The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Means testing education benefits > Comments

Means testing education benefits : Comments

By Paul Duane, published 4/6/2013

The richest 20% of Australia’s households receive up to 12% of social assistance benefits, which include public education and healthcare.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
While it is a good idea for rich parents to pay towards their children's education in government schools this will never happen. Free public education is a sacred cow and the lefties wish to force everyone into public education. Paying for public education would only increase the exodus into private schools.
Posted by Bren, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 8:09:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The progressive tax system accounts for the fact that some people earn a lot more than others. To then impose an additional fee for access to a universal service on higher earners is unjust and absurd.

The move to impose mean-tested fees on government education is a direct consequence of the Gonksi report, which recommended keeping the Howard government’s SES funding model – a fact you will not read in the daily press – under the label of “capacity to pay”. This model ignores school fees and other income and discriminates against low-fee private schools that take students from middle-class areas. If we fund private schools on the capacity of parents to pay then it is consistent to fund public schools on the same basis. If, alternatively, we fund private schools on the basis of their fees, we can consistently fund public schools on the same basis; i.e., fully fund them, irrespective of the income of the parents who use them, as they charge no fees.

I have warned against this consequence of the Gonksi report since the day the report was released, in numerous letters to the editor and blog posts, as well as in my submission to the Inquiry into the Australian Education Bill 2012 link (No. 46 at http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=ee/auseducation/subs.htm).

Those public education advocates who once vehemently condemned the SES funding model (when it had John Howard’s name on it) and who now demand it be implemented (now that it has the Gonski panel’s name on it) are adding to the argument that their own schools have means-tested fees.
Posted by Chris C, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 9:57:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Our charity ought to be for the needy, not the greedy!
As indeed, should those lifeline bins,that are occasionally raided by greed driven "resellers"!
I think that everyone except those holding a Govt. issued health care card, ought to pay a means tested sliding scale fee.
We are already borrowing 100 million a day just to service current Govt. debt!
Welfare for the better off is simply no longer affordable!
Moreover, Family rebates A+B ought to go as well.
The money saved could simply be used to further raise the tax free threshold, which together with the sliding scale means tested health and education fees, would benefit all equally, except those whose incomes are already below the threshold.
In which case, they would automatically qualify for a health care card and all health and education fees waived.
[A lot has changed since 1872, including the comparative wealth of the better off.]
Apart from that, there could be some merit in increasing the job related relocation grant, so that more people can follow the work, rather than eke out an existence on job start, in this or that post code poverty trap.
Job start could be made much more generous, as a trade off for the complete repeal of unfair dismissals; but, with a reasonable time limit imposed!
If the able-bodied are't able to find work in that time, then perhaps a period of compulsory service would help them adjust their attitude. Military training or civil service in a highly mobile green army, which would live onsite in tents, and do all the grunt in relation to eliminating noxious weeds, or building myriad upland dams, that create new wetlands, that in turn would assist in establishing quite massive reafforestation projects?.
Six or twelve months, of getting up early and pushing yourself to your limit 5.5 days a week outdoors, would reset those who have trouble finding work, and create in them a new mindset, self reliance, and can do enthusiasm and attitude!
And indeed, create much more positive role models for their kids to emulate or learn from!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 11:05:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
While the left would love to bilk the better off at every turn, what their fevered little minds often forget is to consider the consequences.

Already independent enrollments are growing 20x faster than public school enrollments driven by significantly better results from even low fee non public schools. The major gripe of the public schools is that the smarter and more diligent pupils are disproportionately leaving the public system.

Whilst there are still a large number of professionals that send their children to public schools, charging them, will remove the last vestiges to keep their children there, stripping public schools of the most of the smart motivated kids.

Given world wide data showing that single most important factor in school achievement is the academic strength of ones peers, this will set up public schools for failure and establish a new class system.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 11:26:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Does anyone benefit from today's education apart from the hangers-on Uni top echelon ?
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 6:56:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"by revisiting the idea of introducing some level of user charges for better-off parents who patronize Australia's government schools."

I don't think you understand the tax system, they already pay more.

Why add another layer of complication, if Government thinks they should pay more, just up the tax rate.
Posted by Valley Guy, Tuesday, 4 June 2013 8:36:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy