Why is the government covering up to 80% of private school's SRS (schooling resource standard)? Considering the amount of money that the private sector charges, as well as the exclusivity of it; would it not be in the public interest to divert all that funding to improving your local public schools?
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/feb/23/five-…
https://www.education.gov.au/schooling/how-schools-are-funde…
he's thinking all private school kids are all going to elite schools and their parents are swimming with money
"Five private schools spent as much on new facilities in one year as 3,000 Australian public schools". Sure….. I must be wrong lol.
@burningrage: What assault? Nothing wrong with the private schools. I just question why the public is funding them?
420000 per class of 30.
and teachers get what? 80k-120k?
seems wrong.
how does one classroom and admin overhead cost $300,000 a year?
The shockingly poor quality and standard of educating from our teachers and the public servants writing the education programs should also lead to a hefty reduction in their wages across the board. The more money the government pisses away on these people, the worse their standard of educating kids become.
The average salary for a teacher is easily over $100K and that's at least 30K more than they deserve.
Principle, vice principle, admin staff, ground staff, PE teachers, building maintenance, electricity, library staff, school facilities like pools, sporting equipment etc.
That adds up pretty quick.
damn cleaners always get forgotten rip pour one out for the cleaner homies
Is It Time to Cut Funding to Private Schools?
How about modify the topic to include :
"Is It Time to Cut Funding to Private Medical Centres?"
Same thing………..
Do you mean Medicare funding?
We are paying private medical clinics using tax payer money…
We should all use public hospitals only… \sarcasm
That shouldn't be a sarcasm. That's exactly what Australia should do: Establish public medical centres (smaller, thoroughly distributed), and add fee-free GP service to all public hospitals, and remove Medicare rebates to private providers.
That's exactly what Australia should do:
So create a thread topic about it…
See how many GPs will sign up… 🤣🤣🤣
@leiiv: Lol
So basically you're suggesting that everyone loses their base Medicare rebate (that's the same for everyone) because they decided to choose their own doctor? Laughable.
@leiiv: The lifespan of Australian's would actually decline under that model, as our public health system is a dumping ground for diversity hires and second rate foreign medico's.
The public system is so appallingly and inefficiently run at the moment, they already can't handle their own work loads as it is & have to pay private hospitals and medico's to do a hefty chunk of their work for them. You could only imagine how much of an unmitigated disaster it would be if we tried to kill the private system.
Schools and medical centres are not the same thing jv, even though you seem to have escaped from both
Schools and medical centres are not the same thing
never said they were…
but we are using tax payer funds for private use when there are public facilities available.
same argument…
Jv of all people playing the "your comment didn't actually address the thing I said" card
They all already run their own slush funds, not like they're short on cash.
Apparently a big portion of their fees are paid for by the kids cashed up grandparents.
They all already run their own slush funds
so do many public schools…
Only 20 replies per hour…slowing down in old age 🤔
Private schools should probably be administered and monitored by the state.
Why is the government covering up to 80% of private school's SRS (schooling resource standard)?
Where are you getting this 80% from?
From your link Under the current arrangements, the commonwealth is responsible for the majority of non-government school funding (80%) with states and territories contributing the rest. The reverse is in place for public schools, with the states and territories responsible for the remaining 80% of funding.
The feds themselves
https://www.education.gov.au/recurrent-funding-schools/schoo…
https://www.education.gov.au/schooling/how-schools-are-funde…
It's just that the actual nominal sum is excluded probably because it varies for each school due to loadings. But the biggest number the news headline is ignoring is that the percentage is probably higher because non-government schools have their SRS reduced by their Capacity to Contribute (CTC).
Yea, I read that. Was just implying that while the feds are responsible for that 80% for private schools, the public schools are still getting it from the states.
I stand corrected. The Feds in deed do pay 80% of non-government schools' SRS, however that value is reduced by the CTC. And as far as I can tell the remaining 20% plus any costs above the SRS is funded by the schools themselves.
As for government schools the agreement sees 20% of the SRS funded by the Feds, 75% funded by the States with the difference covered by the school.
Here's some text from the second link they posted, perhaps this is what they meant:
In 2023, the Commonwealth is providing at least 20% of each government school’s Schooling Resource Standard (SRS) and 80% of each non-government school’s SRS
Yea but he conveniently left out what was said in the guardian article in the OP as if to imply the public schools weren't getting that much. They were, it was just from the states, not the commonwealth.
I don't know which part of the sentence I copied and pasted from the govt website is giving you the most trouble, but luckily for us both it's sitting right there so you can have a second pass at it if you need to (yes, you do).
Thanks for the "simples" takes along the way tho!
Not conveniently left out. I don't see why the private school needs government funding. Perhaps a new English garden or a helipad?
@ozhunter: So send the kids to public school….. where they accept all students regardless of their financial position. Why support a private entity that only caters for the wealthy?
Doesn't pass the pub test to me.
@Duckie2hh: Some parents rather put some of their own money into their kids education so they have other non-academic benefits. Then there are some public school parents who rather just give the absolute minimum required.
I'm not surprised that you don't get it, nor do I think you ever will.
@ozhunter: I never said to abolish private schools. I just asked why is the government funding them? If you wish to pay for private education, that is your prerogative. Private schools, should be run as a private institution.
I'm not surprised that you don't get it, nor do I think you ever will.
A bit rich, considering your views.
@Duckie2hh: Most if not all private schools have scholarships. Anyone can apply for them.
A lot of private schools with boarding also cater to farming families I don't know of any public schools, at least in Brisbane that do that. There are many that also have scholarships for indigenous students from out of city areas. Both of these students would have to complete their schooling via remote education with no social contact with kids their own age.
I would not write them off as facilities that cater to only the rich, a few do but the vast majority don't.
Instead they should make them share their facilities for free or for extremely low rates to the community, e.g. for sports or hobby/interest groups etcetera.
So the government pays you a solar rebate and you have to share your swimming pool?
They pay you solar rebate and you have to share the energy you harvest
agree! even the public schools are being fenced in and gates locked so you cant use basketball court / ovals..
Great idea. Get the parents who send their kids to private schools pull them all out and stick them in the public schools.
There is no way the public schools could cope with the student numbers for decades to come. Lack of premises, teachers, etc.
Didn't the first or second comment on this entire thread basically answer that?
[Edit: Yes. Scroll to the top chief, have a read of mskeggs' pre-emptive explanation of why that's not a problem]
I think this argument historically came from Catholic school system when gov prepared to withdraw some of their funding. Somehow became common thought over the eons.
It's probably more true today than ever as today a larger % and more importantly larger number of students are in the private system.
You think the unemployed private teachers won’t seek positions in public schools?
You think the empty private schools won’t go up for sale?
Yes, it’s all far fetched….. but so was your nonsense premise.
Why does increasing funding to public schools require a corresponding reduction to private? It’s not like it’s a fixed pool of money.
There’s so much wasted by government that could be cut before worrying about private school funding.
Why does increasing funding to public schools require a corresponding reduction to private?
Due to some public school parent's jealousy, selfishness, and guilt.
How about the dole?
How about the dole?
what about it…personally id get rid of it and do the food stamps/limited spend debit card option
Why does increasing funding to public schools require a corresponding reduction to private? It’s not like it’s a fixed pool of money.
There’s so much wasted by government that could be cut before worrying about private school funding.
this is spot on we just spent half a billion on a referendum that was annihilated at the polls and was clearly going to not get over the line and no one bats an eye lid
we have also spend more money on a couple Nuclear Subs then we will spend in 10 years on education and healthcare combined
There’s so much wasted by government that could be cut
want to elaborate? I agree with you, but everyone has different idea on what to cut, lets hear yours
Forget the billions in schools, you should be complaining about the corporate management tax thats forced upon all of us.
20 years ago there was one or two government gas companies. Today there are 20. Thats 20 more buildings full of more managers and more advisors all paying themseves bonuses. Guess where that money comes from ?
Replace gas with electricity or trains. Go read the smh.com.au today another manager tried to give their friend a $450k job. Why do the trains have thousands of managers when they managed considerably better 20 years ago with far less ?
Everywhere you go theres another ceo paying themselves multi million bonuses..Its not just one ceo at the company there are buildings of them, and those buildings are not free either. Now you know why everything is going up…
Just allocate education funding per child and the funding goes to whatever school they attend be it public or private and then the parents pay extra to fund the extra of private school if that’s what they want
Just allocate education funding per child and the funding goes to whatever school they attend be it public or private and then the parents pay extra to fund the extra of private school if that’s what they want
this is an idea that could work but would need a lot of ironing out as some regional schools have less than a few dozen students
regardless the issue around funding is more about infrastructure then students
Isn’t that what happens? It’s called SRS. Maybe I understand it wrong. Public school pupils aren’t receiving full funding for each child at the moment but private is receiving over 100%
For some reason Fed Gov pays more to privates…. Maybe to do with what schools the pollies making decisions went to.
“In 2024, reflecting the established responsibilities for school funding, the Commonwealth funds at least 20 per cent of each government school’s SRS and 80 per cent of each non-government school’s SRS.”
Under the current arrangements, the commonwealth is responsible for the majority of non-government school funding (80%) with states and territories contributing the rest. The reverse is in place for public schools, with the states and territories responsible for the remaining 80% of funding.
A simplistic argument that shows a lack of understanding of private schools.
I send mine to public currently for what it’s worth.
No voters - parents with kids in private school.
Yes voters - nearly everyone else.
if you cut private school funding, fees need to increase, most medium wealth parents will pull out and send state and overload the state system further. state cannot handle the influx.
If you cut funding to private schools and make private schools even more expensive, the wealthiest and powerful literally won't be affected. Private schools would become a lot more exclusive and it would be harder for middle class families to save up more money so that their child can go to those elite schools. A lot of the private schools have no enrolment issues despite the cost of it. Some schools you need to enrolled from birth to have a chance at getting in if your parent didn't go there.
A lot of the private schools have no enrolment issues despite the cost of it.
Even more reason to cut the funding to private school. In a free market capitalist society, the price must be increased to balance the demand.
Some schools you need to enrolled from birth to have a chance at getting in if your parent didn't go there.
This is also the norm in private school that smells really bad to me. School should be an institution that highlights equality. The epitome of perfect school is the one that takes in disadvantage students and produces good ones. Even the merit-based (eg take all the best students in) ones are still better than the "nepotism" based ones.
The idea behind my comment is to say social class mobility decreases with a more free market. If I see an APS school on a resume it would indicate tla certain level of proficiency. An example of this is more AFL players being drafted from private schools than public schools. Now, if that becomes more exclusive and even harder to obtain it increases the perception of the school on a resume etc.
I personally have no issues with the father son rules for schools. In a private establishment they should be able to choose who they want. As a private individual, if there was a fire, you can definitely go into save your family over other people without any moral wrong.
However an governmental organisation would not be permitted to do this. A private organisation isnt created to do what is best for society, but what is best for their own interests. The private schools dont strive to achieve the highest scores or be the best school. Many being religious based, want to enstil values into their students more than anything.
Some schools you need to enrolled from birth to have a chance at getting in if your parent didn't go there.
Which schools are these just out of interest? wasn't aware we had any Etons in Australia
Scotch and Melbourne Grammar are notoriously difficult to get into in Vic. Im sure its the same for other states with their top schools.
The local public school here is full of mould and crumbling asbestos. Not to mention large parts closed due to collapsing roofs. So we really don't have much choice but to pay for private until it's replaced.
Also at $3000 a year it's not really exclusively for the rich.
Also at $3000 a year it's not really exclusively for the rich.
i think it needs to be a 'cut off' ie private schools charging under 10k [number i made up] tuition should be treated differently to those charging over 10k esp those schools that milk government funding and charge over 20k pa
$3000 a year private school wow that is like the wish.com of private schools haha lol
i honestly thought most private schools were 10x like $30k a year like santa sabina or something but i have no knowledge on private schools so im gonna step out
Not all parents that send their kids to private school are rich. The ones who do, make sacrifices to be able to do so. Lots of better ways to spend tax money, cutting funding for any school isnt anywhere near the top of the list.
Not all parents that send their kids to private school are rich. The ones who do, make sacrifices to be able to do so. Lots of better ways to spend tax money, cutting funding for any school isnt anywhere near the top of the list.
and not all kids that go to public schools are 'poor' i know a number of multi millionaires that send their kids to the local public school - however they live in multi-million dollar areas so the public schools are better then some private schools
regardless generally speaking private school kids parents can afford to pay thus they should pay more and get less funding
Sounds like you love to generalize. I bet you also believe people who make more should pay more taxes, even if they work harder and longer than the folks lining up at centrelink because they couldnt make good choices or sacrifices in their own lives.
Is this just a waste of time fun vote, or is there petition at the end of this?
as I believe I saw on a TV documentary called something like 'London Calling' about rock'n'roll lifestyles in the 1980s or something, the very last scene was an old East Ender guy asked what he thought about the young people of today - he thought for a moment, and said something like …
"I'm worried about the young people of today … … … fargemall I say !"
At the very least we should be a 10% GST on all education, tertiary and private K-12 schools (sorry, I love Americanisms). Everything else I purchase (good or service) has a 10% GST; imports also have a 5% duty + a 10% GST on that 5% duty, making it 5.5%.
No free ride for education that greatly increases one's earning potential.
Also, we should greatly reduce the number of tertiary course places subsidized by the government, where those course contribute nothing of value to the nation: most humanities, non-applied sciences, law, commerce.
No free ride for education that greatly increases one's earning potential.
this is actually incorrect on average tradies and blue collar workers tend to out earn higher educated workers ie Uni and Tafe graduates
im more on the funding public schools better camp then lets fund other schools worse
i dont agree that rich kid schools get more funding the public schools i personally think the funding should be relatively uniform as in ever student attending the school gets 20k - regional schools perhaps a bit more due to lower school sizes
regardless the issue is the education department is so incredibly woke left the next generation are more interested in pro-nouns, identifying as a cat and being offended by everything than Science, Maths and Literature - literally know a child who 'identifies' as a cat, the school has kitty litter in the toilets for her to pee on and allows her to wear whiskers and meow in class….personally speaking i think her parents should be locked up but these days the system panders to it
id gladly pay 20k pa if they got rid of all social political crap and taught the essentials well, along with personal and global finance and economics
literally know a child who 'identifies' as a cat, the school has kitty litter in the toilets for her to pee on and allows her to wear whiskers and meow in class
I have so many questions I never want to know the answer for.
The school system will collapse if private schools are not funded.
In a democracy choice is important - religion, values etc.. all kids should get the same amount of support for their education. It's all about equality.
A private school here in Sydney is building a new"wellness centre" in one of the most expensive areas with a 200 spot car park, gym, tennis courts, and purchased another $14m house to support administration. My back of napkin calculations puts profit at about 20 million p.a. and a cost to income ratio that would make Gina Reinhardt blush. I won't generalise to the whole country but here in Sydney, it seems like a trend.
It would appear that the free market is working fine to drive people to independent schooling. Perhaps subsidises to encourage business startup is a good idea, but ongoing, forever, even after such dramatic profitability? Doesn't pass the sniff test.
What if the funding for the centre comes out of the school's building fund (donations)?
If it comes from donations then they have even more profit than I estimated. But do you have some other point?
I read this https://isa.edu.au/our-sector/about-independent-schools/myth….
And think the current funding is fair. If one or two private schools (among thousands of private schools) have money to build expensive facilities using their own funds, I don't have a problem with that.
You're gonna read from a source that is vehemently trying to defend its over funding and trust it isn't completely biased?
jenniferlawrenceok.mp4
I think it is time to cut to public schools
Parents aren't spending any of their Centrelink benefits on school fees and that should change
I had a look at funding for my local private and public schools and they're pretty much identical per student, it's completely transparent on https://myschool.edu.au/. This thread makes no sense to me and comes across as an entitled whinge - as a portion of the private school kids migrate to the public schools the costs will increase as the public schools will be beyond capacity and that would mean costly expansion or renovations. Public schools will need more funding to keep their status quo - much more I'd imagine then they'd gain from "private school savings".
Some children would stay in the private system but more likely all you'd be doing is pulling the middle to middle upper kids into the public system and widening the economic divide and educational privilege for minimal benefit. There are many examples of public schools excelling and exceeding - perhaps it would be better ask why they haven't been able to mirror that success widely. Maybe it isn't only a money problem?
No
Because their children are all in private schools.
All schools should be private. Save the government money and every school will have better facilities 😁
Given the generally egalitarian nature of Australian society compared to many other countries and the fact that so many children are privately educated, this would be electoral suicide for any government that proposed it. We're a normal (although relatively high-earning) family and my son did his whole 12 years of education at a moderately elite private boys school. Yes, there were many boys from wealthy families there but there were also plenty of families like us - plus much poorer families. Some single parent families too. There were times when we had to sacrifice a lot to keep him there but we did. It was a great melting pot of backgrounds and the boys who have come out of that school are, in the main, well adjusted members of society who are going to go on and do good things that will benefit us all. I lived in the UK for 10 years and there private schools receive no taxpayer funding and their incoming socialist government wants to take away a tax break that will mean that many less well off families will no longer be able to afford it. There, it's pure class-warfare. It's not quite like that here but it certainly has the potential to be with nonsense like this. The Guardian can certainly spout some shite at times.
This idiocy comes up all the time…ask anyone at the dept of education, they are praying no more interest rate hikes as each time they do, kids pull out of private education and labor the already stretched public system.
The reality is the public system is failing students and funding isn't the issue, it's teachers teaching social issues not RRR's.
Fund the student, not the school.
I like this idea. Means tested of course.
Who, the student or the parents?
Why means test? If the family is rich then they will be paying more tax/GST/rates so actually giving the government more than they get back.
Just a load of unnecessary bureaucracy rather than simply giving each kid the same fund regardless of who and where they are.
I prefer childless people decide what their taxes go to then.
Should cut funding to dole bludgers and pension scammers. The amount of people on pension card and "jobseeker" (when they are anything but) not willing to work when absolutely able to is disgusting.
Also have a look into how much the nsw government is wasting on "EAPA" vouchers, they are just subsidizing the electricity companies with taxpayer money, millions upon millions of dollars of your money straight to energy companies. They don't need to reduce the energy price, whenever someone complains about their bill the energy companies tell them to apply for the eapa so the energy company still gets paid.
This issue keeps coming up. The people that send their kids to independent schools to contribute more to the tax base. Give a little, take more. (noting also that some people don't have a choice, as they may live in an area where they cannnot access public schools or public schools are at capacity).
Or an alternative fair outcome would be to remove pulic funding from independent schools, but independent school fees be tax deductable (note: things like independent school building fund contributions are already tax deductible). This would be a worse outcome for the tax base.
Neverthelss feels like an envy politics.
Education takes up a relatively small proportion of the tax revenue (~8%), compared with something like welfare (~40%) or health (~20%). Would prefer education's slice of the pie be increased, which could help future tax base and potentially effect long-run welfare and health spend.
A fair system would be to assign every kid a government fund with whatever the per kid budget is, and then their parents use that to pay the "bulk-bill" portion of school fees with option to pay their own gap payments for private schools.
Parents should be able to choose a public school like choosing any other business, including sending their kids 50km away if the local suburb schools are trash.
And what of those with no kids? I would like the option to direct my taxes who actually need them - the public system.
@burningrage: Was just a quick suggestion, as they seem to only want to go after private school parents, whether they are rich or not. It's like he's thinking all private school kids are all going to elite schools and their parents are swimming with money.
First option imo would be getting the parents to contribute(unless they are on low income)