ALP targets 178 private schools
Related Topics
spookyrahul2 ...@yahoo.com (T. Anderton)
MARK Latham has pledged $1.9 billion more for public schools under a radical overhaul of education policy that will cut or freeze funds to up to 170 private schools.
Labor's long-awaited $2.4 billion schools policy released yesterday identifies a hit list of 67 expensive private schools - mostly in NSW and Victoria - that will receive less money, and 111 other private schools to which funding will be frozen.
A Latham government would set a national standard for school resources. Schools will receive a minimum of $9000 for each primary school student and $12,000 for each secondary school student by 2012.
Federal funding will be cut or frozen to private schools that charge higher fees than the national benchmark - leaving up to 178 schools $520 million worse off over four years.
Because of lower fees, many well-off schools in the smaller states, such as Queensland's most exclusive private school - Brisbane Grammar
- have been spared the worst of the Labor cuts.
Releasing the $2.4 billion package, Mr Latham pledged the policy would end the buckp***ing on education between the states and the commonwealth.
"I'll never apologise for pursuing needs-based funding and fairness in the school system," he said. "All parents want the very best for their children and I believe in that happening for the many, not just the few." Private schools warned the policy would trigger fee increases, prompting some parents at elite schools to consider jumping to the public system. Schools to lose funding include the King's School and Pymble Ladies College in Sydney, Caulfield Grammar and Melbourne Grammar in Victoria, and Adelaide's Scotch College.
While funding for private schools overall will not be cut, 67 high-fee private schools with 70,000 students - or 5 per cent of the school population, will face funding cuts of up $3 million each over four years.
Sydney's Trinity Grammar School will lose $3,045,667 in funding between 2004 and 2008, a reduction of 63 per cent. However, 2500 low-fee private schools will share an extra $500 million while 2 million public school students will share up to $1.9 billion.
Regardless of fees charged, all public and private school students will secure a basic grant - $1550 per primary student per primary school student and $2066 per secondary student ensuring that every child receives some taxpayer-funding. The figure is set at 15 per cent of the funding required to educate children to the national standard agreed to by the ALP and Labor states.
Independent schools that charge big fees in NSW, Victoria and South Australia are the hardest hit, but no private schools in Queensland, Tasmania, Northern Territory and Western Australia will face cuts.
In a bid to limit the political damage, schools that offer big discounts for multiple family members, such as many Catholic and all Jewish schools, will not be affected by the change.
The $1.9 billion for government schools will be directed at programs to ***ist needy schools in struggling areas to attract high-performing teachers, improve literacy and numeracy and boost accountablity and reporting requirements for public and private schools.
Education Minister Brendan Nelson said it was the "politics of punishment" being handed out to Australian parents.
Independent schools warned they would be forced to increase fees, sack staff or lose students. "Do they put fee levels up further, do they sack staff, are students likely to withdraw from the schools if fee levels go up," Independent Schools Council of Australia spokesman Bill Daniels said.
http://noalp.blogspot.com/
BF B...@BF.com.au
about bloody time that those private school kids shared their resources with the rest of the country.
"jg" j...@nospam.com
Oh yeah? and do you share your income with someone worse off than you? If you could afford an expensive school would you be happy for your fees to go for other kids instead of yours? I'd say bugger it, my kids might as well just go to the state school. (which they did because we couldn't afford it & don't see any great advantage) ....................................
"Stan Pierce" tpie...@bigpond.net.au
You can't share willingness and capacity to learn though.. No amount of resources will make a difference. Capacity to learn shows early in life and is usually accompanied by a sense of difference and anxiety about the difference.
Teachers years ago would talk to a parent and advise about what to with with someone showing the capacity. Most kids just treat school as a place to meet their mates. LEARNING is a different mental state.
Latham really only sees 'education' as a political football... more money etc. Billions are spend on educating people who have no interest in actually learning anything in any depth. It would be cheaper to give parents an education subsidy to teach their own children to read write and then have a public examination every year. Schools and school buildings are a big waste of time and resources.
"jg" j...@nospam.com
That started off really well... then it just went to shit.
"Stan Pierce" tpie...@bigpond.net.au
And it won't make the slightest difference in the educational standard of the people. It is money wasted. The ones that lose out in money terms ...the private schools will still produce the brightest kids. The ones that gain in money terms will still produce the socially alienated...the victim minds.
"sdf" s...@yahoo.com
Damn- have to cut back on the size of the new rowing sheds.
"dechucka" dechuc...@spew.com.uk
everyone does IF they pay thier taxes, people in NSW and Victoria do it all the time when they pay GST. Next silly point jg If
"fritz" fr...@address.com
Stan Pierce wrote u...
| | "T. Anderton" <spookyrahul2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message | ...
| > MARK Latham has pledged $1.9 billion more for public schools under a | > radical overhaul of education policy that will cut or freeze funds to | > up to 170 private schools.
| | And it won't make the slightest difference in the educational standard of | the people. It is money wasted. The ones that lose out in money terms | ...the private schools will still produce the brightest kids. The ones that | gain in money terms will still produce the socially alienated...the victim | minds.
And I thought IQ or 'brilliance' had nothing to do with the school, just your genes. Silly me.
"jg" j...@nospam.com
...to the point where you have no more than the lowest common denominator?
"dechucka" dechuc...@spew.com.uk
Just pointing out to you that in Australia we do share our income with people worse off than us, there is still a belief in Australia that people should have basic services and basic opportunity if they cannot afford it than people who can pay for it via the tax system. People with more income subsidise people with less income or no income, states with greater income subsidise states with less
"jg" j...@nospam.com
Yes, and pointing out to you that the richer ones still have more after paying tax - if they didn't there would be no incentive to earn more. The private school set pay more tax because they earn more, then they pay more for education etc because they can afford it. Now the ALP wants them to pay more still because, since they can still afford school fees they obviously have not been ripped off enough.
"dechucka" dechuc...@spew.com.uk
Correct but so what the point remains we do share our income with poorer people we hope we pay more tax :-( personally I think the Federal Gov should divide the amount of money available by the number of students and either credit the State if the child attends a State School or send the parent a cheque if they don't so they can put it towards private school fees
"Stan Pierce" tpie...@bigpond.net.au
What I meant was, the family background that consideres private schooling, books on the shelves at home, a musical instrument being studied and played, serous talk at the table, is the reason the kids do well at schools. Money spent doesn't increase that background. It maybe only five percent world-wide that actually benefit by schooling. All the rest just use school as a high cost babbysitting service.
"dechucka" dechuc...@spew.com.uk
Not wanting to be the spelling police but your education seems to have let you down on this post Stan.
"jg" j...@nospam.com
....................
.....we hope they pay more tax?
I agree with that, or give the equal amount to the private school - per head.
"Denz" RUBB...@RUBBISHhotmail.com
Not ripped off enough? ... now theres an interesting point....
The Howard governments 25% (30% attempted) increase in university fees, $100,000 course fees, removal of GST relief from text books... i guess you wouldnt consider this as being ripped off ???????
Latham is simply diverting some taxpayer dollars from elite schools with abundant funding to schools that actually need the money. These elite schools are being 'targeted', because they *are* targets- get it?
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
That targets a hell of a lot more than 178 schools! B^D EVERY primary school will get funding increased from an average $7600 to $9000 per student!
EVERY secondary school will get funding increased from an average $10,000 to $12,000 per student!
The whining from a small number of wealthy elitest schools which have rorted funding under Howard's cl*** warfare is of little interest to all the parents in the vast majority of public, private and catholic schools.
Outstanding!
Finally, a government which is prepared to invest in our finest resource .. YOUNG AUSTRALIANS!
A sound policy.. if those elitist schools are going to make things tougher for the battlers who struggle to pay for their choice of school, then the government should encourage the more efficient private schools, who provide quality education without profligate waste on polo fields and marketing.
Why shouldn't those schools who try and make themeselves accessible to battlers be encouraged? If they are prepared to give all Aussies a fair go, and set fees which battlers have a chance of meeting, they should be encouraged over the tiny handful of elitist schools who discriminate against all but the wealthy elites.
A fair go for ALL!
That is the very essence of true blue!
Huh? only 178 schools, whose fees are already exhorbitant will get less government funds, but it is simply redirected to other more needy, schools!
FUNDING FOR PRIVATE SCHOOLS OVERALL WILL NOT BE CUT! B^D The media (and we know where the media magnates send their children) are complaining that most independent schools are getting MORE money!
Only a handful of schools which have an abundance of swimming pools, polo fields, and every amenity, will now be sharing the money they rort from taxpayers with poorer independent schools to buy books and pay for teachers!
> prompting some parents at elite schools to consider jumping to the Oh boo ****ing Hoo!
Those wealthy elitists are basically saying that 178 schools should get a half a billion dollars, rather than 1200 poorer, less well resourced, private schools!
Pull the other one!
Got that.. overall funding for independent schools WILL NOT BE CUT, simply redirected from a small number of the very greedy rich (178) to a huge number (2500) of the needy independent schools!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAA!
The tory cl*** warriors want to PUNISH 2500 independent schools to help 178 of the most extravagently resourced, rife with discrimination, elitist institutions!
The have choices, now the poorer independent schools do to! B^D
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
hear hear!
The ALP is NOT reducing the OVERALL FUNDING for the private sector, just shifting it more fairly from 178 super-elitist schools to 2500 more needy ones!
That's called A FAIR GO FOR ALL!
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
Of course I do! EVERY TAXPAYER DOES!
What we ****ing well object to is sharing it with those VASTLY BETTER OFF!
I have no problem if my income taxes fund 2500 needy independent schools, thats CHOICE for parents, cultural DIVERSITY, and competition for the public sector!
But for my pensioner Aunt, or some Western suburbs kid with a paper route to have their GST used to buy a tiny handful of super elitist schools another ****ing polo field is just an outrage!
They do already, you dolt!
I pay for my own kids education and am absolutely DELIGHTED to pay through taxes for the education of other peoples children! Because they are the people my kids will live among..
I want them to be educated, not ignorant brutes!
Education is one investment where THE WHOLE SOCIETY BENEFITS!
OUR VERY CIVILIZATION is based on cheap, universal education.
I don't want my kids to be educated, but find themselves living in a society of ignorant bastards, who will have to turn to robbery rape and murder to get by! B^p Always remember, when you are complaining about the price of education.. WHAT IS THE COST OF IGNORANCE?
You have demonstrated part of the answer. B^p > I'd say bugger it, As do most elitist ponces from St Bummers School for Boys. B^D > my kids might as well
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
What total twaddle. Youth of two centuries may have had willingness and capacity, but the total absence of schools for all but the elite meant they received no education.
The provision of cheap, universal education is a cornerstone of our society, and is the foundation of upward social mobility which has smashed the cl*** system.
Most people can accept differences in incomes due to different capacities, supply and demand for skills, or even luck.. but cannot accept that their children will not have a decent opportunity to DEVELOP SKILLS AND CAPACITIES via education and training.
And any society which squanders it's most valuable resource by failing to educate them in the most comprehensive way it can manage, is failing to optimise it's wealth... just ask the Taliban.
> Capacity to learn shows early in life So?
A moment ago you said resources were unimportant.
> Most kids just treat school as a place to meet their mates.
Oh, now you are an educational expert too? B^D If you had mates you might want to meet them too.
Most schools encourage socialization, you clearly missed out on it, and are jealous.. which explains your overt Nazism.
to meeting your mates?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!
For months now, drones like you have been lambasting him for pointing out the critical role parents play in early learning and offering ***istance to parents in that task.
"Where's the policy" has been the chant.
Now it shows SERIOUS committment to funding a $2.4 BILLION overhaul of schooling.. you whimper..
"it's about more than money!" B^D > Billions are spend on educating people who have no interest in You are a raving ****wit. We have a society in which parents CANT GET ENOUGH CHILDCARE for infants to enable them to both work in order to be able to buy a house etc... and you are suggesting they abandon primary school, secondary school and Universities and educate their kids at home??? And you think that will be cheaper?
I gues you aren't planning to teach them physics, chemistry or music..
or is every home to be fitted with labs, equipment, and pianos?
And as for the ability to work in teams, they will obviously be as poorly socialized as you are.
Here's the product of Stan the Nazi's edukayshun; # From: "Stan Pierce" <spie...@bigpond.net.au> # Newsgroups: aus.politics,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.usa # Subject: Re: A Jewish view of Christians.
# Message-ID: <Hn8l9.545$kd3.2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au> # Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 02:22:31 GMT # # # "As for being a nazi sympathiser, it took me nearly fifty years to # become sympathetic towards Hitler. " - Stan Pierce.
# "I was told a story many years ago that Hitler cleared # the streets of Germany by having motor vans that # cruised the streets throwing gypsies # and nere-do- wells into the back...then turned # on a tap that tranfered the exhaust gases into them.
# Never found out if it was true, but it's tempting.
# - Stan Sturm'n'Drang Pierce.
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
Just do another fundraiser with the old boys.
The definition of wealthy is having more money than you spend... ;-)
fasgnadh fasgn...@yahoo.com.au
Thats why the ALP is INCREASING their funding, for the schools most in need, and the tories are sqeualing because a few schools who are already extravagently resourced are being forced to share with the poorer independents.
It's called sharing the cake equitably.. none of those words mean anything to the greedy rich.. except cake.. B^D Let them eat it! B^D And they get their political party, the tories, to give them a tax break equivalent to that amount.
Having withdrawn their donation to educational services from the commonwealth, they should now fund it themselves.
Q.E.D.! B^D ....
...
...
...
....
...
"me" m...@hotmail.com
Only one small problem with all this: Policy should be about principles not about economic cut off points. It should also encourage success.
Some private schools have taken the STANDARD government hand out and used it and high fees to put out a better product and been very successful. What's wrong with being successful?
Well under Labor the target is NOT success but general mediocrity. Labor says, 'if some do well we can't have that so we will cut them off at the knees and then we'll all feel better'.
Under Hawk and Keating Australia made an art form of cutting down tall poppies. After a decade or so of Labor there were none left. So the Labor boys took to cutting down you and me. That's why we voted them out -
remember!
I remember taking my kids to child care in the mid 1990's only to find that there were no places because they were all given to drugos and other dropouts who didn't work. My wife couldn't get a job to help pay our 18% interest rates because we couldn't get child care for our kids. The dropouts all lived in government homes and were insulated from Labor's interest rates.
Today they cut the 'rich' private schools. Tomorrow it will be catholic schools. After that they will cut something that you and I thought was a basic right.
You see without a principle they are free to move the economic cut off level for what they call 'RICH' private schools up or down as they please.
They have done it before and they WILL do it again.
| To Top |