Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

Zed and Steve plan to send more money to the struggling private schools

By johnboy 30 August 2012 60

The Liberals have announced they’re going to putting an extra $30 million into Canberra’s private schools, because those kids need even more help in life:

CT Opposition Leader Zed Seselja and ACT Shadow Education Minister Steve Doszpot announced today that if elected, a Canberra Liberals Government will increase non-government school funding to bring the ACT on par with New South Wales funding levels.

Mr Seselja said the Canberra Liberals support the rights of parents to have a genuine choice between government and non-government schools, and do not believe children in non-government schools should be disadvantaged just because they live in the ACT.

“The ACT currently has the highest proportion of non-government school students in any jurisdiction – and the lowest funding,” Mr Seselja said.

“A Canberra Liberals Government would increase recurrent funding for all non- government schools progressively, to eventually bring the ACT on par with New South Wales.

“This policy will cost $31.4 million over the forward estimates,” Mr Seselja concluded.

Mr Doszpot said the Canberra Liberals are the only party that has been consistently supportive of non-government schools.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
60 Responses to
Zed and Steve plan to send more money to the struggling private schools
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Jon 5:32 pm 13 Sep 12

Jim Jones said :

Honestly, the financial quandary we have with educational system we have at the moment isn’t going to go away. And there’s no way in hell that funding of non-government schools is going to be stopped. Realistically there’s no point arguing that private schools shouldn’t get government funds; we’re well beyond that point.

The issue of fairness for me was well raised in the Gonski report. Yes, I accept that private schools get government funding. But fairness in education is not achieved by having funding given equally between private and government schools. Fairness is achieved by having funding tied to quality of education, so that there are real options in education, not the situation we’re developing at the moment, where the choice is to send your kids to a private school if you can afford it (and from there try to negotiate your way through all the religious crap that is implicitly part of this) or put up with a substandard public system if you can’t afford it.

I have no doubt that there are *some* non-government schools that deserve greater funding. And there may be some public schools that are adequately funded. But you’d be hard put to argue that private schools are poorly funded compared to their public counterparts. If this were the case, there wouldn’t be so many threads on riotact whining about crappy public schools.

Fairness is more than just money. Fairness is also about HOW independent schools treat their students too – both inside and outside the classroom. It’s about the administrative framework which governs how a school is run.

As I commented in a previous post, why SHOULD independent schools expect the SAME level of government funding as a government school, but at the same time reserve the right to pick and choose which students they accept?

Why is it that a school can cry poor in a national newspaper and blame Gonski for losing students and declining enrolments, but then turn around and expel a child without giving their parents ANY rights to challenge or appeal that expulsion (when it’s clearly an unfair and biased decision in the first place)?

Legally, it seems a Principal doesn’t even need to meet with the parents of the child or provide reasons for making a decision that could affect a child’s entire future (although, to be fair, most do as a matter of course).

Nor does it seem a Principal is required to allow the parents of the child to discuss or appeal the decision before making a detrimental decision that affects a child’s future. While most Principals would, and do, consult with the family before making the decision to exclude a child, legally they don’t appear to be required to.

I am not against providing more money to the private sector – far from it, but I have real issues with providing money to “stuggling private schools” when those same schools refuse to treat their students with dignity and respect and provide fairness and natural justice when it comes to decision-making.

Zed and Steve may be planning to send more money to the struggling private schools, but they also seem to be balancing that by expanding the powers of the Human Rights Commission to include education.

http://www.canberraliberals.org.au/LATEST-NEWS/STEVE-DOSZPOT-MLA/LIBS-TO-INTRODUCE-INDEPENDENT-EDUCATION-COMMISSIONER.asp

It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s far better than the ALP and Green have done in the last Assembly. Having an independent education commissioner is a definite win for ALL students – both public and private. So yes, if Zed and Steve want to send more money the way of private schools, if they’re introducing an independent third party ombudsman that can resolve disputes between schools and parents, then I’m all for it.

BrassRazoo 12:04 pm 01 Sep 12

Predictable pay-off for the Canberra Liberals aka the Canberra Catholics, courtesy of their generous commitment from the public purse –

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/election-row-hits-catholic-schools-20120831-2569x.html

Jethro 5:41 pm 31 Aug 12

fabforty said :

Mysteryman said :

Proboscus said :

Mysteryman said :

Proboscus said :

The Catholic Church is the biggest corporation in the world. They also pay next to zero in taxes. They should be solely responsible for funding their schools. Ditto for the every other tax avoiding, devil dodging school in Australia.

Do you know why churches and other religious organisations are tax exempt?

It’s one of the Ten Commandments?

Nope. Take another guess.

Care to enlighten us ? I can’t think of one single reason.

I think it’s because they provide charitable services, which are tax deductible. Of course, it shouldn’t be too hard to separate the charity arm of a church from the rest of it, and allow the charitable stuff to remain tax free.

Jethro 5:39 pm 31 Aug 12

chewy14 said :

Jethro said :

Seems to me that they want to have their cake and eat it too. If you want public funds, you should be open to the whole public.

So organisations that accept public money need to be open to the whole public?

This argument just got a whole lot bigger. Do you apply this to everything or do you only apply this to schools?

Do you rail against government selective schools and advanced programs as well?

If a private organisation provides a service that is otherwise provided by a public service provider AND the private organisation receives public funds, it is entirely reasonable that they are expected to follow the same standards as the public service provider, particularly in terms of being accessible to everyone.

The big issue is that private schools can exclude whomever they want from attending. What this effectively means is that public schools get all of the difficult students, thereby making them less attractive an option, which in turn pushes more people into the private system. I know of private schools that have effectively expelled students after they developed mental health issues (not behaviour related) that basically made the students to much of a burden to deal with. Other private schools force all children who wish to attend to sit an examination before entrance; only students with high enough scores gain entry. This helps make the schools test results look better and helps act as a marketing tool. If a private school wishes to pick and choose who they allow to attend, they shouldn’t expect to be funded from the public purse.

And, yes, I am against selective public schools for a number of reasons. Education research shows that having high level students in regular classrooms helps pull up the results of the more average students, as they provide work and behaviour models for the other student to emulate. On the other side, there is also evidence that high-end students who are separated from mainstream lose valuable social skills, which are equally necessary for success in later life.

fabforty 5:03 pm 31 Aug 12

Mysteryman said :

Proboscus said :

Mysteryman said :

Proboscus said :

The Catholic Church is the biggest corporation in the world. They also pay next to zero in taxes. They should be solely responsible for funding their schools. Ditto for the every other tax avoiding, devil dodging school in Australia.

Do you know why churches and other religious organisations are tax exempt?

It’s one of the Ten Commandments?

Nope. Take another guess.

Care to enlighten us ? I can’t think of one single reason.

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Mysteryman said :

It’s a shame, CSRI, that you’re so intent on attacking me and trying to prove me wrong that you can’t see the stupidity of the argument you’re backing. I know there are people in this world who are so persuasive that they can take the wrong side of an argument and make it look like the right one, but mate, you aren’t one of them. You’re just starting to look desperate and a bit pitiful.

I have just re-read this, could you enlighten me as to which argument I am backing?

Mysteryman said :

*crickets*

watto23 11:17 am 31 Aug 12

An idea I’ve had for a while is a HECS/FEE-HELP system for primary and secondary schools.

The issue is the debt associated with this and how its paid back, ie is it the parents debt until paid off, even after the kids have left home? or could the debt be transferred to the child when they turn 18, but then of course it may not have been their decision to have a better schooling….

Still their are plenty of parents wanting better schooling for their children, are middle class and can’t afford it, but could afford to pay for it over say 10-20 years in extra taxes.

Mysteryman said :

It’s a shame, CSRI, that you’re so intent on attacking me and trying to prove me wrong that you can’t see the stupidity of the argument you’re backing. I know there are people in this world who are so persuasive that they can take the wrong side of an argument and make it look like the right one, but mate, you aren’t one of them. You’re just starting to look desperate and a bit pitiful.

I have just re-read this, could you enlighten me as to which argument I am backing?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 10:34 am 31 Aug 12

Mysteryman said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Mysteryman said :

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Source?

Gamer_Nerd, Comic_And. 2012, Various Comments.
Available from: . [30 August 2012]

How’s my referencing?

Impeccable. A+.

I’m not sure you guys understand what source means.

don’t hold your breathe waiting for Miseryman to back up any of his claims – it is his MO, make unsubstantiated claims about other posters and when called on it he responds with ‘troll’, idiot’ or the very Beverly Hills 90210 ‘douche’.

Well, because I’ve got some time… Here’s the backup to my claims of terrible spelling:

This makes me happy. Not only for the ghungalin muslim community but also becuase its going to cause a bunch of intolerant morons rage.

Locked doors dont do much when they have acomplises holding it open.

Again, you appear to be specualiting instead of relying soley on factual evidence

And while we’re at it, some evidence of having no idea about what facts are:

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

here is another one, FACT: if money is spent upgrading and improving bicycle infastructure (sic), more people will be inclined to use it.

motor sport benifits (sic) nobody besides a small group of bogans

Exactly. Most multinationals are evil just by existing.

It’s a shame, CSRI, that you’re so intent on attacking me and trying to prove me wrong that you can’t see the stupidity of the argument you’re backing. I know there are people in this world who are so persuasive that they can take the wrong side of an argument and make it look like the right one, but mate, you aren’t one of them. You’re just starting to look desperate and a bit pitiful.

haha typical sign of loss of debate on teh interwebs, when you have nothing but to attack spelling and grammer.

It also appears you dont seem to know the difference between typos and bad spelling and superior brain that works faster than my fingers.
Its ok tthough, once my implants are complete you wont see a single mistake in my typing/1

Mysteryman said :

It’s a shame, CSRI, that you’re so intent on attacking me and trying to prove me wrong that you can’t see the stupidity of the argument you’re backing. I know there are people in this world who are so persuasive that they can take the wrong side of an argument and make it look like the right one, but mate, you aren’t one of them. You’re just starting to look desperate and a bit pitiful.

I am not intent on attacking you, in fact I often agree with your posts and post that I agree with what you have stated.

I do, however, reserve the right to point out that you regularly make ill informed comments and are unable to back them up.

You have proved your point about CAGN making spelling errors on an internet forum, though I am not sure how that should disqualify him from teaching. Whilst I will concede that your spelling is exemplary, I really hope you are not a teacher.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 10:30 am 31 Aug 12

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

Source?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

Mysteryman 10:13 am 31 Aug 12

Proboscus said :

Mysteryman said :

Proboscus said :

The Catholic Church is the biggest corporation in the world. They also pay next to zero in taxes. They should be solely responsible for funding their schools. Ditto for the every other tax avoiding, devil dodging school in Australia.

Do you know why churches and other religious organisations are tax exempt?

It’s one of the Ten Commandments?

Nope. Take another guess.

BrassRazoo 10:05 am 31 Aug 12

Unsurprising coming from the Canberra Catholics/ Canberra Liberals.

A better idea would be to return the prime land and taxpayer funded facilities to public use.

Mysteryman 9:59 am 31 Aug 12

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Mysteryman said :

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Source?

Gamer_Nerd, Comic_And. 2012, Various Comments.
Available from: . [30 August 2012]

How’s my referencing?

Impeccable. A+.

I’m not sure you guys understand what source means.

don’t hold your breathe waiting for Miseryman to back up any of his claims – it is his MO, make unsubstantiated claims about other posters and when called on it he responds with ‘troll’, idiot’ or the very Beverly Hills 90210 ‘douche’.

Well, because I’ve got some time… Here’s the backup to my claims of terrible spelling:

This makes me happy. Not only for the ghungalin muslim community but also becuase its going to cause a bunch of intolerant morons rage.

Locked doors dont do much when they have acomplises holding it open.

Again, you appear to be specualiting instead of relying soley on factual evidence

And while we’re at it, some evidence of having no idea about what facts are:

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

here is another one, FACT: if money is spent upgrading and improving bicycle infastructure (sic), more people will be inclined to use it.

motor sport benifits (sic) nobody besides a small group of bogans

Exactly. Most multinationals are evil just by existing.

It’s a shame, CSRI, that you’re so intent on attacking me and trying to prove me wrong that you can’t see the stupidity of the argument you’re backing. I know there are people in this world who are so persuasive that they can take the wrong side of an argument and make it look like the right one, but mate, you aren’t one of them. You’re just starting to look desperate and a bit pitiful.

chewy14 9:02 am 31 Aug 12

Jethro said :

Seems to me that they want to have their cake and eat it too. If you want public funds, you should be open to the whole public.

So organisations that accept public money need to be open to the whole public?

This argument just got a whole lot bigger. Do you apply this to everything or do you only apply this to schools?

Do you rail against government selective schools and advanced programs as well?

chewy14 8:59 am 31 Aug 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

Source?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Mysteryman said :

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Source?

Gamer_Nerd, Comic_And. 2012, Various Comments.
Available from: . [30 August 2012]

How’s my referencing?

Impeccable. A+.

I’m not sure you guys understand what source means.

don’t hold your breathe waiting for Miseryman to back up any of his claims – it is his MO, make unsubstantiated claims about other posters and when called on it he responds with ‘troll’, idiot’ or the very Beverly Hills 90210 ‘douche’.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 6:54 am 31 Aug 12

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Mysteryman said :

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Source?

Gamer_Nerd, Comic_And. 2012, Various Comments.
Available from: . [30 August 2012]

How’s my referencing?

Impeccable. A+.

I’m not sure you guys understand what source means.

Something you put on your meat pie?

Please elaborate, is this another factpinion?

If you want to post something as fact, it either needs to be historically recognised or you need to post sources as well.

justin heywood 11:47 pm 30 Aug 12

Diggety said :

Two verifiably false presumptions often tossed up in this debate:

– Parents who choose to send their children to private schools are rich.
– Parents who choose to send their children to public schools are poor.

No prizes for guessing which side of politics those come from.

Diggety said :

Jethro said :

If private schools want public funding they should be open to the whole public…. kids with behaviour problems, indigenous kids, refugee kids, kids with learning disabilties, etc.

And that is of course, is not true either.

Now now Diggety, settle down. Surely you know how it goes by now. The thread is only up to the ‘bash the Catholics’ stage. Don’t go spoiling people’s fun by injecting reality.

chewy14 10:34 pm 30 Aug 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Mysteryman said :

chewy14 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Source?

Gamer_Nerd, Comic_And. 2012, Various Comments.
Available from: . [30 August 2012]

How’s my referencing?

Impeccable. A+.

I’m not sure you guys understand what source means.

Something you put on your meat pie?

Please elaborate, is this another factpinion?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site