|
senate vote 2017-06-22#8
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-11-24 10:41:36
|
Title
Bills — Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017; in Committee- Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017 - in Committee - Funds for students with disability
Description
<p class="speaker">Sarah Hanson-Young</p><p>I would like to first withdraw amendment (4) on sheet 8176. We have dealt with that effectively through questions to the minister in relation to the establishment of the independent resources board.</p>-
- The majority voted against [amendments (11), (14), (15) and (16)](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-06-22.248.1), which were introduced by South Australian Senator [Sarah Hanson-Young](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/sarah_hanson-young) (Greens). This means they failed.
- Senator Hanson-Young [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-06-22.248.1):
- > *These amendments all relate to the establishment of and putting money into the disability fund and will ensure that we have enough money to support our students and children with a disability in schools. We know that there has been much talk in this debate about the impact of these changes on the disability sector and children in our schools. We have obviously heard the revolting and very unhelpful comments from Senator Hanson in relation to children with a disability. What the Greens want to do is to request an extra $300 million to ensure that we have enough support in our schools across the country for our children with a disability.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(11) Schedule 1 , page 24 (after line 27) , after item 82 , insert:*
- >
- >> *82A Subsections 67(2) and 69A(1) (note 2)*
- >>
- >> *Omit "' section 126"' , substitute "' subsection 126(1)"' .*
- >
- > *(14) Schedule 1 , page 26 (after line 21) , after item 98 , insert:*
- >
- >> *98A Subsections 112(3) to (5)*
- >>
- >> *Omit "' section 126"' , substitute "' subsection 126(1)"' .*
- >
- > *(15) Schedule 1 , page 27 (after line 2) , after item 101 , insert:*
- >
- >> *101A Section 126*
- >>
- >> *Before "' The Consolidated Revenue Fund"' , insert "' (1)"' .*
- >
- > *(16) Schedule 1 , page 27 (after line 5) , after item 102 , insert:*
- >
- >> *102A At the end of section 126*
- >>
- >> *Add:*
- >>
- >> *(2) It is the Parliament' s intention to, by another Act, establish a fund of at least $300 million to meet the needs of students with disability.*
<p>by leave—I move amendments (11), (14), (15) and (16) on sheet 8176 together:</p><p class="italic">(11) Schedule 1 , page 24 (after line 27) , after item 82 , insert:</p><p class="italic">82A Subsections 67(2) and 69A(1) (note 2)</p><p class="italic">Omit "' section 126"' , substitute "' subsection 126(1)"' .</p><p class="italic">(14) Schedule 1 , page 26 (after line 21) , after item 98 , insert:</p><p class="italic">98A Subsections 112(3) to (5)</p><p class="italic">Omit "' section 126"' , substitute "' subsection 126(1)"' .</p><p class="italic">(15) Schedule 1 , page 27 (after line 2) , after item 101 , insert:</p><p class="italic">101A Section 126</p><p class="italic">Before "' The Consolidated Revenue Fund"' , insert "' (1)"' .</p><p class="italic">(16) Schedule 1 , page 27 (after line 5) , after item 102 , insert:</p><p class="italic">102A At the end of section 126</p><p class="italic">Add:</p><p class="italic">(2) It is the Parliament' s intention to, by another Act, establish a fund of at least $300 million to meet the needs of students with disability.</p><p>These amendments all relate to the establishment of and putting money into the disability fund and will ensure that we have enough money to support our students and children with a disability in schools. We know that there has been much talk in this debate about the impact of these changes on the disability sector and children in our schools. We have obviously heard the revolting and very unhelpful comments from Senator Hanson in relation to children with a disability. What the Greens want to do is to request an extra $300 million to ensure that we have enough support in our schools across the country for our children with a disability.</p><p>To provide a little bit of background in relation to this, this was one of the elements remaining from our discussions with the government. Up until mid-yesterday, we were urging the government to increase the amount of money put aside for students with disabilities. We are concerned that, with the larger number of students now categorised, there is not enough money in that fund to go around. It is absolutely essential that we do not cut short support for our most vulnerable children as these reforms go through. So we are requesting, through this amendment, an extra $300 million to support children who are the most vulnerable.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>The government will not be supporting these amendments. As I emphasised in the chamber before, the rate of funding growth for students with disability is quite significant. The changes that have already been agreed to during this debate have increased the support for students with disability from $20.6 billion to $21.2 billion over the next decade. As indicated, we are also supporting the review and the work in relation to the continuing improvement of the NCCD.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacinta Collins</p><p>Labor will not be supporting these amendments. However, we do understand the Greens' intentions here, but the assessment of needs for students with disability in our school system should be addressed properly in a manner informed by the appropriate evidence. Unfortunately, that evidence has not been available to us because of the nature of the process in dealing with this bill, and the limited information that the minister has made available. In the longer term, with an independent—or not so independent—schooling resourcing body, hopefully that problem will be overcome. But simply picking the nominal figure of $300 million is not enough, especially given that the government is not supporting it, which means that even that nominal figure is not going to be provided.</p><p>From the Labor Party's point of view, we are concerned that additional funding has not been provided for this additional number—this 100 per cent increase in the number of students. We remain concerned to understand how these new arrangements are going to apply to the additional students and, indeed, to the existing funding arrangements for students with disability. We have serious concerns that this will be rolled out according to the nationally consistent data for students with disability, in a manner which will have quite serious impacts on students—both those that currently attract funding and those that do not. We appreciate that the Greens are attempting additional funding here. I suspect other crossbenchers have also attempted that endeavour. We understand that, unfortunately, that attempt has failed. We would have preferred to have seen the full data about these students with disability—what categories they will shift into across the model, and understand exactly what the additional resourcing requirements for those students would be.</p><p>We agree with the Greens about the additional funding. I was not in the chamber during question time, but I listened to Senator Brandis talk about the significant additional funding that is supposedly in these arrangements for students with disability. There is no significant additional funding. Anyone who has looked at this bill and understands the miniscule amount of additional funding that is involved in this area knows that these measures are insufficient and, unfortunately, our students with disability will suffer the consequences of that.</p><p>Senator Hanson-Young, I understand your endeavour to attract that additional funding and the attempt to try to capture a figure for what that appropriate amount should be. From my experience in this area in the past, it is no better than a guestimate, because of the amount of information we have available. Given that the government is not going to support it and no-one else has been able to secure it, I do not see, in terms of our point of view about what approach should be followed, that simply nominating a figure informs that—more than as an acknowledgement of our statements from the shadow minister, Tanya Plibersek, about the additional funding that is needed and your statement through this amendment as well. I do not see Labor supporting this amendment as necessarily achieving that.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>Given that I was denied an opportunity to give a second reading speech because of the shenanigans in here yesterday, I have not had an opportunity to comment specifically on children with disability and how this will affect children with disability in school. I was extremely disappointed and concerned to hear the comments from Senator Hanson yesterday in her contribution on how we address the inclusion of children with disabilities in school. So many people have been fighting for so long in this country to ensure that children with disability are included in our classrooms, to build an inclusive culture in schools. We know we are not there yet, and comments like that set us back even further. We know we are not there yet, because I was a very active participant in the Senate inquiry into the access of students with disabilities to school. We found some very distressing facts there, and some very distressing evidence.</p><p>As Senator O'Neill will remember, many parents articulated their daily battles with schools to try and get their children access to schools and build that inclusive culture. You would get some parents who were saying, 'They'll let my children go for a couple of days, but then there's not enough funding to enable them to go for the rest of the days, or there's not enough funding for them to go on the excursions, so they get told to stay at home.' We know this is still happening.</p><p>We also heard a lot of evidence about the lack of evidence for the nationally consistent collection of data. This was 18 months ago—around that time. Parents and teachers were already expressing their deep concern about the NCCD. They were saying, 'When it comes out, don't believe it!' I subsequently had teachers talk to me about the fact that they did not know where their school's data was coming from. Those were teachers who had students with disabilities in their classrooms, and they said, 'We're not contributing to that data. We did the first year, but not since.' I have had that said to me several times.</p><p>So this data is not reliable. We know from the evidence that the committee collected that there are still serious issues around children's access to classrooms so that they get the best education possible. That is why we need this additional funding. I am not at all confident that there is enough funding available to meet the needs of students with disabilities, so I am pleased that there will now be a commitment to a review of this process. We have had a lot of feedback about the issues around the data—around NCCD and the lack of funding.</p><p>In short, many people who are active in this place will be aware of the work of Children and Young People with Disability Australia. CYDA said:</p><p class="italic">Students with disability frequently experience discrimination, including denial of enrolment, imposed part time attendance and exclusion. Further, schools often lack the required expertise in developing educational programs for students with disability. Limited monitoring and accountability for the learning outcomes of students with disability is also a significant issue. Finally, experiences of bullying and abuse, including restraint and seclusion, are now shamefully common for students with disability in education settings.</p><p>I have to stop there and to say that this is an area where I have done a lot of work in terms of the issues of violence, abuse and the use of restraints. We also got a lot of evidence about the use of restraints.</p><p>That also goes, obviously, to issues where we need to improve our education system. Their submission goes on:</p><p class="italic">It is the experience of CYDA that it is rare for students with disability to be provided with a truly inclusive education experience.</p><p>That is the evidence that we actually heard through that inquiry, and I have subsequently heard it through other inquiries as well. This group works day in, day out with students with disability and their parents. I believed them. I know that they are looking out for the best for students with disability, and when they are concerned for funding we need to take that seriously.</p><p>Even if we do not have it tied down—we do not have it tied down because we do not have all the data anyway—it is not a good enough excuse to say, 'Oh well, you can't give us every dollar and cent to tell us how much we really need, so we won't give them any extra.' That is a flawed argument when you are talking about the need to improve our inclusiveness and make sure that we do provide the best education possible for children with disability.</p><p>I urge the Senate to support this amendment. It will provide the start of the additional funding that is needed to ensure that we have a truly inclusive education system.</p><p>The CHAIR: The question is that amendments (11), (14), (15) and (16) on sheet 8176 be agreed to.</p> -
-
|