A timely essay. There's no mention of the aims of the education offered by schools... What do we hope our students will have learned by the time they leave - apart from reading and writing? It is true that in general, private schools achieve better academic results, but they draw from a better educated and motivated class of people. Also, they are mainly single-sex establishments, and that is widely acknowledged to be better for academic and sporting achievements for adolescents.
I agree that our independent schools have something to offer when planning for the future, but so have the systems of other countries - although it is doubtful if the USA is an example to follow, having some of the worst educational outcomes in the western world, from what I've read, the most culturally ignorant population.
It seems clear to me, though, that while independent schools receive twice the funding per pupil as state schools, there will be no improvement, and, as you say, without financial certainty, nothing much will happen.

"non-government schools provide the best model" Catholics will agree but those of us that have had enough of the whinging, whining and cries of PERSECUTION are feed up with the misleading stories about their self proclaiming of "superiority".
Catholics NETWORK in society to the advantage of other Catholics and to the disadvantage of non-Catholics, they run a corrupt "union" this is very pronounced in the legal industry, yes I have evidence but so far "good" Catholics in the media have been successful in blocking any reference to my findings, I am happy to provide the evidence to any one who is interested in outing the corrupt.
The problem with so called "independent" schools is that they push their own political line and we all know about the "old school tie" used as a "write of passage", more importantly there are many problems within "private schools" that are swept under the carpet while at the same time claiming the "moral high ground", if parents insist that their children go to their particular religious schools, then they can bloody well pay for it.

The usual.

Misinformation from ybgirp - "...independent schools receive twice the funding per pupil as state schools..."

AND

Generalisations from lockhartlofty - "The problem with so called "independent" schools is that they push their own political line and we all know about the "old school tie" used as a "write of passage", more importantly there are many problems within "private schools" that are swept under the carpet while at the same time claiming the "moral high ground".

I remember reading a balanced, honest account of education funding once - but then I woke up...

When we are compared with the Finnish example the Fins come out better?
Why? Well, their seemingly superior results are achieved in far less hours than our average?
The students seem to spend less time learning and more time learning how to learn; and or, the art of critical thinking, right from the get go?
Moreover, there is no cultural or privilege divide in tiny Finland?
No private or religious schools? No exceedingly pretentious old boys club or elitist old school tie advantage?
Just a single system of public schools only?
Which is arguably the only way we are ever going to actually ensure funding equality for all students?
Alternatively, we need to absolutely embrace the Gonski report; and or, means test all education funding or both?
If only to stop embedding and endorsing privilege, and all that's wrong or inherently unfair with that approach?
Sure, by all means let those who want to further entrench privilege and or privileged outcomes, send their Kids to a school which inculcates their supposed superiority and or, entirely unearned and undeserved prestige?
But not to also expect the far less well off to somehow subsidise it?
That said, and in the interest of true equality of outcomes, we also need just a single funding paradigm, which simply deals the states and their often seemingly exorbitant "management" fees, out of the education equation!
I think we'ed release more education dollars for education outcomes, with a direct funding model; based almost solely on student numbers and the miles travelled, by the school's student body.
[We need to stop selectively if entirely inadvertently, disadvantaging country kids?]
Entirely agree with vastly streamlined autonomy for local Principals, and a much bigger bang for the education buck!
And more online learning and P+T involvement/consultation outcomes?
Our goal must be, to do it better and be the equal opportunity education example everyone else wants to follow, surely?
Rhrosty.

Unlike public schools non-public schools can be selective in accepting only those students who they wish to accept. Public schools must accept all children and provide for their needs.

Unlike public schools private schools are generally segregated as to belief systems. Most private schools are supported by a particular religious establishment and require that the beliefs of that particular religious establishment must be accepted as fact. This is contrary to the idea of critical thinking which requires that all ideas be subject to critical examination.

Public schools provide a service to society that private schools do not provide. Students of different backgrounds mix and learn about each other. The Supreme Court of the United States has declared that segregation by race in inherently unequal. The results are the same when it comes to segregation by religion.

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution says:

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

By applying Commonwealth funding to support religiously based schools the Commonwealth is imposing a religious observance. Parents have a right to instruct their children into their religious beliefs. However, government support for this activity violates S. 116.

One purpose of education is to prepare children to live as adults in our society. By segregating them according to religion we prevent interaction with children of different faiths. Thus prejudice grows.

Learn together, grow up together and be aware of the feelings of those with different backgrounds. Adequate government support for public schools is obligatory. Religious schools should not be the business of government except to ensure those schools provide an adequate education.

Parents have a right to imbue their children with their faith. However, the taxes of people of other faiths should not be allocated to support that right. Religious schools should be funded entirely by parents of the students and their religious bodies. Religious instruction should not be the business of government.

The claim of "generalization" by RATIONAL-DEBATE is the usual way people try to demean statements for which they don't have an answer, they hope their followers will dismiss the relevance of the story and take the lazy way out and not think to much about the subject.
As for "rational-debate" about the majority of taxpayers funding self righteous religious schools I doubt R-D will ever wake up.