I for one, object to my taxes being diverted to subsidise parents who have chosen to educate their children outside the Public system.

I recognise their right to go to a private system but they should be prepared to pay the FULL difference in cost and not take away funds that have been intended for the public system.

For example, I may choose to buy a Rolls Royce but I don't think it's fair to have all the Toyota owners chip in to help me pay for it.

Wobbles

Don't forget that those taxes are also paid for by the parents of those in private schools. The only difference is that they don't get as much back as those in the public education system. The Greens and Democrats have this mantra that choice is good but somehow destroy their own arguements by making up porkies about funding. My 15 year old son got up at 5am before school for months in order to help finish off a building at private school. The end result of the school was not nearly as good as the public school next door fully paid for by Government taxes. All those in the private system ask for is a bit of honesty and not the usual socialist victim mentality distortions.

I'm surprised this issue hasn't surfaced earlier. The comments take the lid off the simmering ideological stew that has so unfortunately opened up on this issue. My kids went mostly to public schools, but one, for a period, to a private school. I've chaired a State High School Council, and volunteered at the private school, so I've had to think about this.

Australia is almost unique in accepting the public subsidy of private education, and it IS a subsidy. On the other hand, it also LEVERAGES additional, private investment. So I think it's justified up to a reasonable level.

What is NOT justified, in my view, is the absence of proper accountability for that public money, and - at least for selective private schools - the absence of responsibility to educate the remote, the poor, and the disabled, and even the local populace, which remains the responsibility of the public system, so of course the costs are high. Slamming public education is just wrong. Even if a person never directly uses it, their mechanic, solicitor, nurse and aged-care provider will probably have had their start in life in it.

I advocate increased accountability of ALL schools to their local communities, and far greater autonomy for State schools, as ways of reducing the gulf that has so regrettably arisen. The complacency of the Coalition and the timidity of the ALP on this issue astound me.

Charles Worringham
Independent candidate for the Federal seat of Ryan

Johnj
“a 50m heated indoor pool, performing arts centre, art gallery, manicured grounds, extensive sports fields etc etc “

The only difference between this and the public high school just down the road from where I live is that the pool is 25m, and it is shaded and not heated.

As well they have rock climbing equipment, video equipment, an inhouse cafe run by the students, extensive libaries, and over 400 computers in the school. They teach everything from marine studies to robotics, and they even have a barbecue so home ed students can practice cooking at a barbecue.

Does this create better students?

Somewhat doubtful as there can be so much going on in the school that the students can lose track of the 3 R's, and I understand that a considerable number of school principals now want greater emphasis on the 3 R's, rather than all the other paraphernalia that is now accompanying the school system.

Regardless of how much money schools are getting, I completely disagree with the implicit assumption of this article – and many of the comments here – that public schools provide an inferior education to private schools. I have been a student and a teacher at both types of institutions, and I have never found the quality of education to be any better at private schools.

This is a huge generalisation but, if anything, I have found the education in private schools to be compromised by too much of an emphasis on school prestige, religious activity, competitive sport, stifling conservatism and too much same-sex company.Whatever public schools may lack in ivy-league resources is more than made up for in their more relaxed, no-nonsense approach to life and learning.

My husband and I can afford to send our kids to private schools, but we (and they) opted for the public system. None of us have regretted the decision. As for the $300,000 we’re saving in tuition fees, that’s flagged for their first-home deposit or business – sometime down the track, when they really need it.

MLK

'Regardless of how much money schools are getting, I completely disagree with the implicit assumption of this article – and many of the comments here – that public schools provide an inferior education to private schools.'

At last someone with the commonsense and decency to recognise the effect of the thoughtless criticisms in the article and of other posters.

Well said MLK.

My experience was as a single custodial parent, who was educated in private schools, but because of a 'broken' business venture, found I had no alternative but to send my two children to public schools.

Both are remarkable successful with one playing music in the best state representative bands and now happily playing for her own and her dad's enjoyment. She's always had a good income either through permenant work or operating her own busines. The other is starting work experience, with a major and renowned consulting engineering firm, 4/5ths of the way into his double degree in Applied Science (Math) and Engineering (Electrical and Computer).

In the latters case all of his cohort are Public School educated, there are no-longer any private school students. All had the classic English Liberal education of Maths B, Maths C, Physics, Chemistry, English and Latin. Some studied German where Latin wasn't available. All have current GPA's of close to six or more. All are really decent youngsters...and fun.

I love the public education regime regardless of it's critics for I have seen it produce some truely remarkable results.