on 25-11-2013 03:05 PM
Gonski school funding: NSW Government plans to fight changes to deal
Updated 22 minutes ago
The New South Wales Government says it will fight any changes to the "Gonski" school funding agreement it struck with federal Labor before the election.
New federal Education Minister Christopher Pyne has said the Coalition cannot go ahead with the "Gonski" funding arrangements and will go back to the "drawing board".
He insists the total amount of money allocated to schools funding will not change, but the way in which it is delivered is now uncertain because final deals had not been signed with some states.
But his NSW counterpart Adrian Piccoli says it has a "binding agreement" that must be honoured.
"NSW expects the Commonwealth to fulfil its obligations under this agreement," he said in a statement.
"NSW will not agree to returning to the broken SES funding model. The new funding model has secured additional resources for classrooms across NSW, with the majority going to schools in most need."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-25/gonski-funding3a-nsw-government-plans-to-fight-changes/5114880
Solved! Go to Solution.
on 25-11-2013 11:20 PM
And the funding wasn't for 'EXTRAS' per se. It is to keep a school at a standard to make it function reasonably and effectively.
They may be extras now, but the funding is simply to the extent of what they SHOULD have been getting all along.
on 26-11-2013 09:01 AM
the funding was a base line plus extra needed for disadvantaged schools...to improve outcomes.
OECD endorsed the Gonski report
the article below was from 8 days ago ...is it better now?
Victoria's schools still waiting for Gonski funds
Extra money earmarked for Victorian schools has not arrived in time for principals to plan next year's budgets, even though the Napthine government signed up in August for $12.2 billion over six years under David Gonski's Better Schools Plan.
Principals are increasingly worried they may have to do without funds from the Better Schools Plan next year, although their counterparts in NSW and Tasmania already know how much they will benefit from the new deal.
Kevin Pope, principal of Meadow Heights Primary School, said his school had hoped to hire two new literacy coaches and an ESL teacher, but could not do so without the crucial equity funding.
Mr Pope said he was led to believe that funds from Better Schools would start to flow in 2014.
And yet the indicative budget for Mr Pope's school, which is in an area of poor families with a considerable migrant population, leaves it worse off by about $200,000 next year.
Older ''National Partnerships'' funding ends shortly, he said, and Better Schools money was expected to bridge the gap, ''but fundamentally our school will be about three teachers worse off''.
NSW schools learned weeks ago that they would receive two of the equity loadings recommended under the new funding agreement in 2014, one based on socioeconomics, the other on indigenous needs.
Frank Sal, president of the Victorian Association of State Secondary Principals, said his organisation's specific questions have gone unanswered, including how much federal money would be coming through, whether the state was still committed to matching funds and whether the funds would still be distributed according to need.
''We keep asking,'' Mr Sal said. ''But I can't imagine that it's going to be there for the start of the next school year, given that we've heard nothing about it to this time.''
A spokesperson for Minister for Education Martin Dixon said schools had received their 2014 funding. But the government did not rule out additional money for schools: ''There is more detailed work to be undertaken before any further funding for 2014, 2015 and beyond is announced.''
Opposition education spokesman James Merlino said that, without the extra funding, ''immense strain will be placed on school curriculums''.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorias-schools-still-waiting-for-gonski-funds-20131117-2xp8a.ht...
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorias-schools-still-waiting-for-gonski-funds-20131117-2xp8a.ht...
on 26-11-2013 10:13 AM
Leaked documents obtained by The Sunday Telegraph reveal Bill Shorten and Kevin Rudd never signed the $1.6 billion schools deal with the Catholic sector and bilateral agreements with Victoria and Tasmania were not finalised. Despite Mr Shorten and former Prime Minister Mr Rudd heralding the deal with the Catholic sector a triumph in July weeks before the election, government sources said it was all "press release politics".
"It's come as a shock to learn that Mr Shorten's claims to have signed a deal with the Catholic sector and bilateral agreements with Victoria and Tasmania turned out not to be true," he said.
............................................................
Counting chickens before they're hatched?
on 26-11-2013 10:20 AM
My State Premier, the parents and students and educators of Victoria (where I live) are owed more than gossip about leaked documents as excuses
Christopher Pyne is our Education minister....He needs to respect his position and the commitments made to the people of Australia....pre-election.
Return the phone calls Chris Pyne...and do not hide and let the State Premiers take all the flack here.
As he might say....He needs to Man up
on 26-11-2013 10:40 AM
There is no bilateral agreement. They counted their chickens before they were hatched.
They have guaranteed the funding, their presumtions on how it was to be administered were simply that. Unsupported presumptions. There was no bilateral agreement.
They were writing cheques that they were never guaranteed they could cash.
26-11-2013 10:56 AM - edited 26-11-2013 10:58 AM
“Mr Abbott and Mr Pyne are the only ones who want to tear up the Gonski agreements that have already been signed. The Coalition only pledged one third of funding in those deals, yet it seems they want to abandon even that,” said Mr Gavrielatos.
“Abandoning Gonski would be a disastrous move by this Government – it would be a terrible breach of faith with Australian parents, one that would deny resources to the school kids who most need some extra support,” concluded Mr Gavrielatos.
See below for additional key quotes from the Coalition on Gonski schools funding.
Policy launch 29 August 2013
Pyne: “So you can vote Liberal or Labor and you'll get exactly the same amount of funding for your school except you'll get $120 million more from the Coalition because in this policy today we are announcing a number of measures, modest measures, prudent measures, but ones that will address some of the key issues that we think are important.”
Speech to Deaf Group, Melbourne 19 August 2013
Pyne: “So, your question asks about federal funding, we’ll provide exactly the same federal funding as Labor will provide in Victorian public schools.”
Abbott & Pyne doorstop, 2 August 2013
Abbott:“As far as I am concerned, as far as Christopher Pyne is concerned, as far as the Coalition is concerned, we want to end the uncertainty by guaranteeing that no school will be worse off over the forward estimates period.
Abbott: “So, we will honour the agreements that Labor has entered into. We will match the offers that Labor has made.
We will make sure that no school is worse off. We think that money is important. It's very important to educational outcomes that schools are properly funded but money is not all that matters. What matters at least as much is good teachers, good teaching, strong principals, strong parental and community engagement and strong curricula. This is what counts if we are going to have the better schools that our students deserve and that our country needs.”
“
Abbott:“Under the Coalition, “Under the Coalition, you'll get the funding but you won't get the strings attached so what I want to say today is that as far as school funding is concerned, Kevin Rudd and I are on a unity ticket. There is no difference between Kevin Rudd and myself when it comes to school funding.”
Pyne: The two key elements that we're announcing today in the education funding area are that we will adopt exactly the same funding envelope as Labor over the forward estimates so that school principals and parents, that school systems, states and territories can plan from 2014 and onwards knowing that they will attract exactly the same funds whether they are in the new model or out of the new model that Labor would have given them if the school system had gone ahead as planned.
News Ltd Education forum, 29 August 2013
Pyne:“We have agreed to the government’s new school funding model over the forward estimates, because we believe that the debate over funding was becoming something of an asinine distraction from the issues around getting the best results for students.”
POST ELECTION COMMITMENTS TO GONSKIABC 7:30 Interview, 15 October 2013
Pyne: “Well, we've said that we will adopt the new school funding model from the 1st of January next year for the next four years and have the same funding envelope as the previous Government. So yes, we’ve accepted that there is a new school funding model, but I believe there's a great deal of work that needs to be done to make it work.”
Australian Agenda 17 November 2013.
Pyne: “Over the next four years, we will maintain the new school funding model and the budget that went with that in the forward estimates.”
on 26-11-2013 12:32 PM
If this is the level of regard that is played out by the new Commonwealth Minister, it doesn't bode well for a positive and ongoing enduring relationship.
on 26-11-2013 01:10 PM
on 26-11-2013 01:15 PM
Are you able to refrain from interpreting, adding to my posts
and making up what you believe I am saying,feeling,wanting and thinking .
Thankyou .That would make the discussion more friendly
Many people want to,need to and deserve to know what is going on
It's as simple as that .
on 26-11-2013 03:08 PM
and there is that sense of entitlement again.
the grant is free (as is education, apparently, but that's a separate issue) and now people, even ones with whom no commitment was made under Labor, so it was Labor that never signed off on it, not the current government, now people are complaining about what they are being given for free.
"we want to know"
we need to know"
"we deserve to know"
It's a gift. Not even the constitution obliges the Federal Government to do anything for eduacation. It is a State responsibility.
The only ones to whom that mantra really applies are those who were able to form agreements. But even then - it's free money *cough insert healthy dose of cynicism*cough* and now people are complaining about how it is to be given?
The only thing that keeps going thropugh my mind is that even that which is masked as free is never really free, so I am wondering what the tradeoff is for getting the *cough*free*cough*money.
What have people had to give up?, What strings are attatched? What did people have to give up to get this grant? Health care?
The whole concept of free is that you don't have to do anything to get it. So, if that was the case, why didn't all 7 States jump at the chance to sign up? What did the federal Gov what in return, and why did 3 States seemingly get what they wanted and thus a bilatteral agreement was formed, but then 2 completely rejected it and another 2 couldn't reach a final agreement?
Why is that?
And how does that all tie in with the National Curriculum? A National Curriculum which really each individual State controls.