House debates

Monday, 20 October 2014

Bills

Australian Education Amendment Bill 2014; Second Reading

3:37 pm

Photo of Gai BrodtmannGai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

The previous speaker, the member for Hughes, made mention of the fact that he wanted Australian students to take part in some sort of pop quiz to test their mathematical abilities; their abilities to create sums and test their addition skills. I am very interested in the quiz that the previous speaker proposes because in my view I think those students should turn their attention to the actual cuts that have been made to their education—cuts that have been made to their schools; cuts that have been made to their primary schools, cuts that have been made to their high schools—by the Abbott government. It is my view that the attention of young Australians' mathematical skills should be focused on looking at the billions of dollars worth of cuts that are going to take place to Gonski as a result of this government, focused on the impact of the billions of dollars of cuts to Gonski and the impact of that. Essentially, what that means is that 20,000 teachers will potentially lose their jobs, will not get their jobs funded. Why don't young Australians turn their attention to those sorts of figures? Billions of dollars worth of cuts as a result of the cuts to Gonski during the last two years, and the impact that will have on them. The figures I have seen show that potentially 20,000 teachers will not be employed. We could also get the students of Australia to turn their attention to the impact of the cuts to the schoolkids bonus and, most importantly, the impacts of the cuts on trade training centres.

Here again we are talking about nearly $1 billion of investment in trade training centres gone—not just here in Canberra but right across the nation. We have a suite of trade training centres here in my electorate, in Tuggeranong in the south of Canberra, and we have our sustainable learning centre down in Tuggeranong where a number of colleges and the high schools have got trade training centres. Those opposite have condemned the whole trade training centre notion; those opposite have abolished future funding for the trade training centres. I find it galling when members of the coalition government, when members of the Abbott government, come along and open these centres and talk about the importance of trade training, the importance of developing pathways between high school and a vocational education, the importance of providing options to students—options where students can actually go and get a degree in carpentry or a cert IV in hospitality or a cert IV in mechanics while, at the same time, continuing with their year 12 and continuing with their English and their French and gaining a breadth of experience and knowledge that trade training centres provide.

I find it particularly galling when those members opposite—I am sure they have been running around opening trade training centres. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, the minister at the table, is smiling: how many trade training centres have you opened since the election last year, Parliamentary Secretary? How many trade training centres? And what have you said? 'Gee, these trade training centres are fantastic. These trade training centres provide great pathways for young Australians; they provide pathways and give options to people who may not necessarily be suited for university. These are great things, these trade training centres.' And yet, with their next breath, they say, 'The future funding for these trade training centres has been abolished.' It has been breathtaking.

I also suggest that young Australians turn their attention to the fact that the secular chaplaincy scheme is being scrapped. Just think about the impact that is going to have on the mental health and wellbeing of young Australians in a range of schools throughout Australia. So rather than taking the previous speaker's arithmetic pop quiz, I suggest that young Australians take this pop quiz and look at the impact of not having those last two years of funding for Gonski, nearly $3 billions worth of funding; look at the impact of the potential loss of 20,000 teachers out of the system; and look at the impact of the loss of the schoolkids bonus on low- and middle-income families. Low- and middle-income families no longer get the opportunity to have the schoolkids bonus; it provided them with a chance to go out and get computers, school shoes, uniforms. It encouraged people to stay in education; it was a great scheme, a great bonus. It is gone as a result of those opposite.

But most importantly there is the impact as a result of cuts in funding to the trade training centres. What is the future cost to young Australians who have had that door closed to them?

Comments

No comments