Captive Customer
Saturday, January 01, 2000
Most of the public are confused about the school funding reforms. Many don’t even know how taxpayers’ money is shared out now.
If a family uses a state school, staff and operating costs are funded 100% — regardless of the family’s means. If a family chooses a Catholic school, about 70% funding is provided — again regardless of family means.
Finally, if a family thinks an independent school will do a better job for their child, the average level of funding is about 30% — also regardless of family means.
In other words, the funding is not based on children’s needs or family means. It is based on income protection for school operators. The biggest sector gets the biggest protection, and so on down.
The losers in this deal are (a) parents, who must pay extra if they want to exercise choice as to who shall teach their children, (b) lower-income children, who are locked out by the selectively withheld funding, and (c) the standard of schooling, which would improve if we didn’t have so many schools with “captive customers”.
The Kemp funding reforms, now before the Senate, are two steps in the right direction. They redistribute the independent school funding (such as it is) according to family needs. And they introduce a minimum 13.7% grant for every child — which is why the very low-funded schools are getting a significant boost.
All this without reducing any school’s grants until inflation catches up — which creates an extra cost for starting the scheme. It is a modest step towards a more democratic society. We’ve waited a long time for any improvement. Fair people will support this reform.
Philip O'Carroll