More funding for all schools—an update on Gonski

Parliament house flag post

More funding for all schools—an update on Gonski

Posted 23/08/2012 by Marilyn Harrington

The Government’s previous commitment that no school would lose a dollar in funding per student has been extended. The Prime Minister and the Minister for School Education, Peter Garrett, have announced that all schools will receive increased funding under the Government’s new plans for school funding. Peter Garrett has also confirmed that funding will be increased in real terms.

This newly announced commitment follows the release on the News Limited website of a list of 3254 schools (about one-third of all schools) that would lose funding. State governments and non-government education authorities used data provided by the Australian Government for their modelling to calculate funding for individual schools under the Gonski proposals. According to the list, the significant majority of schools (72 per cent) that would lose funding are government schools, and the list includes schools in rural areas and special schools. The 2010 funding data referred to in the list is total government recurrent funding (federal and state and territory) as published on the My School website.
If this list of schools is correct, it appears that there may be some serious deficits in the assumptions upon which the Gonski recommendations were based. As reported by Samantha Maiden in the Sunday Herald Sun, the Prime Minister, too, has admitted that the original modelling had ‘some schools missing out’. Moreover, as reported in the same newspaper article, there is a belief that the Gonski Panel were never provided with detailed modelling on the impact of its own recommendations and that some panel members have ‘expressed frustration they were left in the dark’.
The Government’s announcement that all schools will receive ‘increased funding’ does not include any information about the scope of the increases. Under the Australian Government’s existing system of school funding, schools receive annual indexed increases in their base per student funding mostly in response to increases in Average Government School Recurrent Costs (AGSRC). Per student recurrent grants are based on a percentage of AGSRC with different amounts for primary and secondary school students. Government school students are funded at 10 per cent of AGSRC and non-government school students, under the Socioeconomic Status (SES) system, are funded along a continuum from 13.7 per cent to 70.0 per cent of AGSRC. In 2011, the primary AGSRC amount increased by 6.9 per cent to $9697 and the secondary AGSRC by 4.8 per cent to $11 945.
In addition to the per student funding provided under the National Schools Specific Purpose Payment, the Australian Government provides funding for both government and non-government schools through other programs such as its national partnerships, and also, for non-government schools, through targeted and capital programs. (See the Parliamentary Library publication, Australian Government Funding for Schools Explained, for further information.)
The report of the Review of Funding for Schooling (the Gonski Report) recommended a funding increase of $5 billion (in 2009 dollars). Using the average annual increase in AGSRC of 5.9 per cent from 1999 to 2011 (and as calculated by the Statistics and Mapping Section, Parliamentary Library), this amount will equate to an estimated $5.94 billion in 2013–14 when a new funding system is due to be implemented. Of this new funding, the Gonski Report recommended that 75 per cent be provided to government schools on the basis that they educate the most disadvantaged students.
The Gonski Report also provided estimates of the proposed per student Schooling Resource Standard (SRS) amounts—$8000 per primary school student and $10 500 per secondary school student (in 2009 dollars). Using the same methodology as above, these amounts will equate to an estimated $10 355 and $13 591 in 2013–14.
On top of this funding, the Gonski Report proposed weightings for various indicators of disadvantage, which were not determined at the time of the Report’s release. The new funding was to include Australian and state and territory government money, of which the Gonski Report concluded state and territory governments should provide 70 per cent on the basis of their current share of total government funding. (For a summary of the Gonski proposals, see the Parliamentary Library’s FlagPost, 'Brave new world'? The Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling).
It is difficult to navigate through all the claims and counter-claims now being made about the future of school funding. So what is known for certain?
  • In an interview on Sky News, the Prime Minister said that the Government’s response to the Gonski report ‘… won’t be too far away from here. It’ll be in a number of weeks’ time’. The Government has also committed to introducing legislation for the new funding system this year. Given that schools are funded only to the end of 2013, legislation will need to be introduced soon to provide funding certainty.
  • As mentioned above, the Government has promised that all schools will receive increased funding in real terms. However, there is no news yet about the indexation formula to be used. Indexation mechanisms vary considerably. From 1999 to 2011, the average annual rate of increase in the AGSRC, which currently is the basis of most of the indexation mechanism for school funding, was 5.9 per cent, almost double that of the Consumer Price Index which increased at an average annual rate of 3.2 per cent.
  • There have always been educational and financial accountability conditions placed on Australian Government funding for schools. School improvement plans will be a new condition. What they will mean in practice for schools is not yet known.
  • The Government has distanced itself from the Gonski modelling upon which the list of schools to lose funding was based. In a Lateline interview, Peter Garrett said that ‘[it] is not the Government's modelling and the figures are not correct at all. No school will lose a single dollar and that commitment is absolute. What people saw out of those figures was modelling from the Gonski panel. It's not the Government's figures’. The modelling has not been released.
  • From comments Peter Garrett made in an interview on Sky News’s Sunday Agenda program, and as reported in The Australian by Justine Ferrari, it seems likely that the implementation of the Government’s new funding system will be phased in over time. On the same program, he also declined to commit to the quantum of new money recommended in the Gonski Report.
  • Elements of the existing funding system will continue. Peter Garrett wrote in the Daily Telegraph that non-government schools will continue to be funded according to ‘the ability of parents … to contribute to the cost of their child’s education’ and government school students will ‘continue [to] be fully publicly funded.’
  • The Opposition’s policy, as stated by Christopher Pyne, the Shadow Minister for Education, is to ‘maintain the current funding plus yearly six per cent indexation, meaning over four years both government and non-government schools would receive recurrent funding increases from a Coalition Government’. The Shadow Minister has also urged the Government to ‘extend the current funding model to give schools and parents the certainty they need to plan for the future’.
  • State and territory government support is uncertain. State governments, such as the Queensland Government, argue that they are not in a position to fund the Gonski reform agenda. It seems likely, however, as reported in the Sunday Herald Sun by Samantha Maiden, the Australian Government will contribute a greater share of the funding than proposed in the Gonski Report.
  • The Greens and the Australian Education Union and other public education advocates, are calling for an additional government investment of the scale recommended in the Gonski report.
School funding increases every year as a result of indexation. The questions remain as to how much new money over and above the current indexation arrangements will be provided, how and when this money will be apportioned, what funding role the states and territories will have and whether the different approaches to school funding will be resolved.

Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print


Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament

Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice




refugees asylum immigration Australian foreign policy Parliament climate change elections women social security Indigenous Australians Australian Bureau of Statistics Employment taxation Sport illicit drugs Medicare welfare reform Australian Defence Force welfare policy Asia income management Middle East criminal law disability Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency World Anti-Doping Agency United States higher education people trafficking school education aid statistics Australian Electoral Commission WADA United Nations federal budget health financing emissions trading gambling Australia in the Asian Century steroids detention Private health insurance OECD ASADA labour force transport Law Enforcement Australian Federal Police Industrial Relations dental health National Disability Insurance Scheme forced labour Senate election results Papua New Guinea Australian Public Service International Women's Day corruption Fair Work Act child protection people smuggling debt federal election 2013 parliamentary procedure ALP New Zealand Australian Crime Commission Newstart Parenting Payment 43rd Parliament slavery by-election political parties Census constitution High Court skilled migration voting Federal Court terrorist groups Afghanistan Higher Education Loan Program HECS youth Aviation environment foreign debt gross debt net debt defence capability customs poker machines doping health crime health risks multiculturalism aged care Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling sex slavery sea farers leadership United Kingdom UK Parliament Electoral reform politics banking firearms public policy mental health China ADRV terrorism social media pensions welfare ASIO intelligence community Australian Security Intelligence Organisation governance public service reform Carbon Pricing Mechanism carbon tax mining military history employer employee fishing paid parental leave European Union same sex relationships international relations coal seam gas planning United Nations Security Council Australian economy food vocational education and training Drugs Indonesia children codes of conduct terrorist financing election timetable citizenship Productivity asylum seekers early childhood education Canada Population Financial sector national security fuel violence against women domestic violence disability employment Tasmania integrity science research and development Australian Secret Intelligence Service sexual abuse federal state relations World Trade Organization Australia accountability housing affordability bulk billing water renewable energy children's health health policy Governor-General US economy export liquefied natural gas foreign bribery question time speaker superannuation family assistance expertise Senators and Members climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry food labelling Pacific Islands reserved seats new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC carbon markets health reform Indigenous constitutional recognition of local government local government consumer laws PISA royal commission US politics language education Leaders of the Opposition Parliamentary remuneration health system Australia Greens money laundering servitude Special Rapporteur Trafficking Protocol energy forced marriage rural and regional Northern Territory Emergency Response ministries social citizenship China; Economic policy; Southeast Asia; Africa housing Speaker; House of Representatives; Parliament Defence High Court; Indigenous; Indigenous Australians; Native Title ACT Indigenous education Norfolk Island External Territories emissions reduction fund; climate change child care funding refugees immigration asylum procurement Indigenous health e-voting internet voting nsw state elections 44th Parliament 2015 ABS Age Pension Death penalty capital punishment execution Bali nine Bali bombings Trade EU China soft power education Fiji India Disability Support Pension Antarctica Diplomacy by-elections state and territories workers Bills anti-corruption fraud bribery transparency corporate ownership whistleblower G20 economic reform innovation standards NATO Members of Parliament Scottish referendum Middle East; national security; terrorism social services Criminal Code Amendment (Misrepresentation of Age to a Minor) Bill 2013 online grooming sexual assault of minors ACT Assembly public health smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Asia; Japan; international relations Work Health and Safety Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine regional unemployment asylum refugees immigration political finance donations foreign aid Economics efficiency human rights; Racial Discrimination Act employment law bullying Animal law; food copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry peace keeping contracts workplace policies trade unions same-sex marriage disorderly conduct retirement Parliament House standing orders public housing prime ministers sitting days First speech defence budget submarines Somalia GDP forestry world heritage political engagement leave loading Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission regulation limitation period universities Ireland cancer gene patents genetic testing suspension of standing and sessional orders animal health live exports welfare systems infant mortality middle class welfare honorary citizen railways disciplinary tribunals standard of proof World Health Organisation arts international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies roads Italy national heritage NHMRC nutrition anti-dumping Constitutional reform referendum Rent Assistance competition policy pharmaceutical benefits scheme obesity evidence law sacrament of confession US presidential election international days baby bonus DFAT UN General Assembly deregulation Regulation Impact Statements administrative law small business Breaker Morant homelessness regional engagement social determinants of health abortion Youth Allowance Members suspension citizen engagement policymaking federal election 2010 workplace health and safety Trafficking in Persons Report marine reserves hearing TAFE Victoria astronomy resources sector YMCA youth parliament alcohol Korea rebate Australian Greens presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act entitlements political parties preselection solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef Stronger futures political financing Hung Parliament political education social inclusion Social Inclusion Board maritime early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin Iran sanctions

Show all
Show less
Back to top