Worse than the general false claims is that you hide behind your anonymous screen name to impugn my character:
“your use of statistics neatly underlines your intellectual dishonesty/ignorance”
“there needs to be a way to make public schools work to improve too, which every teacher (no doubt including yourself) seems opposed to”
“The end result is you are now, in a very shady and backwards way, accepting my initial point was correct.”
“You intentionally ignore the stuff you can't respond to”
“You’re claim that “A system which pays some teachers more than others because they are better is fine, and is not opposed by the AEU” is simply a lie.”
“More to the point, you continue to use dishonest figures ($10,826 is a total that includes primary schools, which I was very clear was not what I was arguing, and bears no relevance to the subject under discussion... the actual figure for catholic expenditure per student is $12,735, though this is also lower, it’d be nice if you could use the correct stats).”

Perhaps that is how you really behave, but it is an appalling attitude to take. You need to learn to distinguish between the argument and the person. You are not a mind reader, so it is ridiculous for you to claim that you know what is in my mind when I make a point.

There are insufficient words left for me to deal with all the false accusations you make in your posts of 4/3, so I will return to them on another occasion as I continue with my first priority. If that means there will be another set of false accusations for today, so be it. If you want to discuss the topics in a serious way, you will have to behave better.

As I started to say in my first post of the day: You’re not the first person I have come across who claims to want to discuss an issue but actually wants to denigrate a person. I will not allow your attitude to go unchallenged here.

You just used all 4 posts and 1400 words to say "waaa, you're mean and I hate you! Mommy!!" Nothing you just said, which mostly consists of quoting things that have been said already, has added anything to the discussion, not even as a reproach. At the risk of encouraging you to respond further, I'll even say why. If you're just going to quote things as though they speak for themselves, then surely they've spoken for themselves already, re-quoting everything that annoyed you in drips and drabs, without anything further from you, added really serves no purpose at all. I confess, after I got the tenure of it I just skimmed the rest, since I don't need to re-read what I wrote (I know what I wrote). You just wasted the time of anyone still following this discussion, congrats.

I have some advice for you next time you feel the urge to do this. Instead of quoting everything I've said that you didn't like under a heading, just write "I don't like what you said", since it will be as effective as what you just did. Of you know, you could explain why something was a lie/mean/whatever, and I'd respond. Or better yet, you could man up, stop crying to mother, and REPLY to the actual points you've had put to you, in some cases dozens of times as direct questions!

Your figures are correct Chris and reflected in weekend media reports indicative of the fact that private systems have received less funding than public schools over past years contrary to the many OLO viewpoints on the debate raised many times here.

Some states have differed in the past and some schools required more funding than others for improvements.

I would love to know how many schools in the hotter parts of Australia now have airconditioning as opposed to fans? For many years, the Australian public who do enjoy sitting in airconditioned offices and vehicles for most of the day, have whinged about teachers and their fantastic conditions.

Has any person spared a thought for the teachers educating their children for 20 years during 33+ temps? Funding for both systems should have included some airconditioning for highly humid and heatwave weather.

Emotion over-rides fact with quite a few taxpayers who begrudge a few dollars going into our future Nurses, Doctors, Pharmacists, Police Officers, Defence force, tradespeople and population who require an education for employment to assist us all at one time or another.

500 NZ uni students have arrived to continue their studies here, with many south australian good hearted people accommodating these young people.

If there's an outcry from any Australians, just be aware, that quite a few of these wonderfully determined students will undoubtedly stay in Australia after qualifying and may one day be your GP or Specialist saving your lives.

Ditto with Teachers educating our future generation, regardless of either systems funded

Riddler,

In accordance with the priorities I have set myself, I will now respond to the untruthful accusation and inaccuracy in your first post of 4/3.

“Your dishonesty and poor grammar knows no bounds” should read “Your dishonesty and poor grammar know no bounds.” (1.55:21pm, 4/3)

You say “You accuse me of claiming that the AEU controls where children go on the basis of a partial quote of mine, deliberately excluding the last 3 words, which make it clear I do not believe that at all”.

I omitted the last three words because they change nothing in the meaning of the previous two sentences.

You say, “The AEU opposes league tables, opposes myschools, etc. They clearly oppose more information for the public, and want to restrict it as much as possible, which is why they don’t even allow parents to choose where their kids go.”

Quite clearly this means that the AEU does not allow parents to choose schools, that it has the power to stop parents choosing schools. When you say, “The department does”, you cannot mean that the department allows parents to choose schools as you have already told us that the AEU will not allow this. You mean that the department chooses schools for the students. Thus the words you wrote say that the AEU does not allow the parents to choose schools, but the department is allowed to and therefore does the choosing.

You now say that that you would obviously have written “support allowing” instead of “allow” in regard to the AEU. The following three words do not negate the original two sentences at all. I can read quite well, which is why I took you to mean what you actually said , not what you now say.

I accept that what you now say is what you meant to say originally because you tell me this is so, though you have not produced any evidence that either statement is true.

There may be some statements, even in recent years, from the AEU or its constituent branches that have said that parents should not have any choice of schools, that they must send their children to their local zoned school. I am not aware of any, but you are free to produce some with the dates they were made.

Parents in Victoria are free to send their children to any non-selective school that has room, and this has been the case for years. Even when we had fairly strict zoning, parents had a choice of high or technical schools and of co-ed or single sex schools and there were appeals allowed against zoning.

In NSW, there is zoning, but it not the end of the story:

“Finding a school
Each NSW public school has a defined local enrolment area. This means that your child is designated to a particular school based on the permanent residential address of the primary caregiver. Every public school reserves enough places within their school for students in their local enrolment area.
“Out-of-area schools
Parents may however apply to enrol their child at a school outside their enrolment area. Non-local applications may be considered by the school's enrolment panel, according to the department's policy and subject to selection criteria such as availability of appropriate staff and classroom accommodation….”
(http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/gotoschool/enrolment/index.php)

In WA, there is zoning, but it not the end of the story:

“Choosing a school
“Children usually attend the school closest to where they live. Your child has automatic entry to your local school in Years 1 to 12….
“You are encouraged to visit the school and have a look at the programs and facilities available and to meet the teachers….
“You may also apply to enrol at a school other than your local school if this suits your individual circumstances. You will need to meet the enrolment criteria set by that school. Entry to schools outside your local area is not guaranteed.”
(http://www.det.wa.edu.au/schoolsandyou/detcms/navigation/parents-and-community/schooling/)

In SA, there is zoning, but it not the end of the story:

“School Zoning

“The Minister for Education has the authority, under section 55A of the Education Regulations 1997, to establish school zones.

“Approximately 80 primary schools and all secondary schools in metropolitan Adelaide are zoned. This means that a student’s zoned school is determined according to their permanent and primary place of residence.

“A place is reserved for each child in their zoned secondary school (except Adelaide High School and Urrbrae Agricultural High School who have separate Enrolment Policies). While students are zoned to a particular secondary school, they are free to apply for enrolment at any other out of zone secondary school in the State. Acceptance of an enrolment in an out of zone secondary school however, depends on whether the number of enrolments at that school exceeds the number of places available.

“Enrolment of children and students in out-of-zone school
If a student wishes to enrol in an out-of-zone primary or secondary school, selection for entry to the school should take place in accordance with the department’s Criteria for Allocation of Points. These criteria are communicated to parents in the Starting Secondary School Brochure….”
(SA Department of Education and Children’s Services, Enrolment – School Enrolment Policy, available at http://www.decs.sa.gov.au/portal/community.asp?group=matters&id=enrolment)

In the ACT, there is zoning, but it not the end of the story:
“Priority Enrolment Areas
Each public school gives priority to the enrolment of children living in its Priority Enrolment Area (PEA). ACT public schools are non-selective. If a school has room available after accepting students from its PEA, it may offer places to students who live outside the area.”
(http://www.det.act.gov.au/school_education/enrolling_in_an_act_public_school)