House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Better Schools Reform BETTER SCHOOLS REFORM The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly Colton BETTER SCHOOLS REFORM The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton) (14:32): My question is to the Minister for Education and Child Development. Can the Minister for Education and Child Development advise the house about the ongoing implementation of the Better Schools reforms? The Hon. J.M. RANKINE House of Assembly Wright Minister for Education and Child Development Minister for Multicultural Affairs BETTER SCHOOLS REFORM The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for Education and Child Development, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (14:32): I think it's fair to say that shock waves have resonated in relation to the implementation of the Better Schools reform. We negotiated a package with the federal Labor government that meant an increase of funding to South Australian schools of $1.1 billion by 2019. Every student, whether they go to a public school, an independent or Catholic school, would be getting the same base level of funding, with loadings for a range of other factors. The focus was on the individual children. The Premier and I also announced that we would bring forward additional funding from the state contribution. That commitment meant that funding that would have been provided in the later years in 2017 and 2018 would be brought forward with an extra $17 million invested in all schools, starting next year. Better Schools has now been put at significant risk by the Abbott government. Mr Abbott has obviously tasked his ministers to slash their budgets. Christopher Pyne has been caught red-handed, shamefully trying to pull money out of our schools. We signed a six-year deal. The first cut from the Liberals was to commit to only four years. The first cut—$400 million—out of public, Catholic and independent— Mr PISONI House of Assembly Mr PISONI: Point of order, sir. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Point of order, member for Unley. Mr PISONI House of Assembly Mr PISONI: Before you were in your position of grandeur, you often referred to Erskine May and members reading their answers. Could you please advise if you still believe that to be the case? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: If the member for Unley could approach the Chair—the 'grandeur' of the Chair, as he puts it—and show me the particular passage, I will rule on it. Minister for Education. The Hon. J.M. RANKINE House of Assembly The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Thank you, sir. If that was not bad enough—a $400 million cut to the three sectors of schools—Christopher Pyne has said that he now wants to renegotiate the deal. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: I anticipate that the point of order is going to be that the minister is referring to the member for Sturt and the federal Minister for Education by his Christian name and surname. Of course— An honourable member interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: That is quite in order, because he is not a member of this parliament, and the standing order is designed to prevent quarrels between members of this house by not referring to them by their given name. For instance, if the Minister for Education were to refer to His Holiness Pope Francis, she could refer to him as Frank, if she so wished. The Minister for Education. The Hon. J.M. RANKINE House of Assembly The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Thank you, sir. If cutting $400 million from our schools was not bad enough, Christopher Pyne, the member for Sturt—so that people know where he is located—says he wants to renegotiate, but he has said on radio, and I quote, 'The funding envelope remains exactly the same.' Weasel words, sir. What it means is the same amount of money but more states. This is like your nanna turning up to your birthday with $20 in an envelope for you but saying that you have to share it with your sister. I know how well that would go down with you, sir—like a lead balloon. We are not interested in renegotiating. We have a signed deal. There is a very simple question for Christopher Pyne, the member for Sturt, and the opposition leader in this place: will they guarantee that every government and non-government student will get every cent they were promised under the six-year Better Schools agreement? It could have funded an additional 14 teachers, an extra million dollars for each school in this state. It would have funded 14 teachers or 18 SSOs, or access to any number of numeracy and literacy programs, or purchased more support for students with special needs. The states that signed up—not just Labor states, not just South Australia, but Liberal states as well—told the Minister for Education, Christopher Pyne, to back off. We have signed an agreement and we expect you to honour— Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN House of Assembly Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Point of order, sir: standing order 98. I believe the minister is debating the issue. The hypothetical possibilities that she raises have nothing to do with updating the house on the status of— The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: No, it is not a hypothetical question and it is not a hypothetical answer. The minister is sharing with the house what she believes are the consequences of the commonwealth policy. They may be conjectural and the opposition may disagree with them but, alas, you have to listen to them. The Minister for Education. The Hon. J.M. RANKINE House of Assembly The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Thank you, sir. I ask the South Australian opposition leader to put the interests of South Australia first, to put the interests of South Australian schools first, to put the interests of South Australian students first, to stand up for South Australia. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The minister's time has expired.