❓ Opposition Leader McGowan questions Premier Barnett about federal education funding, highlighting discrepancies between offers from previous Labor and current Liberal governments. Barnett defends his government's position, criticising the opposition's previous support for earlier offers.
AnsweredQoN 884Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
EDUCATION — FEDERAL FUNDING
884. Mr M. McGOWAN to the
Premier:
I refer the Premier to the $120 million over four years that
the federal government has offered in education funding, which is $57 million
less than was offered by the previous federal Labor government.
(1) Was the
Premier right when he said in the house on 16 April this year that a funding
allocation of $33 million per year was ''completely inequitable''?
(2) If so, how
is this new funding offer of $30 million per year now more equitable than the
$33 million that was offered?
(3) The
Premier previously stated —
The
Northern Territory, with a population smaller than the City of Stirling, gets
the same amount of money as Western Australia. That is clearly inequitable.
How is this deal, with the
Northern Territory now getting $152 million more than WA over four years, a
better deal for Western Australia?
884. Mr M. McGOWAN to the
Premier:
I refer the Premier to the $120 million over four years that
the federal government has offered in education funding, which is $57 million
less than was offered by the previous federal Labor government.
(1) Was the
Premier right when he said in the house on 16 April this year that a funding
allocation of $33 million per year was ''completely inequitable''?
(2) If so, how
is this new funding offer of $30 million per year now more equitable than the
$33 million that was offered?
(3) The
Premier previously stated —
The
Northern Territory, with a population smaller than the City of Stirling, gets
the same amount of money as Western Australia. That is clearly inequitable.
How is this deal, with the
Northern Territory now getting $152 million more than WA over four years, a
better deal for Western Australia?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3)
It is a very long question. Again, I remind the house that 70 per cent of
children go to state government schools. The state government funds 90 per cent
of state government schools. The state is the major player; the commonwealth is
very much the minor player. However, any increase in commonwealth funding is
clearly welcome, because schools that may be relatively disadvantaged tend to
be in the government school sector for a whole lot of social reasons—isolation,
distance and so on. In the non-government sector, the commonwealth contributes
more than the states: parents, 40 per cent; the commonwealth, about 40 per cent;
and the state government, about 20 per cent—those figures vary a little
bit.
There have been three so-called
federal offers on education over the course of this year. It is interesting
that the Labor Party in Western Australia totally accepted without question
whatever was said by a Labor government in Canberra. What was said by Prime
Ministers Rudd and Gillard was accepted by Labor in Western Australia without
qualification. Indeed, it went out to the media and urged the Western
Australian government to accept first the Rudd offer and then the Gillard
offer. The opposition demanded it in here through questions; it continually
demanded the government accept the offer.
Mr
J.R. Quigley : Does that give Yanchep back its $10 million?
The
SPEAKER : Members! That is an interesting question, member for Butler. Maybe
you can ask it later. I call you to order for the first time.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The successive offers made by Prime Ministers Rudd, Gillard
and Abbott have variations. Obviously, they differ in the amount of money. Some
of them include commonwealth plus state money in the headline figure. Some are
over four years and others are over six years. Let me go through the offers.
The first offer, the Rudd offer, if members like, was on 1 April.
Mr M. McGowan : No,
that was Gillard.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The Rudd offer that continued through to the Gillard offer.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition, you have asked a question. Let the
Premier answer. If you want to ask a supplementary, you will get a
supplementary.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The April 2013 offer was $300 million over six years, of
which $117 million was meant to be state money. This was not all commonwealth
money—far from it; $183 million was from the commonwealth. The April 2013
offer was for government schools, where 70 per cent of children go, and was $45
million over four years, with $7 million or $8 million in the first year. That
was it, and that is the one the Leader of the Opposition went out and backed.
The Leader of the Opposition went out and backed something that would give this
state about $7 million or $8 million. Seventy per cent of the children were
going to get $45 million over four years. That is the one the Leader of the
Opposition backed. He argued we should accept it. He thought it was fantastic.
We can all recall it.
Mr
M. McGowan : You're losing your mind.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : I am not losing my mind at all.
Mr
P.T. Miles interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Wanneroo, I call you to order for the first time. I
would like to hear the rest of the answer.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The next offer was on 2 June 2013; again it was made to look
good, with $900 million, but it was over six years and very much backed in to
the last couple of years. In politics, given changes of government, frankly,
anything that is more than about two years away, I think, can be discounted as
unlikely —
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Members!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : Anyone who has dealt with commonwealth–state
relations knows that agreements do not tend to last too long as governments
change. I am now the elder statesman of the Council of Australian Governments,
for what it is worth. I have seen Prime Ministers and agreements come and go.
Mr
J.R. Quigley interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I call you to order for the second time.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The 2 June offer for government schools, where 70 per cent of
children go, including those most in need, works out to be $137 million over
four years, or $13 million in 2014. The first offer was $7 million or $8 million
in 2014. The second Labor offer was $13 million in 2014. The Abbott offer—again,
I am talking about government schools—is $120 million over four years.
For the year that matters, next year, that is an extra $31 million. For the
next school year, we have gone from $7 million to $13 million to $31 million,
and I will take that!
Mr
J.R. Quigley interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I am going to call you to order for the third
time now. If you want to ask a question, put your name down.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : We would always take more from the commonwealth, but again I
remind members that it is the minor funder. The state spends over $4 billion a
year on our state government schools. There was another element to all this;
namely, that the Gillard government put legislation through the commonwealth
Parliament, attached to this, which would require a high level of reporting by
individual schools to Canberra.
Mr
W.J. Johnston interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Cannington!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : What would it do with 8 000 reports on all sorts of things
coming from around Australia? It effectively gave the commonwealth a level of
governance directly to the principals of state government schools. The
Queensland Premier and I would not accept that. We stood our ground and we have
come out of it looking pretty okay.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Members!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
But the opposition in Western Australia was willing to accept anything from
Labor and was willing to hand over effective management of our schools without
question! We stood on principle, we stood our ground and we got a pretty good
result out of the Abbott government.
Mr J.R. Quigley interjected.
Suspension of Member
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I will read out standing order 48 to you
—
A member whose conduct has made it
necessary for the Speaker to formally call that member to order more than three
times in the course of one sitting for a significant breach of the rules may,
by order and at the discretion of the Speaker, be suspended from the service of
the Assembly until the adjournment of that sitting.
Will you please leave the house.
[The member for Butler left the chamber.]
Questions without Notice Resumed
It is a very long question. Again, I remind the house that 70 per cent of
children go to state government schools. The state government funds 90 per cent
of state government schools. The state is the major player; the commonwealth is
very much the minor player. However, any increase in commonwealth funding is
clearly welcome, because schools that may be relatively disadvantaged tend to
be in the government school sector for a whole lot of social reasons—isolation,
distance and so on. In the non-government sector, the commonwealth contributes
more than the states: parents, 40 per cent; the commonwealth, about 40 per cent;
and the state government, about 20 per cent—those figures vary a little
bit.
There have been three so-called
federal offers on education over the course of this year. It is interesting
that the Labor Party in Western Australia totally accepted without question
whatever was said by a Labor government in Canberra. What was said by Prime
Ministers Rudd and Gillard was accepted by Labor in Western Australia without
qualification. Indeed, it went out to the media and urged the Western
Australian government to accept first the Rudd offer and then the Gillard
offer. The opposition demanded it in here through questions; it continually
demanded the government accept the offer.
Mr
J.R. Quigley : Does that give Yanchep back its $10 million?
The
SPEAKER : Members! That is an interesting question, member for Butler. Maybe
you can ask it later. I call you to order for the first time.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The successive offers made by Prime Ministers Rudd, Gillard
and Abbott have variations. Obviously, they differ in the amount of money. Some
of them include commonwealth plus state money in the headline figure. Some are
over four years and others are over six years. Let me go through the offers.
The first offer, the Rudd offer, if members like, was on 1 April.
Mr M. McGowan : No,
that was Gillard.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The Rudd offer that continued through to the Gillard offer.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition, you have asked a question. Let the
Premier answer. If you want to ask a supplementary, you will get a
supplementary.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The April 2013 offer was $300 million over six years, of
which $117 million was meant to be state money. This was not all commonwealth
money—far from it; $183 million was from the commonwealth. The April 2013
offer was for government schools, where 70 per cent of children go, and was $45
million over four years, with $7 million or $8 million in the first year. That
was it, and that is the one the Leader of the Opposition went out and backed.
The Leader of the Opposition went out and backed something that would give this
state about $7 million or $8 million. Seventy per cent of the children were
going to get $45 million over four years. That is the one the Leader of the
Opposition backed. He argued we should accept it. He thought it was fantastic.
We can all recall it.
Mr
M. McGowan : You're losing your mind.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : I am not losing my mind at all.
Mr
P.T. Miles interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Wanneroo, I call you to order for the first time. I
would like to hear the rest of the answer.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The next offer was on 2 June 2013; again it was made to look
good, with $900 million, but it was over six years and very much backed in to
the last couple of years. In politics, given changes of government, frankly,
anything that is more than about two years away, I think, can be discounted as
unlikely —
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Members!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : Anyone who has dealt with commonwealth–state
relations knows that agreements do not tend to last too long as governments
change. I am now the elder statesman of the Council of Australian Governments,
for what it is worth. I have seen Prime Ministers and agreements come and go.
Mr
J.R. Quigley interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I call you to order for the second time.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : The 2 June offer for government schools, where 70 per cent of
children go, including those most in need, works out to be $137 million over
four years, or $13 million in 2014. The first offer was $7 million or $8 million
in 2014. The second Labor offer was $13 million in 2014. The Abbott offer—again,
I am talking about government schools—is $120 million over four years.
For the year that matters, next year, that is an extra $31 million. For the
next school year, we have gone from $7 million to $13 million to $31 million,
and I will take that!
Mr
J.R. Quigley interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I am going to call you to order for the third
time now. If you want to ask a question, put your name down.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : We would always take more from the commonwealth, but again I
remind members that it is the minor funder. The state spends over $4 billion a
year on our state government schools. There was another element to all this;
namely, that the Gillard government put legislation through the commonwealth
Parliament, attached to this, which would require a high level of reporting by
individual schools to Canberra.
Mr
W.J. Johnston interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Cannington!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : What would it do with 8 000 reports on all sorts of things
coming from around Australia? It effectively gave the commonwealth a level of
governance directly to the principals of state government schools. The
Queensland Premier and I would not accept that. We stood our ground and we have
come out of it looking pretty okay.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Members!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
But the opposition in Western Australia was willing to accept anything from
Labor and was willing to hand over effective management of our schools without
question! We stood on principle, we stood our ground and we got a pretty good
result out of the Abbott government.
Mr J.R. Quigley interjected.
Suspension of Member
The
SPEAKER : Member for Butler, I will read out standing order 48 to you
—
A member whose conduct has made it
necessary for the Speaker to formally call that member to order more than three
times in the course of one sitting for a significant breach of the rules may,
by order and at the discretion of the Speaker, be suspended from the service of
the Assembly until the adjournment of that sitting.
Will you please leave the house.
[The member for Butler left the chamber.]
Questions without Notice Resumed
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.