy bastard7:48 am 03 May 09

s-s-a said :

I’m talking about mobility aids and hearing aids and vision aids and communication aids and support people

Which should never be paid for by the school no matter whether it’s private or public.

Which is why they are an irrelevance to, and a distraction from, to this debate, and my points exactly.

Berraboy the issue of the child with diabetes should be taken up by his parents with the Human Rights Commissioner and/or Diabetes ACT.

+1

Has no one noticed the simple answer to Doszpot’s gripe?

The Govt should request that all private schools conduct, (within a given time scale,) a review of their provision of special education for disabled children in their care, using the same criteria as the Govt has used for children within public schools.

The everyone is happy…. Not so fast Sherlock!

Possible outcomes?
a) A review is conducted, deficits are highlighted, and addressed.
b) A review is conducted, deficits highlighted, “private” schools ask the taxpayer to fund improvements. (Which should be rejected.)
c) “Review” is conducted, deficits whitewashed. (responsibility of parents of disabled kids at these schools to address)
d) No review is conducted, on the grounds of cost, or “not being needed.” (As for “c”)

s-s-a said :

Berraboy the issue of the child with diabetes should be taken up by his parents with the Human Rights Commissioner and/or Diabetes ACT.

S-S-A: Which was my advice also!

I’m talking about mobility aids and hearing aids and vision aids and communication aids and support people

Which should never be paid for by the school no matter whether it’s private or public.

My husband needs a wheelchair no matter whether he’s sitting at home watching Dr Phil and Jerry Springer, volunteering at a national institution or in the paid workforce. Ditto for assistance to eat lunch, use the toilet etc etc.

Having a review into services for students with a disability is a complete red herring. If the funding was provided “properly” (ie attached to the person) then it would not be any of the government’s business whether students attending private schools were adequately catered for by the schools.

Berraboy the issue of the child with diabetes should be taken up by his parents with the Human Rights Commissioner and/or Diabetes ACT.

But it is a matter of walking the walk, not talking the talk.

Thanks for caring, monomania. I really appreciate that. So many people don’t care at all.

Granny I believe that people with disabilities have an overwhelming case for improved funding. The national disability insurance fund sounds an excellent idea.
Why aren’t things better now for people with disability. In a social democratic society that valued the rights of it’s citizens much more effort would be made to make it so. The publicly funded private school system is anathema to this type of society. It is all about the able. People who have been able to convince society that their ability entitles them and their children to a rewards above the effort they make within the society. They short change the society by paying as little ‘rent’ as they can for using it. Supporting those not able is a charity they bestow not a right. They pay tax so why should they not be able to use some of this money to exclude others in their schools. Keep Tarquin or Bethany away from those who should be eliminated from the gene pool. Give them opportunities the children of the less able cannot. Exclusive Christain schools have more to do with the religion maintaining its power base in our society and little to do with Christianity. As far as I can determine the Australian catholic system was an attempt to pull its members out of the poverty of the potato fields and to make something of themselves and now it has succeeded has lost its true purpose. What is happening to people with disabilities makes Australia’s concept of mateship and a fair go a fraud.

Bundybear said :

Let me close by expressing my delight in the level of interest and debate aroused by this topic, regardless of the opinions expressed, and my pleasure in having found an opportunity to use the word posit in a sentence.

I would second that, Bundybear!

: )

Doszpots complaint, at the core of this post, is drawing attention to the fact that a govenment sponsored review of services for the disabled, I think undertaken by Tony Shaddock, failed to review the circumstances / facilities of a large portion of the disabled community targetted by the review.

Johnboy then took it into a broader dimension by his editorial comment about non-government schools not being the governments responsibility.

The discussion has certainly ranged far and wide from this beginning.

Why should the fact that some services are provided by public organisations, and some by private, colour their selection as worthy of being included in a review? Surely the point of a review is to assess all services available in order to look to the future in an informed fashion when deciding unmet needs.

And surely meeting the needs of the entire community is the priority, rather than discriminating against any individual on any grounds whatsoever.

I would posit the theory (note I say theory because it is based on my sense of how things work through personal experience rather than statistical information) that there is little variation in true cost in the provision of an enormous range of services for the disabled based on wether they are provided by the public or private sector (assuming service providers to be ethical professionals with the clients interests at heart). That said, why is it so hard to get ones head around the concept of selecting the best placement for the individual, based soleley on their needs. And providing equivalent funding to the service provider for the care and support of that individual, regardless of the service providers public or private status.

Let me close by expressing my delight in the level of interest and debate aroused by this topic, regardless of the opinions expressed, and my pleasure in having found an opportunity to use the word posit in a sentence.

Pommy bastard5:50 pm 02 May 09

Granny said :

Pommy bastard said :

[I have followed your attempt to change the discourse, from public provision in private schools into a debate on services for disabled kids, with some mirth Granny.

Public provision of what, PB?

Why don’t you tell me exactly what the government is providing for students with a disability in private schools … I don’t believe you can.

I never claimed I could, and your points, again, have nothing to do with the debate at hand. If you want to enlighten us on what the government is providing for students with a disability in private schools, then that would at least be pertinent, please feel free to go right ahead.

I have no interest in enabling your attempts to pull the debate around to yourself, and your interests, again.

When you have something to say on the topic at hand, let me know.

PS. The topic at hand, which you seem to have missed, is shadow minister Doszpot’s claim that 411 students in private schools are “not having their rights respected” as the govt has done a survey on the needs of disabled kids in public schools, but not those in private ones.

It has nothing to do with ramps*, hearing aids*, crutches*, wheelchairs*, vision aids*, communication aids*, sewage, electricity, garbage, roads, or any of the other irrelevancies that you have attempted to introduce into the debate. Nor is it about comparative disability provision in Aus, England, and Germany.

The rest of your post is, again, irrelevant.

* It is not the school’s responsibility to provide medical aids.

Pommy bastard said :

hadow Minister for Education and Disability, Steve Doszpot, has today condemned the Stanhope-Gallagher Government for failing to acknowledge the rights of 411 students with a disability currently enrolled in the non-government school sector.

So these kids are already at Private schools, and not being discriminated against in terms of access to that school.

I was advised today that a child has been denied access to a southside primary school because he has diabetes. Huzzah, I say. After all, who’d want such such a monster playing with their kids. I for one don’t want my kids catching diabetes. As for the teachers at the school it’s great they don’t have any tricky issues to deal with such as even the remotest possibility of having to save a kids life. Score another tick in the box for private education! Let have only good health citizens in our classes devoid of all difference.

They’re point of Steve’s media release as best I can tell is to ensure the Gov’t keeps its eye on the ball for the sake of all disabled kid’s. Private schools are under the same obiligations as the rest of the community when it comes to human rights. Hypothetically, just because I might choose to send my child to a private school because a) I know several teachers there personally, b) I believe in god, c) I like the pastoral care and d) I hold a perception there’s a better quality education it doesn’t mean I have to accept the schools position that my child, if he/she had special needs, should not be provided teaching aids and materials specific to their needs on the basis of cost alone.

In fact, as many in the community (and apparently RA) believe private schools are made of money the argument of cost would be negated. Personally I’d prefer any school invest in special needs equipment rather than a new and unnecessary clock-tower (built as a monument to the headmaster) or scrum machine for the first XV. What these school need isn’t cash, it’s a short sharp kick up the bum by the only power able to or willing to do it, i.e. The Government. That, to me, is the point of the media release.

Incidentally, it is my belief that public sector schools are supposed to be all about choice too, particularly in high school when you can request out of zone schooling to suit your childs needs (e.g. Narrabundah for Arts, Tuggeranong for Aerospace etc.).

Pommy bastard said :

[I have followed your attempt to change the discourse, from public provision in private schools into a debate on services for disabled kids, with some mirth Granny.

Public provision of what, PB?

Why don’t you tell me exactly what the government is providing for students with a disability in private schools … I don’t believe you can.

I can tell you what they’re providing in the public sector, however.

An asbestos-filled library with a leaky roof for starters.

We have some computers, switches and smartboards, but the computers aren’t very accessible and there’s no decent educational software that a kid with a severe disability can use – unlike what the teacher had in England where they had mouse patterning software for one thing.

We had to use our own Reader Rabbit software. From our home.

We have a couple of multi-sensory gardens provided by Rotary, and a ball pit which was made by a previous principal during the school holidays, along with a whole lot of landscaping work he had to do mostly himself.

The government provided the therapy pool, I think, many years ago, and they’ve upgraded the kitchen in the staff room and some stuff like that.

But when it comes to equipment the kids just can’t get it.

So I really don’t believe that students with a disability in non-government schools are getting anything much at all.

In actual fact all the teachers I know who’ve taught in the English system rave about how much better it was. Over here they’re the ones expected to try and teach something without the proper resources to do so.

Pommy bastard3:53 pm 02 May 09

But it’s still irrelevant, totally irrelevant, to the debate here.

Whilst Sue Corrigan did make the point that the system is far from perfect, six months seems like luxury compared with here. We’ve been waiting over four years for a wheelchair.

However, I would think that two intelligent journalists with a severely disabled child would be capable of knowing when they are better off. They’re not stupid people and they had lived with disability every day.

Pommy bastard3:48 pm 02 May 09

Granny said :

Ok, I give up. You’re completely missing the point.

I’ve mised the pint?

I have followed your attempt to change the discourse, from public provision in private schools into a debate on services for disabled kids, with some mirth Granny.

For example;

Granny said :

Why do you keep talking about ramps when I’m talking about mobility aids and hearing aids and vision aids and communication aids and support people?

What do; “mobility aids and hearing aids and vision aids and communication aids” have to do with the rights of disabled kids at private schools? Are these school provided, or are they health care provisions? Oops, they are provided by health care systems, public or private, not by schools, and therefore irrelevant to the debate…

Oh, by the way, you ask “Why do you keep talking about ramps,” Well to see who introduced the subject of ramp provision into the debate, it was introduced in post 9 by…errmmmmm you.

Pommy bastard3:37 pm 02 May 09

Despite what Sue Corrigan believes happens in the UK, Granny, this is the actuality. (Not that this has anything to do with the topic at hand.)

Thousands of disabled people are being forced to wait for NHS equipment which, when it does arrive, is often outdated, uncomfortable or unusable, according to a report published yesterday which has set off alarm bells in Downing Street.

The standards of NHS disability equipment services, which supply everything from hearing aids to prosthetic limbs and wheelchairs, were “unacceptably low” said the report by the Audit Commission, which supervises spending by local governments and health authorities.

Disability equipment services cost the NHS and local government a total of £400m a year. But the report found some local social services lose up to 80 per cent of their community equipment (such as bath mats, hoists and mattresses) because they don’t keep proper records.

Of the 4 million registered disabled people in Britain who are supplied with NHS equipment, 2 million have hearing aids, 1 million have community equipment and 750,000 have wheelchairs.

The report also investigated the provision of artificial limbs for the 65,000 people who have had amputations and 400,000 users of orthopaedic footwear such as callipers.

It found that a fifth of health authorities had a six-month wait for the fitting of a hearing aid while the average wait was 19 weeks.

Even then, one in three NHS hearing aids are infrequently or never used because they are of poor quality and patients are not taught how they work. The hearing aids provided are based on 1970s technology rather than the new, digital aids which work much better.

One in four people who have an artificial limb provided by the NHS do not use it as often as they want to because of poor fitting which causes discomfort and pain.

A fifth of amputees wait more than six months before they have a first appointment for fitting their artificial limb. Experts say amputees should be seen and fitted for a prosthetic as soon as their stumps have healed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/disabled-people-let-down-by-unusable-equipment-721856.html

Ok, I give up. You’re completely missing the point.

Pommy bastard2:02 pm 02 May 09

Granny said :

The issue of whether the Government should have to supply services to students with a disability in the private sector as well as in the public sector was raised in the original post, and it was this point which I was addressing.

Actually, it was johnboy’s assertion that this was about “providing services,” the shadow minister makes no mention of it. He is concerned with rights being upheld.

Granny said :

You really haven’t read the Sue Corrigan article, have you?

Yes, I have. It bares no relation to anything being discussed here. It doesn’t mention Private schools once, in fact. Also it paints a pie-in-the-sky picture of disability aids provision in England, (also not something we are discussing here,) one I know through experience to be totally false.

Granny said :

So kids in private schools shouldn’t be given crutches when they break their leg? Or a wheelchair?

False analogy one.

If you have private treatment at a private hospital (on my planet hospitals, not schools provide medical assistance to people with broken legs), having opted out of Govt provision, does the Govt provide the crutch or wheelchair, or does your private provider?

Because these are services the Government provides, and the Government shouldn’t give private students anything.

They should also cut off their sewage, electricity and water, stop collecting their garbage and cease all road work.

False analogy two. (Reductio ad absurdam.) If someone opts out of government provided sewage, electricity, water, garbage, and road work, and takes out a private contract for these services, additional expenses do not fall to the govt.

Hells_Bells741:19 pm 02 May 09

You tell ’em Granny!

So kids in private schools shouldn’t be given crutches when they break their leg? Or a wheelchair?

Because these are services the Government provides, and the Government shouldn’t give private students anything.

They should also cut off their sewage, electricity and water, stop collecting their garbage and cease all road work.

You really haven’t read the Sue Corrigan article, have you?

The issue of whether the Government should have to supply services to students with a disability in the private sector as well as in the public sector was raised in the original post, and it was this point which I was addressing.

And if your daughter had special needs I hope I would be more sensitive than to refer to your concerns about them as your ‘hobby horse’.

Pommy bastard11:37 am 02 May 09

Ermmm ok… What “rights”, does Doszpot believe these kids are denied then? It certainly doesn’t say on his flyer.

“There is no doubt that a shortfall in services for students with a disability in the government sector has been identified in the review so far. However, the question remains unanswered about how significant the shortfall is for the non-government sector, because non-government students are not included in this review.

It would appear that the Govt has prioritised investigating the service needs of disabled kids within the services it provides. Which is right and proper.

“I am consistently being contacted by families from both non-government and government schools who have provided anecdotal evidence of a gap in services and long waiting lists for families of a student with a disability regardless of where they attend school. “Their needs must also be addressed in the same way across the board.

So if Kid A in public school gets help with his disability needs, then Kid B in a Private school should also have their disability need met by the Govt?

Idiocy.

Pommy bastard11:09 am 02 May 09

hadow Minister for Education and Disability, Steve Doszpot, has today condemned the Stanhope-Gallagher Government for failing to acknowledge the rights of 411 students with a disability currently enrolled in the non-government school sector.

So these kids are already at Private schools, and not being discriminated against in terms of access to that school.

Pommy bastard11:07 am 02 May 09

Granny said :

You are talking about fixed infrastructure and I’m talking about aids that a person needs, such as if you broke your leg and needed crutches.

The discussion is about Doszpots assertion that the government is failing the human rights of 411 kids in private schools. It’s not about the provision of disbility aids outside of that school.

You’ve gone off topic on your own hobby horse Granny.,

You need that in order to cope at home and at school and in your after school job. This is not complicated. I really don’t understand why no-one is getting it.

You are talking about fixed infrastructure and I’m talking about aids that a person needs, such as if you broke your leg and needed crutches. Do you seriously believe the school should provide your crutches? The government provides this resource because you need it and you can’t get around without it. They don’t tell you to go out and buy your own crutches either.

Why do you keep talking about ramps when I’m talking about mobility aids and hearing aids and vision aids and communication aids and support people?

Pommy bastard10:29 am 02 May 09

someoneincanb said :

As to whether an obligation on a private school to provide particular services SHOULD exist or not, basically I think it should be up to a private school to decide if it is worth financing such things.

Sure, that’s fine, no problem with that, as long as they don’t go “cap in hand”* to the taxpayers pockets, and ask us to stump up for facilities on their property, so they can reap the disabled kids fees.

If they don’t want to pay for disabled facilities, thus excluding disabled kids it’s their right as a Private school.

It would speak volumes about them.

*”cap in hand” the origin of the term “handicapped.”

someoneincanb9:49 am 02 May 09

Pommy bastard said :

Granny said :

Private schools have an obligation to provide disabled facilities. Why are you not complaining about them not doing this?

For maybe the first time ever PB posts something I agree with. Granny basically believes these students should have the facilities they require (at some level I think every agrees on that). But why is your complaint against the government? Your poignant quotes demonstrate the inadequacies of an existing public funding scheme. Complaining that this clearly inadequate and dysfunctional government funding system isn’t stretched into private enterprises seems strange. With the case of private schools, you’d probably get a much better outcome by complaining that these private enterprises aren’t meeting their human rights obligations and calling for the school to fund services. I bet a private school could install a ramp faster than any government-funded ramp takes to install. I just think it would be a more productive complaint to have (especially if as PB says, an obligation already exists), if you really want to send your special needs child to a private school.

As to whether an obligation on a private school to provide particular services SHOULD exist or not, basically I think it should be up to a private school to decide if it is worth financing such things. I’m sure in many instances it could be. Then, as Berra Boy says so well in post #138, its up to parents to weigh up the pros and cons of sending their special needs child to the private school, just like parents of all children do.

The more we require all schools to provide the same services/experiences/discipline/education/religion/etc, the more indistinguishable schools will become from each other and the less choice we ultimately have.

Pommy bastard9:41 am 02 May 09

Can you point out to me where in your article it says that, in England and Germany, the taxpayer pays for private businesses to upgrade their facilities, in order to meet their legal obligations to the disabled?

PB, I’m only asking for what they do in England and Germany. Have you even read the article I linked to?

That’s not a problem.

However, if you go to Luna Park, should the taxpayer provide money so that the park can adapt its equipment so that a child with, say paraplegia, can use it?

Private businesses should incur 100% of the costs of running their own businesses. Especially those businesses which are exclusive to sections of society, or have a religious bent.

That’s the trouble with private schools, they play on the public heartstrings so that they can access public money in order to provide a money making enterprise only open to the few.

If any private school wants public money, they should make all their opportunities available to anyone who wishes to use them…

Now back to Luna Park, seeing as they have got public money to provide wheelchair access for a paraplegic kids, can they next ask for public money to provide accesss for blind kids?

Oh, there’s a kid with cerebral palsy wants to come, can we have public money for equipment for these kids?

Oh, a kid with an amputated leg wants to go on the death slide, that’s going to cost you the taxpayer…

Now substitute private school for Luna Park.

What’s Luna Park?

Pommy bastard9:01 am 02 May 09

Whatsup said :

These private endeavours as you call them are providing education for children of all abilities. The difference is that parents are co contributing to the the cost of the service in the private system. Why should they be deemed “unworthy” of government assistance to support those students that don’t fit in the regular pigeon hole.

For children of all abilities? At best; “for children of all abilities whose parents can afford to pay the fees, and whose fit the school’s ideological bent.”

If these parents want to buy their kids out of the commons schools, (so they don’t catch nits, or have their parents religious or social views challenged, or whatever,) then they should bare the cost of any special needs the kids have.

I have a kid who I’d love to go to Eton, however he suffers from the disability of having skint parents, can Dozpot get the taxpayer chip in for the annual fee?

Pommy bastard said :

BerraBoy68 said :

Jim Jones at post #22 said

Jim Jones said :

Not everyone has a ‘right’ to go to a private school.

Of course they do JJ, what they may lack, however, is the ability to pay for it. You always have the right in this country.

Not true. You try sending your muslim child to a private catholic school, and telling them you do not want the religious education on offer. Oh, and you want your child to observe muslim ritual, not catholic ritual, see what response you get.

Not the issue PB. I said you have the right to send your kids to a private school, you also have the right to tell the owners of that school how to run it noting they have an equal right to tell you to ‘naff-off’:) I know you’re using the school system in GLC as an example, where a private catholic school can convert if enrollment of kids of another religion exceed 50%. That all stopped I believe when Bishop Chalener Girls school took the issue to court. I hope that never happens over here though.

It’s about exclusion on the grounds of financial ability. It’s about a private organisation looking to the taxpayer to fund it’s building works

PB, it’s call the Interest Subsidy Scheme.

Private schools take out a loan to build, say a gym. The ACT Govt and DEEWR pay the interest on the loan back to the school EVERY financial year. Whilst the scheme is now ‘over’ for new appilcants, and it has been for several years, some schools are still getting their interest paid.

Trevar, the laws only prohibit exclusion if the cost of the students needs are not a heavy burden on the school financially e.g. lift, ramps, toilet remodelling. If the school were to go into the red for several years then the student can be turned away but it is a rarity.

BerraBoy68 said :

No, JJ they shouldn’t – at least in their entirety. What they should be doing, however, is ensuring that they only fund ACT schools (i.e. private schools are provided grants in excess of Fed. Gov’t funding) where the school has demonstrated its real commitment to basic human rights.

This is a better way to separate the sheep from the goats. Whether a school is public or private should be a secondary consideration, with the needs of its students put first. And beyond that, it would also be intelligent to give consideration to whether the school consistently provides a high quality of education to students with special needs. A school that happens to have one young person in a wheelchair present for enrollment should perhaps be permitted to recommend another school, or find ways to serve that student within existing infrastructure, but a school that consistently enrolls AND NURTURES students with special needs is a better candidate for funding than one that simply enrolls them.

And since laws currently prohibit a school from refusing enrollment to a student on the basis of special needs, there should be assistance for all schools who demonstrate commitment to inclusive schooling.

” … Starting with the fight to get adequate early intervention services, we discovered that the battle continues with the fight to get a few hours of respite each week, the fight to get even the most basic equipment, the fight to get your child included in a local preschool, the fight to find a school that meets your child’s needs and the fight for vital ongoing therapy.

“All this effort means you then face a huge battle to find the time to focus on any other children you may have, to stay afloat financially and, if it hasn’t already broken up, to maintain a marriage battered by grief, anger, despair and rabid exhaustion.”

“In England we discovered that a well planned and adequately resourced disability support system doesn’t have to be a pipedream. There is no exhausting fight for vital equipment or services. If you’re assessed as needing something, it is provided, usually immediately – unlike in Australia, where so often parents are told, yes, they may well need something urgently and, good news, they do indeed qualify to get it … except sorry, there’s no money to fund it. It’s not perfect by any means, but the English system is so much better than Australia’s essentially because four landmark acts of parliament – all introduced, by the way, as private members’ bills – give people with disabilities and their families the legal right to whatever they are assessed as needing. No such legal rights exist in Australia.”

“Because government health and welfare agencies are under no obligation to provide anything once their budget runs out (often just a few months into a financial year), there is no incentive, as there is in England, to design the most efficient system possible to make sure the money goes far enough.

“When Shane needed an electric wheelchair in England, our local cottage hospital supplied it. The chair was basic but it did the job perfectly well, and best of all, it was all organised within a month. Here, we’ve been told the same process could take up to four years.

“A friend in Wollongong, NSW, needs an electric hoist to help lift her disabled, 60kg son in and out of bed, on and off the toilet, and so on. But she is not permitted to apply for funding (from the state health department) until an occupational therapist (from the disability department) writes a report. The waiting time for a therapist is 18 months.

“If a parent can’t wait, because of severe back pain for instance, officials consider it entirely acceptable to say, “Well, you’ll just have to pay for a private therapist and buy a hoist yourself.” But a hoist costs around $3000. The electric bed I had to buy for Shane, because I couldn’t wait two years for it to be funded, cost $2000. The wheelchair-accessible car I had to buy, because they are not funded at all here (unlike in England), cost $60,000. None of this is even tax-deductible. Full-time carers who cannot work at all because of their responsibilities, or who have very limited income for the same reason, either just have to go without, or beg for help from a charity. Severe rationing and long waiting lists, regardless of need, are not features of a properly functioning, equitable system.

“There are myriad other examples of families forced to wait years for “early” intervention and other vital therapy services, essential equipment and respite ….”

Sue Corrigan
The struggle for care

Jim Jones said :

Put simply, the government shouldn’t have to pay for private endeavours.

No, JJ they shouldn’t – at least in their entirety. What they should be doing, however, is ensuring that they only fund ACT schools (i.e. private schools are provided grants in excess of Fed. Gov’t funding) where the school has demonstrated its real commitment to basic human rights.

These private endeavours as you call them are providing education for children of all abilities. The difference is that parents are co contributing to the the cost of the service in the private system. Why should they be deemed “unworthy” of government assistance to support those students that don’t fit in the regular pigeon hole.

Firstly – Berraboy pretty much nails it. I bow before his superior wisdom (not for the first time, either)

That said, I do still feel uneasy about this comment:

Granny said :

This is not about private versus public education, it’s about providing people with a disability the resources they need to have the same opportunities in life as anyone else.

If public schools are providing adequate disabled access then people with a disability *are* being provided the resources they need to have the same opportunities in life as anyone else. All people have the opportunity to attend a public school, not all people have the opportunity to attend a private school. Pragmatically, the *choice* to send children to a private school has to be weighted, as Berraboy rightly states, taking into account what is on offer.

Of course private schools should provide the same ethical fair treatment of people with special needs. No-one is arguing that they shouldn’t (maybe jakez, though, he gets pretty weird on those libertarian trips). At issue (for me anyway) is where any additional funding for this comes from. Put simply, the government shouldn’t have to pay for private endeavours.

I though the review was more about services than funding in government schools.

Let’s set aside for a minute the ideological issues with non-government school funding, and consider the proportion of disabled children they enrol in proportion to their funding.

The review should most certainly look at that, but it probably won’t.

Don’t just pick on Liberals, look at ACT Labor’s record on non-government school funding since 2001. Then comment.

Pommy bastard5:50 pm 01 May 09

BerraBoy68 said :

Jim Jones at post #22 said

Jim Jones said :

Not everyone has a ‘right’ to go to a private school.

Of course they do JJ, what they may lack, however, is the ability to pay for it. You always have the right in this country.

Not true. You try sending your muslim child to a private catholic school, and telling them you do not want the religious education on offer. Oh, and you want your child to observe muslim ritual, not catholic ritual, see what response you get.

Jim Jones at post #22 said

Jim Jones said :

Not everyone has a ‘right’ to go to a private school.

Of course they do JJ, what they may lack, however, is the ability to pay for it. You always have the right in this country.

All I can see here in the press release is Steve Doszpot saying that the Gov’t needs to monitor the private schools as well as it does the public ones to ensure those ekids with special needs are treated fairly. Times change and schools are finally catching up on their responsibilities in this area, there is no doubt some room to go yet. Marist only installed an elevator in the past 10 years to help those students that cannot walk get to the library, classes on the first floor, etc. Prior to that students, yes students, were tasked with carrying a wheelchair bound student up and down the stairs as necessary several time a day. This was an OH&S nightmare for all concerned. Imagine 4 boys lifting another boy (who was quite overweight in my experience due to his condition) up and down a staircase while other kids ran up and down it to get to class. I did this on may occasions and I can tell you that if my kids were ever tasked in such a way at school I’d be furious. Not only was it dangerous but it sadly resulted in serious contempt growing against the disabled lad by many in his form.

All Steve appears to be saying is that the Gov’t needs to step up and make sure all schools are doing the right thing. Interestingly, if the non-government schools suddenly decided to let their staff smoke in class many of you would be up in arms. Just because parents pay more for their kids education at a public school it doesn’t mean they school shouldn’t be held accountable or subject to Government scrutiny. I’ve recently had this conversation in relation to another matter with Simon Corbell.

As for the argument for parents to take their kids out of school if they don’t like then lack of service available for special needs at that school – get a grip. Unless I’m greatly mistaken no school is perfect. E.G. You might not like the fact a school cannot provide equal opportunity for a special needs child but you still like the pastoral care or added discipline available at that school. In most cases parents must weight whet is being offered at any given school and make a decision. However, as Steve and Granny are pointing out the ethical and fair treatment of people with special needs is about human rights and not a choice. All schools must address this issue.

Pommy bastard4:59 pm 01 May 09

Granny said :

This is not about private versus public education, it’s about providing people with a disability the resources they need to have the same opportunities in life as anyone else.

You’re utterly wrong.

Try telling the school that your child has a right to go there, disabled or not, see how far you get without being able to pay their fees. Want the tax payer to fund that too? You’re setti8ng up a fallacy.

That’s what this is about.

It’s about exclusion on the grounds of financial ability. It’s about a private organisation looking to the taxpayer to fund it’s building works

Private schools have an obligation to provide disabled facilitries. Why are you not complaining about them not doing this? Why should the taxpayer improve a private facility?

If public schools did not provide these facilities, then they would face censure and approbation, the government minister responsible for education would have to answer questions on why the provision was not made.

Private schools also have an obligation also to provide these facilities. They are not doing so. But despite being exclusive, and having strict criteria for entry, they are absolving themselves of their duty, and are looking to the taxpayer (or at least Mr Dozpot is) to fund conversions.

This is not fair. It’s corporate welfare.

This is not about private versus public education, it’s about providing people with a disability the resources they need to have the same opportunities in life as anyone else.

You don’t generalise much ….

Pommy bastard3:00 pm 01 May 09

Corporate welfare, nothing more, nothing less.

The Libs trying to look after their own.

They hate the idea of Joe Bloggs on the street getting benefits when they are unemployed,sick, or in need.

But should those of the “Old School Tie” require a state handout, (even if only to fulfill legal obligations to its customers,) then they are the first to cry “it’s only fair the taxpayer should cough up!”

The last paragraph in my previous post should have been in response to this comment…

No, it’s actually analogous to the government giving
free milk to all the children in Australia except the ones
attending non-government schools. Why should the school
they attend have anything to do with whether they get the
milk or not?

If you were to start such a scheme tomorrow, maybe. But were you to start the scheme in 2020, then it would be exactly the way it was initially intended, since everyone would have plenty of time to plan accordingly, and make their choices. Since governments don’t have terms of office that long, there never plan more then about two years in advance however.

Granny said :

There are kids in special schools because they went missing from their public school, Deezagood, and who could have been very badly hurt, and many other ways in which the public schools they tried first were not able to cater for their special needs.

Why are only ‘god’ schools supposed to care?

And, by the way, non-government does not necessarily equal religious.

I’m failing to see the relevance?

I think there is a distint difference in these comments between special schools and private schools. No one here is arguing against those schools modelled around supporting those with additional needs getting funding.

The argument here is distributing funding away from public schools in the direction of maintstream private schools is only going to make it worse for those not in a position to send thier children to these private schools.

Wow, lots-a-posts since I was last here. And I still fall in the middle somewhere.

Way earlier in the thread I conceded that there was a difference between a company which turns a profit for its owners and a school which doesn’t. I still think this is the main difference, but having thought about it a bit, I think that if a private school is run a “non-profit”, then the *benefit* of the business existing is in the eduction acquired by the students who attend. So the *profit* goes to the students, and only the students who’s families are in a financial position to send them are able to profit, thus the reasoning behind my reluctance to see public monies enhance this profit not available to the public.

I think this is a much different situation where the school in question is attempting to provide a service not catered for by the government. For example if there was a school specifically designed for blind children, and it was the only one in the city, then I would accept that the government could fund it in the same way they outsource all sorts of other functions.

At no point while making these arguments am I suggesting the tomorrow all funding cease, or double, but rather I am trying to express what I would be basing my decisions on were I in charge. Thank god (or the FSM) that I am not!

No, it’s actually analogous to the government giving free milk to all the children in Australia except the ones attending non-government schools. Why should the school they attend have anything to do with whether they get the milk or not?

If you were to start such a scheme tomorrow, maybe. But were you to start the scheme in 2020, then it would be exactly the way it was initially intended, since everyone would have plenty of time to plan accordingly, and make their choices. Since governments don’t have terms of office that long, there never plan more then about two years in advance however.

Granny said :

At post #34 you said, “If a parent feels strongly about having a child at school with their siblings then what is wrong with sending all children to a school with these facilities.”

Sure sounds like suggesting big sis should be removed from the school she attends to me.

This is highly selective. What I said was

monomania said :

If a parent feels strongly about having a child at school with their siblings then what is wrong with sending all children to a school with these facilities. Make the decision before the first enrolls.

It is difficult to remove a student from a school they haven’t enrolled in. You recognised what I meant when you first read it so you replied in post #36

Granny said :

Firstly, you are assuming that the child is born with a disability and that they are close in age.
Would you want to disrupt the education of all your children if your child suddenly acquires a brain injury, loses their sight or whatever? But it’s different if it happens to you, isn’t it?

Why would an older sister have to leave the school they are enrolled in if a younger sibling acquired a learning disability or multiple disabilities? It may be in this child’s interest to move to a school with a special education centre. Or even a special school.

Should a parent be able to demand the school set up a special education centre and hire the additional staff necessary if the child also has multiple physical disabilities so that they can remain at their original school with their siblings and friends.

PsydFX said :

chewy14 said :

Jim Jones said :

There are funding stats easily available. There are many here: http://www.adogs.info/

I thought there was no religion taught in public schools?

What specifically are you talking about – it’s not very clear sorry.

The website Jim linked to, The Australian Council for the Defence of Government Schools (DOGS) is like a cult. It reads like a worship to the god of the Public School.

Shouldn’t we at least find out what’s happening to students with disabilities in private schools?

If you go back to the press release by Doszpot that started this discussion he complains that the recent review into special education needs in the ACT did not look at the 411 students with disabilities in private schools.

It seems to me that we now need a review to see what is happening to those students in private schools.

If their needs are not being met, then people could argue about how, as a community, we make sure that their needs are met and who pays for it.

But is there an attitude that if children go to private schools we don’t care what happens to them?

A sort of out of government school out of mind approach?

There are kids in special schools because they went missing from their public school, Deezagood, and who could have been very badly hurt, and many other ways in which the public schools they tried first were not able to cater for their special needs.

Why are only ‘god’ schools supposed to care?

And, by the way, non-government does not necessarily equal religious.

chewy14 said :

Jim Jones said :

There are funding stats easily available. There are many here: http://www.adogs.info/

I thought there was no religion taught in public schools?

What specifically are you talking about – it’s not very clear sorry.

Sorry Deezagood, i meant the link from Jim.
It is the cult of the Public School.
na na na na na na na Leader (of the defence of Government schools).

There isn’t – was refering to the god schools.

Jim Jones said :

There are funding stats easily available. There are many here: http://www.adogs.info/

I thought there was no religion taught in public schools?

Correction: ‘spiritual and educational needs met’

I like to think that if I were a staunch Catholic and had a special-needs child, I could send them to any Catholic school to have both their spiritual and religious needs met. The religious schools preach empathy and caring; let them put their money where their mouths are and fund facilities for ALL students/parents/carers/teachers. Frankly, I would question the values of ANY religious school that hasn’t equipped themselves to accommodate special-needs students. I don’t think the government should provide any additional funding for these facilities; the schools themsleves should source/priorities the funding; just as they would to build a new library or sporting facility. It is all about spending priorities.

My kids were at a private school that wasn’t particularly well-equipped for students with disabilities. I suppose as a consequence, very few students with disabilities attended that school. My kids now go to a public school with excellent facilites for ALL students, and as such, my kids enjoy the wonderful experience of being actively involved with these kids, which I’m sure will ultimately help them to become more empathetic and hopefully caring citizens. It actually blows me away to see how the stduent population supports these kids – nobody gets louder claps on sports days or assemblies. I won’t be sending my kids to any school that doesn’t accommodate special-need students again.

Jim Jones said :

There are funding stats easily available. There are many here: http://www.adogs.info/

I have had a look through some of the stats available, and they’re not particularly accessible, or reliable. Statistics are only really useful when they present comprehensive data, not when they present data selected exclusively for the purpose of proving a point.

The whole site seems like one of those quasi-religious cults calling for us to all worship the public school system without scrutinising it. (They even suggest that we should take education back to the good ole days of the 19th Century!)

The ABS does have unbiased stats available, but the context is a bit dense, so you have to have hours to wade through them.

At post #34 you said, “If a parent feels strongly about having a child at school with their siblings then what is wrong with sending all children to a school with these facilities.”

Sure sounds like suggesting big sis should be removed from the school she attends to me.

Granny said :

monomania said :

Could be pretty tough on big sis. And then she is off to high school.

Why are you pretending to care about big sis? You would have ripped her away from her friends and school community and shipped her off to another school that she didn’t want to go to and told her ‘Tough luck’. Apparently she doesn’t already have to make enough sacrifices as a young carer.

I never suggested big sister should be removed from the school she attended just that eventually she would leave and go to high school and be educated in a separate school at least for a while. At least in most cases.

Could be and might be were the words I used when describing the situation when a young person is a carer for a sibling which means that the statements were general and not meant to be applied to any specific situation or persons. I can care about real people from my own experience in similar situations and empathise with others if I am aware that this situation exists.

Jim Jones said :

It’s analogous to the government giving free milk to all the children in Australia. If I decide I don’t want my child to have milk, but, say, orange juice instead, then it would wrong of me to expect that the government pay for this as well.

No, it’s actually analogous to the government giving free milk to all the children in Australia except the ones attending non-government schools. Why should the school they attend have anything to do with whether they get the milk or not?

Jim,

Some of your tax payer dollars are going to education. If a child is at a private school it will get less of your hard earned cash than if it was to attend a public school.

The child at the private school is being educated by a combination of cash that their parents / caregivers pay and your taxpayer money. The same child at a public school would be costing the taxpayers more. If all the students at non government schools transferred into the public system the government education expenses would increase therefore more of you money would be required to support it.

I really don’t see a problem with parents who can afford to contribute to the cost of educating their children doing so. The government is able to educate more children at a cheaper rate this way.

Emlyn Ward said :

“I fail to see why should private schools should receive even more funding, eat up even more of a limited education budget, and even further reduce the educational opportunities of children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds?”

I don’t think you’re analysing this properly:

If you use compulsion to force people to use Public Education, then you are *increasing* the cost of Public Education, and thereby *reducing* educational opportunities for poor people.

…and when that compulsion is applied to disabled children, whose cost of education is necessarily higher, the imposition on the Public system is even higher.

Of course, what I’ve written above is only true if your statement “private schools already receive disproportionate governmental funding” is incorrect. I assume you can’t back it up with any data?

There are funding stats easily available. There are many here: http://www.adogs.info/

And no-one is talking about ‘compulsion’ to use public schools. If people choose to opt out of the public education system that’s fine. Just as if people want to opt out of the public medical system that’s okay with me, but don’t expect the taxpayer to have to shell out for it.

Further, funding in the public school system is often calculated on a per student basis: having more people use the system wouldn’t degrade funding.

Pommy bastard said :

[
Nowhere in the act does it state; “the taxpayer should pay for private business to avoid their responsibility to the disabled.”

For the first time in my life I agree with PB (except for the one thread about how cool prog music is).

It’s not about the government ‘denying’ funding to children in private schools. The government has established a system of free(ish) education which supplies (to the best of its ability) the appropriate amenities for disabled children. If you CHOOSE not to use this education system, then it’s not up to government to fund your choice – it should be up to the school, which is a private institution external to government mechanisms.

If there are problems with disabled access in private schools, then its the responsibility of these schools themselves to fix it.

It’s analogous to the government giving free milk to all the children in Australia. If I decide I don’t want my child to have milk, but, say, orange juice instead, then it would wrong of me to expect that the government pay for this as well.

Bill Shorten is a hero.

Peter, trust me on this one….

oh, ok. (a nod’s as good as a wink to a blind man)

Today Annette Ellis will release the report of the government inquiry into Better Support for Carers. Earlier this month, Bill Shorten spoke at the Press Club on the government’s plans for disability and social inclusion.

Sue Corrigan’s article is fabulous and makes it obvious that tinkering around the edges – eg whether a child gets support in a private school or not – is only a small part of a very big system that needs a very big fix.

Peter,

the BER is for large infrastructure projects, not ramps and piddly things like that.

A ramp would be eligible but only if it is part of a complete refurnishment of an existing buuilding or as a part of a new building.

thumper, not necessarily. as per the National School Pride (NSP) Program: This element will provide funding to every Australian school – primary and secondary, government and non-government – to undertake construction of small scale infrastructure and minor refurbishment projects. Fairly certain that a ramp could be deemed as a small scall infrastructure project.

PB, the Fed government has created a stimulus packacke for all schools, govt and non govt. The taxpayer is funding this stimulus package, and, effectively, the ACT government is responsible for all equal and fair distribution. The infrastructure upgrades and minor works are designed to stimulate the building industry. If putting in a ramp makes it easier for disabled children to access all areas of a school, this can be met under the stimulus package, upon approval.

There are several instances whereby the disabled have been overlooked in private business, the tuggies club in erindale has a section that is only accessible via stairs, and leads to the children’s play area. This disadvantages some of my friends with kids, not just from the fact that they cannot take a wheelchair down there, or they can – however the fall that they would sustain would raise a lot of questions… or that they cannot assist their partner in carrying the pram / stroller etc down those stairs.

I have worked for a company that had access to the management team at the top of a flight of stairs. How would a wheelchair bound employee get up there? they didn’t. The management came down to them, as a concession.

The taxpayer won’t pay for business to fix glaringly obvious problems relating to disabled access, but we will pay for education upgrades and refurbishments.

Business? Are you kidding?

Pommy bastard8:34 am 01 May 09

Granny said :

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACT 1992 – SECT 5
Disability discrimination
(1) For the purposes of this Act, a person ( discriminator ) discriminates against another person ( aggrieved person ) on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person if, because of the aggrieved person’s disability, the discriminator treats or proposes to treat the aggrieved person less favourably than, in circumstances that are the same or are not materially different, the discriminator treats or would treat a person without the disability.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), circumstances in which a person treats or would treat another person with a disability are not materially different because of the fact that different accommodation or services may be required by the person with a disability.

Excellent. So now then, seeing as the private schools are failing to meet their responsibility under that act, they should be sued.

Nowhere in the act does it state; “the taxpayer should pay for private business to avoid their responsibility to the disabled.”

Thanks for proving my point Granny.

Sue Corrigan’s article The struggle for care details better than anything I can think of what can be achieved when people simply decide that caring for those with a disability is the right thing to do and then do it.

England faced just as many ‘complex policy challenges’ and they went ahead and did it anyway. And that’s what I’m talking about.

Granny said :

When people decide that something is necessary, such as free hospital care, that is what a government provides.

That’s a very simplistic view of rather complex policy challenges.

You may consider it acceptable that in our country necessities are not provided for people with a disability. I don’t.

And that’s a strawman. I’m not saying kids with a disability (or any other type of kid) shouldn’t have their basic needs met in our society–I’m saying that there is always a necessary limit to what can be provided and where. I think it’s unhelpful to look at the provision of these services as a zero-sum game. Clearly there are questions as to how much of the burden is met by government, and how government can most efficiently allocate resources towards helping out the greatest number of kids.

I don’t know which side of this debate I fall on, but I’m tending to think that if governments stipulate how a private body should function, then governments should be held responsible for at least part of the cost that their stipulations incur, at least when those stipulations incur costs that could effect the private body’s capacity to perform their core function. I think the balance is shifted when children are involved. No child should suffer for the choices a parent or a government makes, so no government should leave schools, private, public or otherwise, to fend for themselves when trying to minimise the impact of disability.

However, when I worked in one of Canberra’s private schools who needed additional facilities including an elevator and a first floor bridge between buildings (more expense than a ramp), it was funded mostly from a Federal bucket. So, for the most part, I don’t think our governments are falling that far behind, but the ACT government should be ashamed of their obnoxious and childish attitude towards private schooling.

Pommy bastard7:45 am 01 May 09

Quackers said :

I became interested in this thread because of my Mum.

I’m 13 and as a student with a disabled sibling I don’t really think people are looking at if from the child’s perspective.

I know I do better if I am in a happy environment, so how is that different to a disabled child?

That’s not a problem.

However, if you go to Luna Park, should the taxpayer provide money so that the park can adapt its equipment so that a child with, say paraplegia, can use it?

Private businesses should incur 100% of the costs of running their own businesses. Especially those businesses which are exclusive to sections of society, or have a religious bent.

That’s the trouble with private schools, they play on the public heartstrings so that they can access public money in order to provide a money making enterprise only open to the few.

If any private school wants public money, they should make all their opportunities available to anyone who wishes to use them…

Now back to Luna Park, seeing as they have got public money to provide wheelchair access for a paraplegic kids, can they next ask for public money to provide accesss for blind kids?

Oh, there’s a kid with cerebral palsy wants to come, can we have public money for equipment for these kids?

Oh, a kid with an amputated leg wants to go on the death slide, that’s going to cost you the taxpayer…

Now substitute private school for Luna Park.

Sorry to come to this discussion late. Thank you Granny for your very passionate arguments on this subject. Having a child with a disability and trying to make schooling decisions can change your perspective on this issue.
I would think that a lot of the children Mr Doszpot refers to are in a similar situation to my son. These children have a developmental delay and need some additional help for their first years of schooling but are still able to cope in a mainstream environment and can be expected to catch up to their peers within a few years.
I don’t think it’s inappropriate that the government provides some funding for additional support for these children no matter which school they attend.

Circusmind, there was a time when it would have been considered a foolish luxury to believe a country could afford to pay for the education of every child.

When people decide that something is necessary, such as free hospital care, that is what a government provides.

You may consider it acceptable that in our country necessities are not provided for people with a disability. I don’t.

It is no more acceptable in a country like ours than having people turned away from a hospital because they can’t pay for an operation they need.

And that is how I see it.

This is a really interesting discussion, with some excellent points being made on both sides. I’m not sure which way I’d vote, I keep agreeing with both “sides”.

However, it is irritating to read people who feel the need to deride the views of their opposition in derogatory terms. Those are not good arguments. That’s what you do when your argument won’t stand up.

Let’s debate, not hurl rocks.

The bucket isn’t big enough for even the public schools as noted in the link.

PsydFX said :

And at the end of the day, if the Government has a limited bucket of money for these services then Public Schools should be being served first as they rely solely on Government Funding.

Funny how the bucket is big enough for everyone as long as they all go to the school the government wants them to go to, but if it’s not, “Oh, dear. No money for you.”

Go to the school we want you to … or else.

You know, if the government was refusing to provide their share of funding for a private student because because they were female or because they were not Caucasian or because they were gay or were a different religion people would be outraged.

Yet a person with a disability may not be able to attend a particular school because they have a disability and educational and health funding they would otherwise be entitled to will be withdrawn.

Granny:

s 22(4) This section does not make it unlawful for an education provider to discriminate against a person or student as described in subsection (1), (2) or (2A) on the ground of the disability of the person or student or a disability of any associate of the person or student if avoidance of that discrimination would impose an unjustifiable hardship on the education provider concerned

I think the point that Johnboy is trying to make, albeit perhaps a little too pointedly, is that governments have limited resources as well as a responsibility to all their citizens. As such, they must make tough decisions. In an ideal world, everyone’s unique needs would be totally catered for–but while we live in a world where resources are finite, we must balance the needs of an individual against the rights of the rest of society.

Granny said :

Yes, that is correct. Happy environments do make more suitable learning environments. But there are many kids in private schools who are miserable and many kids in public schools who are happy. It’s got nothing to do with the type of school and everything to do with the fact that educators try to keep families together for the sake of both parents and children.

Surely it would be more beneficial to send a child to a school that is established and is capable of catering to their individual needs, rather then just sending them to a school where they have family and can be “accomodated”.

I think that some of the fault here is with Private Schools, with your above extract, it seems clear that these private organisations are in fact discriminating as they are not fully accomodaing the appropriate needs. If these Private schools can not cater, then they shouldn’t accpet enrollement – however, if they did deny enrollements there would undoubtably be some massive uproar.

And at the end of the day, if the Government has a limited bucket of money for these services then Public Schools should be being served first as they rely solely on Government Funding.

I am massively for the rights of those with additional needs, but I don’t think the responsibility should lay solely with the government.

johnboy said :

You know I’ve looked and I’ve looked and I’m still trying to find the “right to be schooled with ones syblings”

And frankly I don’t want to live in a society with so many crappy little rights where that one makes it in.

The really big and important ones would be lost.

my sons will be schooled together – lucky they aren’t identical…

Yes, that is correct. Happy environments do make more suitable learning environments. But there are many kids in private schools who are miserable and many kids in public schools who are happy. It’s got nothing to do with the type of school and everything to do with the fact that educators try to keep families together for the sake of both parents and children.

Granny said :

What is stopping kids without a disability being at school with their siblings and friends?

They all have an unfettered opportunity to do this.

What happens if a kid has parents that can’t afford to send them to that private school their friends are all going to?

Should the Government pay for this?

Of course they should, because happy environments make more suitable learning environments right?

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACT 1992 – SECT 5
Disability discrimination
(1) For the purposes of this Act, a person ( discriminator ) discriminates against another person ( aggrieved person ) on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person if, because of the aggrieved person’s disability, the discriminator treats or proposes to treat the aggrieved person less favourably than, in circumstances that are the same or are not materially different, the discriminator treats or would treat a person without the disability.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), circumstances in which a person treats or would treat another person with a disability are not materially different because of the fact that different accommodation or services may be required by the person with a disability.

You know I’ve looked and I’ve looked and I’m still trying to find the “right to be schooled with ones syblings”

And frankly I don’t want to live in a society with so many crappy little rights where that one makes it in.

The really big and important ones would be lost.

What is stopping kids without a disability being at school with their siblings and friends?

They all have an unfettered opportunity to do this.

The issue as I understand it is that kids with a disability may not have the same opportunities as their peers if their siblings attend an independent school.

Oh, and I’d much rather listen to me than self-confessed bitter and jaded you.

A kid with a disability’s need to be surrounded by friends and family versus …

Can you take a step back and listen to yourself? Why the need to put it this way? That’s what I meant by my “cute factor” comment earlier. If a KID needs to be at a school with their siblings and friends then say so. Adding “with a disability” should not be necessary.

I think I made it clear when Quackers first posted that she is my daughter, Johnboy. Does she need to state that every time she posts?

Thanks for the advice, albeit patronising. I’ve managed to live this long without you telling me how to do it, however.

Well move all the kids to that Government school if you want those government services.

Otherwise, Whahey! You’ve made a choice!

Gosh! Did it have consequences? Wow! Welcome to life!

Hope you enjoy it!

BTW would quackers and granny like to disclose their relationship for the general readership who have not devoted their entire life to comment squatting on RiotACT?

s-s-a said :

Government schools with facilities for severe disability? Ours does.

Bully for you!

Could be pretty tough on big sis. And then she is off to high school.

I know from being a young carer for my sibling that they would have to grow up fast and put the child’s needs before theirs, but it’s nice to have them around.

monomania said :

Could be pretty tough on big sis. And then she is off to high school.

Why are you pretending to care about big sis? You would have ripped her away from her friends and school community and shipped her off to another school that she didn’t want to go to and told her ‘Tough luck’. Apparently she doesn’t already have to make enough sacrifices as a young carer.

Woody Mann-Caruso10:35 pm 30 Apr 09

Can’t religious schools just pray for God to heal the child in question, eliminating the need for additional infrastructure? Oh, that’s right – He only heals things that tend to heal by themselves anyway, and kiddies with hard stuff like amputated limbs, paraplegia or Down Syndrome can go get f.cked.

Cut and past isn’t working so I will paraphrase…

Government schools with facilities for severe disability? Ours does.

Me jaded and cynical? Oh yes guilty as charged :).

Granny said :

I think if you were nine years old it might be important for you to go to the same school as your friends and your big sister who always sticks up for you when people are mean, or who squeezes your hand when people stare.

Could be pretty tough on big sis. And then she is off to high school.

Well, maybe she is only cool. I mean, she won’t let me decorate my room like the T.A.R.D.I.S.

Obviously the troll is futto.

Quackers is a most welcome addition.

Thumper is a Demagogue! Wow!

I know! Isn’t she just AWESOME?

pfft! troll

i’m very pro-retard.

I was going to write a huge diatribe but it wasn’t worth the effort. I think Granny’s doing a good job as is.

Very wise Neanderthalsis.

neanderthalsis9:17 pm 30 Apr 09

It’s not often I get accused of being warm and fuzzy. I’ll bask in the glow of my new found fuzziness.

Neanderthalis for warm fuzzy inclusion. Actually, warm fuzzies for everyone, but Neanderthalis can go to the head of the queue.

neanderthalsis9:05 pm 30 Apr 09

johnboy said :

You’re setting a ludicrous standard whereby people can choose to opt out of government provided services and then demand the Government deliver the services at the time and place of their own choosing.

It’s selfish, it’s destructive, and it’s bad policy.

So it is wrong to allow for private schools to upgrade infrastructure to allow for students with a diversity of needs?

Is it also wrong for the public service to hire people with a disability that require special assistance? My tax dollar goes into providing that support…

And what about those interpreter services that are available to the general public when they contact government departments. Lazy sods should speak the language and not waste my tax dollar on interpreters.

And those adult literacy and numeracy programs, if they didn’t pay attention in school, it’s their own fault. I shouldn’t have to contribute to their ongoing education now.

And what about the telstras message service for free of charge for the hearing inpaired, my phone bill goes up to pay for that…

Not all private / religious schools are set up like Kings & Waverly. Whether a parent chooses to send their child to a non-government school for philosophical or logistical reasons, a child should not be excluded on the basis of having a different level of need.

It seems we have a lot of outrage over what is a simple matter of providing basic services for those who need them.

Because a service is provided in one place and in one way does not mean that service should be the only one provided, even if it is the most fantastic service in the universe. There will always be external factors impacting on situations that make the most fantastic service in the universe other than the best option.

25 years ago T was receiving fantastic service from a specialist disability educational facility. They even provided boarding facilities so he could stay there a few nights a week while receiving his education. Trouble was, he was a bit bright for the educational level being achieved, and we weren’t too excited about not seeing our son several days a week.

We pushed for him to attend the local school his sister attended, because it was the local school. It was actually not a great fit for his sister, because she would be called on to help with his care when she should have been enjoying her own education or playing with her friends. He needed a teacher’s aid to be provided.

The trade off in expenses was the cost of driving him to and from the special ed facility, the impact he had on the teachers and facilitators there, the cost of his care at the boarding unit.

The monetary impact would have been the same wether it was a public or private school. The benefits of having him at home with his family, receiving his education within the local community, and getting his education in a mainstream school situation, were beyond value. And the benefit to those he came in contact with and who learned to treat someone with a disability as a human being are too many and varied to enumerate.

It’s very sad that 25 years later the same discussions are being reduced to a purely financial argument about public versus private schools.

PS Leave my warm fuzzies out of this if you don’t mind.

If Catholic schools want government funding, they can do their bit for disabled kids and support them! Er, Christian values, anyone?

Clown Killer8:17 pm 30 Apr 09

Welcome aboard Quackers. I agree with your point about suceeding in a happy environment. In reality the only diference between a regular kid and diabled kid will be their ability to negotiate the stairs or to hear the teacher clearly.

I feel strongly that it should be the schools responsibility, Government or otherwise, to make sure all the kids get a fair crack at getting an education.

johnboy said :

And it’s important to me that a supermodel come around with a case of beer to mow my lawn.

That’s supposed to be analogous?

A kid with a disability’s need to be surrounded by friends and family versus your need for a supermodel and a case of beer and a lawn-mowing service.

Good on you.

I became interested in this thread because of my Mum.

I’m 13 and as a student with a disabled sibling I don’t really think people are looking at if from the child’s perspective.

I know I do better if I am in a happy environment, so how is that different to a disabled child?

Clown Killer8:01 pm 30 Apr 09

On the one hand I don’t believe that the Territory Government should be picking up the tab for engineering works to accommodate disabled kids at non-Government schools, but then on the other, if the Government want to essentially dictate every aspect of how non-government schools deliver education then I don’t believe they have the right to cherry pick what they want to and don’t want to pay for.

Centrist governments will always struggle with the non-government school funding dilemma because they would have trouble winning elections if they alienated such a significant portion of the electorate. Government schools provide an excellent safety net in a world where children’s education is mandated, but when families attain sufficient prosperity to choose – they vote with their feet (or perhaps their kids feet).

Granny said :

I think if you were nine years old it might be important for you to go to the same school as your friends and your big sister who always sticks up for you when people are mean, or who squeezes your hand when people stare.

And it’s important to me that a supermodel come around with a case of beer to mow my lawn.

But sometimes we have to make choices and we don’t always get what we want.

I wouldn’t describe England and Germany as ideal exactly, just socially responsible.

Because of the challenges in their lives some people will need more help than others to take part in things that everybody else takes for granted, such as education. Of course it’s relevant to schools when they have a student with a disability.

There are some things an individual employer or school or shopping centre can and should do and others that are provided by socially aware and just governments.

The education department is responsible for the oversight of both government and non-government schools and the Minister for Education is also responsible for the non-government sector including such models as homeschooling.

Disability gets complicated because people try and separate out the needs of the individual across health and education. What a student actually requires is a wrap-around approach encompassing these complex factors and challenges. This also includes the mental and emotional well-being of the student.

I think if you were nine years old it might be important for you to go to the same school as your friends and your big sister who always sticks up for you when people are mean, or who squeezes your hand when people stare.

Granny said :

No, because these services need to be made available whether an individual is at school or at home or at work.

I’m not sure that education in the school of the parent’s choice is a human right. Education appropriate to meet the needs of the child to maximise potential while maintaining all their other human rights may well be.

erm, mine was a reply to granny

Sure, in an ideal world. There just isn’t enough money in the world to ensure everyone gets a fair go. Such is life.

Fine, so un-related to schools.

Nothing to do with schools you say? Fantastic! Let’s stop talking about schools.

Want Government services provided by Government schools? Go to government schools

Very, very simple.

No, because these services need to be made available whether an individual is at school or at home or at work.

I believe the Private Schools need to take some responsibility here. If Private Schools are willing to accept enrollment of a child with additional needs, there should be some expectation that they will provide that child with those additional needs.

In the report it states that there is already a gap in support for both Public and Private schools, so surely “equality” here is going to result in funding being taken away from Public Schools and directed towards to those who seem to be able to afford their childrens private schooling.

Equality is great, but not at the expense of the less fortunate.

Granny said :

Most schools don’t have appropriate facilities.

Do you think if I decided to exercise my right to send my child to the local primary school that it has facilities to cope with severe disability? Think again.

And in the schools operated by the Government this is the Government’s problem. But not in the non-government schools where Steve should take up cudgels against those schools and their operators.

Well, monomania, there are some countries who prioritise the human rights of their citizens and others that don’t. In actual fact, I believe the Rudd government is very much moving in the right direction in this regard.

Most schools don’t have appropriate facilities.

Do you think if I decided to exercise my right to send my child to the local primary school that it has facilities to cope with severe disability? Think again.

That is a very large factor in my personal decision to send my child to a special school.

The same measures would be required wherever she went, and I can’t see that this would benefit the school, whether public or private, in any tangible way whatsoever.

Granny said :

But it’s different if it happens to you, isn’t it?

Well of course it would be. And there would probably be no limit to what I would want.

Decisions are made all the time about resource allocation in education. Kevin Rudd for instance allocates a lot more to the education of his son that he feels is necessary for most other Australian children.

Kids education is changed because demographic changes make schools of diminishing size uneconomic in terms cost per student, demand on staff and opportunities for students.

Someone also makes a decision about the amount of support provided not only to children with disabilities but to the support services available to all students.

Just because someone doesn’t share your exact views Granny doesn’t mean that they have no experience of children with disabilities and their families in family, educational and social situations.

True, let’s prosecute the PARENTS who CHOOSE to put their children in schools that don’t have appropriate facilities.

I went to a private school, I have no problem with private schools.

That’s because you can’t get your head around the fact that these are basic services that the individual needs as a part of life and not just education.

Whatever assistance they need in school they also need in life.

Just like a water supply and sewage.

If you want to get rid of private schools, fine. Just don’t tell them they can’t choose their school when everybody else can.

It’s called discrimination and there’s supposed to be a law against it.

You’re still both wrong no matter how many warm fuzzies you want to send each other.

You’re setting a ludicrous standard whereby people can choose to opt out of government provided services and then demand the Government deliver the services at the time and place of their own choosing.

I don’t care if it’s for disabled children, gold medal winning olympians, anzac legends, or fluffy bunnies.

It’s selfish, it’s destructive, and it’s bad policy.

You’ve put the smile back on my face, Bundy. Thanks ….

Little re-read and all’s right in the world. I’ts so nice to be adored, thank you much and right back at ya.

No, your post was wonderful, Bundy. Sensible and good as always. My comment was directed at monomania, but our posts crossed.

Thank you for posting. It’s the best one on the thread. I adore you, by the way!

: )

Bit lost Granny, aren’t we arguing the same case? Or did I do a really bad job of stating the case for equal access to education regardless of public / private preference?

s-s-a said :

Oh dear. Now we are hanging arguments off the feel good factor that goes with making a disabled child happy. I wonder does supporting policies that provide a better quality of life for a middle-aged man with a disability feel as good? Heaven help Granny and her mates and their children when the kids grow up and lose the cute factor.

What makes you think my mates don’t have grown children or adult relatives requiring care?

Sibling attendance at a school is sufficient cause to accord priority to students, as it is understood that environmental factors such as happiness are important to successful educational outcomes. But we couldn’t have happiness for students with or without the cute factor, could we? It’s not like it’s important for them.

As for you s-s-a, if I ever get as bitter and jaded as you I hope that a good friend will buy me a drink and then shoot me.

Granny said :

Firstly, you are assuming that the child is born with a disability and that they are close in age.

Would you want to disrupt the education of all your children if your child suddenly acquires a brain injury, loses their sight or whatever?

But it’s different if it happens to you, isn’t it?

Well I should imagine a lot of situations where it might be beneficial for children in the situations you describe to have separate time, probably most easily provided by them going to different schools.

Very few students have their education tailored to exactly suit the desires of their parents. Society simply could not afford it.

Ok, I can’t help myself. We’re not funding the school. We’re funding the child. A ramp is built for a child. The school don’t need it. A support person is allocated to a child. A communication device is given to a child, not a school. Why force them to go to a different school from their brothers and sisters just so they can access an education?

A ramp is NOT built for a child. A ramp is school infrastructure and will stay there when the child has moved on from the school. I’m with Jim Jones at #13 in believing that the private school has a responsibility to provide accessible premises (as is the Hyatt so that my dear hubby and I can go there for coffee).

Of course a support person or communication device or wheelchair is allocated to a child and should be available to that child no matter which school he/she attends.

There are other reasons for schools to be accessible premises. Some parents are wheelchair users (and so in theory are some teachers, tho I’ve yet to meet one in the ACT). None of that funding can be tied to the attendance of a particular student.

People, you are going to be paying for these things anyway. It makes no difference to you. It could make a huge difference to the happiness of some child.

Oh dear. Now we are hanging arguments off the feel good factor that goes with making a disabled child happy. I wonder does supporting policies that provide a better quality of life for a middle-aged man with a disability feel as good? Heaven help Granny and her mates and their children when the kids grow up and lose the cute factor.

Not you, Bundy!

; )

Firstly, you are assuming that the child is born with a disability and that they are close in age.

Would you want to disrupt the education of all your children if your child suddenly acquires a brain injury, loses their sight or whatever?

But it’s different if it happens to you, isn’t it?

Would it help if this debate was divided into physical infrastructure and personalised assistance?

My understanding is that all new buildings must meet disability standards, and older buildings must meet them as and when repairs and modifications are made. The issue of wheelchair ramps and lifts, etc. becomes moot. If funding is available for upgrades, why wouldn’t it be available to all who meet the basic criteria.

When we look at the individual support needs of a particular student, their needs are theirs regardless of how or where they are provided. If they need a wheelchair it should be supplied to THEM. If they need a teachers aid, it should be supplied to THEM. Sure, there are some economies of scale available if there are more than one student needing the support, but lets not get back to making these decisions based on economy of scale, or we’ll be re-opening Goulburn and all the other huge institutions.

Let kids get an education in the most appropriate environment for their education, wether that’s a specialist facility for kids with disabilities, or the bloody ANU.

Granny said :

Ok, I can’t help myself. We’re not funding the school. We’re funding the child. A ramp is built for a child. The school don’t need it. A support person is allocated to a child. A communication device is given to a child, not a school. Why force them to go to a different school from their brothers and sisters just so they can access an education?

Sorry, can’t agree with you here. If a parent feels strongly about having a child at school with their siblings then what is wrong with sending all children to a school with these facilities. Make the decision before the first enrolls. Not all schools have a lift for example. Does that mean that as soon as a school receives a request to enroll a student who needs a lift one should be installed when there has always been another school relatively close with these facilities.

Or if a parent wants to mainstream their child when it is inappropriate should an excessive amount of additional resources be used to enable this. Or the situation where two support workers and special facilities are needed when one would be needed and the facilities already existed in a special unit at another school.

Emlyn Ward said :

“I fail to see why should private schools should receive even more funding, eat up even more of a limited education budget, and even further reduce the educational opportunities of children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds?”

I don’t think you’re analysing this properly:

If you use compulsion to force people to use Public Education, then you are *increasing* the cost of Public Education, and thereby *reducing* educational opportunities for poor people.

…and when that compulsion is applied to disabled children, whose cost of education is necessarily higher, the imposition on the Public system is even higher.

Of course, what I’ve written above is only true if your statement “private schools already receive disproportionate governmental funding” is incorrect. I assume you can’t back it up with any data?

16% Of all current ACT govt funding goes to private. the rest goes to public. It is still a contribution, but not a very grand one.

I just don’t understand the term “imposition” when it comes to ALL kids having access to education, public or private.

It is a right. not a privilege. Even if i didn’t have kids, I would want for all children to have the right to learn how to read and write.

It should be something that is expected by us all. If a child is disabled, why should we disadvantage them for it?

If the school needs to install ramps for a disabled child, so be it. It may also encourage more parents with children of similar conditions to consider sending their children there, with their friends, instead of ostracizing them in a special school.

(I refer to the lesser forms of disability, not children who require specific needs care that only a special school can provide)

It’s actually not at all helpful to the cause of these families to inflame this debate.

Er, because I get the impression this is exactly what it is all about – the ALP’s pathological opposition for pluralism in education.

Thanks for making this about the public versus private debate and not the kids affected. Why don’t you argue about that on some other thread?

“I fail to see why should private schools should receive even more funding, eat up even more of a limited education budget, and even further reduce the educational opportunities of children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds?”

I don’t think you’re analysing this properly:

If you use compulsion to force people to use Public Education, then you are *increasing* the cost of Public Education, and thereby *reducing* educational opportunities for poor people.

…and when that compulsion is applied to disabled children, whose cost of education is necessarily higher, the imposition on the Public system is even higher.

Of course, what I’ve written above is only true if your statement “private schools already receive disproportionate governmental funding” is incorrect. I assume you can’t back it up with any data?

I have no plans to move my daughter from her special school, so it certainly doesn’t affect me personally.

It’s the attitudes I object to.

This isn’t about what school a child goes to so much as that a child with a disability will need extra help to learn in whatever educational or public or private setting.

If they can’t communicate they will need a system for communication which may mean a special person or low-tech or high-tech solution. It may involve pictures being posted around the school so that the child can understand that this is the science lab etc.

If they can’t move they will need some kind of mobility aid whether that is a crutch or a wheelchair or a person to push.

If they can’t operate pencils or keyboards they will need a person or gadget to help with those sorts of things also.

It boggles my mind that people are so hung up on trying to tell other people under what conditions a child can or can’t have access to these things because of their own personal prejudices against an educational model.

People, you are going to be paying for these things anyway. It makes no difference to you. It could make a huge difference to the happiness of some child.

Think about that.

Sorry Granny, I’m completely with johnboy on this one.

As far as I’m concerned the state has an obligation to provide an education to all children.

Expecting it to provide for the facilities of choice at the private school of your choice so you can choose to send all your other children there is just having a lend of the taxpayer IMHO.

The real upshot of Steve’s complaint is actually an attack on private education in Canberra, not the Government. I doubt he’s thought that far ahead on that one.

When it comes to education, however, it is clear that the non-government alternatives don’t exist to line shareholders’ pockets, but instead to provide a clear philosophical choice in how you want your children educated.

I concede that this is where my argument totally falls over.

Public education horrifies me in the way it utterly fails to teach children discipline and rational thinking…

I think that the problems with public schools are something of a feedback loop to the mass of society the teachers (and all other people with influence in the education system from minister down) are drawn from. Perhaps the government should get out of the eduction business totally.

The funding is not for the school, Jim Jones. What building codes are you referring to? As far as I know, mainstreaming requires access, special equipment and support people. What do you think it requires? A whole school makeover?

Without some big stick saying you can have this wheelchair you need, but only if you go to this school and not that school because we don’t like it that that/i> school exists and we want to force you to go to this school.

Granny said :

Ok, I can’t help myself. We’re not funding the school. We’re funding the child. A ramp is built for a child. The school don’t need it. A support person is allocated to a child. A communication device is given to a child, not a school. Why force them to go to a different school from their brothers and sisters just so they can access an education?

Granny, I’m not sure that the issue is solely over building codes. I would have thought that all school buildings (regardless of whether they were public or private) would be required to have proper access options.

Even if this were the case, private schools already receive disproportionate governmental funding – if there are accessibility problems, then the schools should be forced to get up to scratch without additional government funding. They can rely on the funding they’ve got.

As for kids being ‘forced’ to go to different schools – I’m sorry, but that really is a bit rich. Not all people can afford to send their children to private schools, what about their kids?

Not everyone has a ‘right’ to go to a private school. I fail to see why should private schools should receive even more funding, eat up even more of a limited education budget, and even further reduce the educational opportunities of children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds?

God, are we arguing public education versus private or whether kids should get to go to the same school as their brothers and sisters?

But the government is responsible for funding and managing public schools – not private schools. Of course, private schools should attain a standard of accessibility, but it’s their own responsibility to provide this, not the governments.

I think this argument stems from the conflict of a sector which everyone feels the government *must* make available, whilst at the same time believing that the private sector has a right to compete in it.

Example, when the government owned Telecom (Telstra), the were expected to provide a minimal level of service to the population. Now there is a situation where everyone expects the government to ensure everyone has access to services, while there is a market place in which companies can offer the same service, but only to the sector of the community which makes then money.

If private schools were *required* to offer all the same support mechanisms that the public system is *required* to offer, then that would be fair competition.

I expect that my opinions will change drastically when I have children.

P1, I would agree with you – when it comes to healthcare and toll-roads and so forth, I am appalled and disgusted at the utter waste of public money used to prop-up a completely faked idea of “choice” and “competition” which is nothing more than public money which should be spent on healthcare or roads (etc) being siphoned-off by private companies to pay for their shareholders’ new yachts (etc…).
Sometimes I feel I must have an inner communist telling me to feel this way – but other times I think it is perfectly rational to expect some aspects of society to function in a 100% socialised manner.
Roads, electricity, healthcare, and petrol are areas where privatisation fails miserably to deliver anything worthwhile.

When it comes to education, however, it is clear that the non-government alternatives don’t exist to line shareholders’ pockets, but instead to provide a clear philosophical choice in how you want your children educated.

Public education horrifies me in the way it utterly fails to teach children discipline and rational thinking – the current triumph of opinion over fact in relation to stuff like Homeopathy, global warming, vaccination, Pop Idol, multiculturalism and history, (etc) where magical-thinking is taking over from clear analysis is a direct result of thirty years of misguided education policy against which non-government schools provide a safe haven for parents concerned for their offspring’s intellectual well-being.

I just wonder why the government should be contributing so heavily to a service that is necessarily denied to many taxpayers because they can’t afford it.

I went to a private school and it was completely sh1t. They were more interested in turning out mindless conformist than actually instilling a love for knowledge or a desire to learn independently (I didn’t get this back until I attended a public college and rediscovered how much I loved learning). The snobbery was also completely appalling, the focus on the all-important ‘image’ of the school was insane, and often contradictory to the best interests of the students.

Ok, I can’t help myself. We’re not funding the school. We’re funding the child. A ramp is built for a child. The school don’t need it. A support person is allocated to a child. A communication device is given to a child, not a school. Why force them to go to a different school from their brothers and sisters just so they can access an education?

I get very conflicted when trying to decide how I feel about government funding of private schools. I usually come down on the “governments should support all people equally”, but when it comes to education, I can’t help but think that economies of scale would mean that if the government put every last cent of eduction money into public schools, those schools would be better. Sure, they would end up with more students (you couldn’t institute such a policy over night), but, well, maybe it is just my inner communist talking.

I do accept that this specific argument is a little different, as it pertains to a specific aspect of being an eduction provider (ie, special needs of students with disabilities), which can get pretty large even for one student.

Granny, I know you have a real concern about this issue and are always going to have very strong views on it.

But the government is responsible for funding and managing public schools – not private schools. Of course, private schools should attain a standard of accessibility, but it’s their own responsibility to provide this, not the governments.

These attitudes are exactly why we have the disability discrimination act in the first place. I’m out of here. You all enjoy yourselves.

I meant, PB.

Yes, jakez, thank you. That’s so how it is for us.

Pommy bastard4:06 pm 30 Apr 09

Lets see now, if the disabled kids parents choose to stay at The Hyatt Hotel, should the government provide disabled facilities there to enable this?

Granny said :

So should equal opportunity exist only for government buildings? Should lifts and ramps be limited to buildings owned by the government?

Not at all. I think private entities should provide such things if they so choose to. I just don’t think they should be forced to through the iron fist of the state. The velvet welcoming hand of voluntary community action however is more than acceptable.

As for Government buildings, well I suppose I’m an ‘owner’ as it were of Government buildings so….

Oh sorry, I fell off my bed in a fit of laughter/tears. Anyway, so I put my own ‘share’ fully behind making such entities accessible to the disabled.

So should equal opportunity exist only for government buildings? Should lifts and ramps be limited to buildings owned by the government?

The Act makes it clear that if you’re offering a service to some members of the public then all members of the public should be able to access it.

It should come as little surprise that parents would choose to send a sibling with a disability to the same school as their other brothers and sisters. But surely this shouldn’t be allowed! Surely they shouldn’t have any choice where they send their kids!

It’s not going to cost a taxpayer any more for a mainstream support person in an independent school than it is in a public school. The same goes for ramps, or communication equipment or a wheelchair or whatever.

A lot of the poorest schools in the country are catholic schools.

This has never been an issue in our family, since we have chosen a special school setting for our child.

This does not mean that the choices of others should not be respected. If somebody wants to send their kid to a catholic school or the Islamic school that child should have just as much right to go there as anybody else.

not surprising when you see the old campaign info like this:
http://www.canberraliberals.org.au/files/6TJV4H83V8/Non%20Govt.pdf

The Liberals want to throw more public money at private schools; colour me unsurprised.

My daughter has a classmate with a disability in her class at her non-government school. The disabled girl has been assigned two “helpers” who make sure she gets assistance for anything she needs. Class activities are designed so as to not exclude her.

The idea that Stanhope/Gallagher have no care for this little girl because she is in a non-government school is as utterly unsurprising as it is reprehensible.

Having said that, the totally dysfunctional state of public education in the ACT does perhaps suggest that Doszpot might get a lot more than he bargained for if he gets his wish in the form of ACT Government interference in non-government-run schools.

Exactly which services does he want the government to pay for? Construction on wheel chair ramps on private property? Or extra staff at private institutions?

considering that the recent stimulus package includes non government schools –

Building the Education Revolution (BER) Approximately $230m in the ACT.

Under BER, infrastructure funding is being provided over 3 years with all of Canberra’s public and non-government schools benefiting from the package.

There are three key elements of the BER:

Primary Schools for the 21st Century (P21): The focus of this element is the building of major new infrastructure for primary schools, the primary component of K-12 schools and all special schools. Buildings that will be funded include libraries, assembly halls, indoor sporting centres or other multipurpose facilities. Where a school already has a contemporary library or hall, refurbishment of existing facilities or the building of a different type of building will be allowed.

Science and Language Centres for 21st Century Secondary Schools (SLC): This element of the BER will fund the building of up to 500 science laboratories or language learning centres in secondary schools. A competitive process will fund schools that can demonstrate the greatest need and a readiness and capacity to be able to build the facilities within the 2009-10 timeframe.

National School Pride (NSP) Program: This element will provide funding to every Australian school – primary and secondary, government and non-government – to undertake construction of small scale infrastructure and minor refurbishment projects. For details of the projects approved by the Commonwealth in Round 1, visit http://www.deewr.gov.au/Ministers/Gillard/Media/Releases/Pages/Article_090406_100637.aspx
here is the link to the stimulus site:
http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/stimulus

Correct me if I’m wrong but I could have sworn that private schools are now being funded by our Government. Or is that just a federal government policy and not the state’s?

Sounds like he’s suffering from Relevance Deprivation Syndrome. Who ever heard of a town council having an opposition, anyway? That job is usually done by the ratepayers.

Be reasonable johnboy. How will the Schools pay for top shelf legal support for rockspiders if they have to pay for disability services as well!

Sounds like Dezpot is getting desperate for material!

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.