The real issue should not be which schools get more money. The real issue should be “what will schools do with even more money”.

I’ve seen government schools that now have about 10 times more facilities than what I had when I was going to school. Meanwhile student marks have declined in that time.

The idea that government school buildings are dilapidated is questionable, as so many of these schools are designated cyclone or natural disaster refuge centers.

So what will any school do with more money?

What a confused and illogical diatribe. Sorry, Chris, but the more you say and the more often you say it, the further away from reality you get.

Another blurring of the distinction between private and public schools is Rudd's support of the Howard initiated School Chaplaincy Program. A child does not have freedom to reject a person in authority in the school system. The School Chaplaincy Program involves coercion to hear the missionising of a particular faith.

Religion can be taught in the school system as it is part of our culture. However, indoctrination in a particular religion and teaching what different faith communities believe and practice are two very different matters. On the back of a book titled "The Chaplaincy Phenomena" is a statement by Duncan Brown, former CEO of Scripture Union Queensland. Scripture Union Queensland has supplied many of the school chaplains. Duncan Brown states in part:

"School Chaplaincy is a feeder ministry - it is a way of directly targeting potential Christians and bringing them to God and into the church environment. If we don't spend time investing in this ministry now, our churches will suffer the consequences of an ageing population base unable to support its initiatives."

Duncan Brown makes it quite clear that he regards the School Chaplaincy Program as a missionary effort. Equating this effort with "bringing them to God" ignores the fact that non-Christians such as Jews and Muslims have already been brought to God.

Parents who wish their children to be religiously indoctrinated have the choice of a wide range of private religious institutions. The School Chaplaincy Program is totally out of place in the public school system and a breach of the separation of church and state. If my children were still of school age and the program was in place in all Australian public schools I would either leave Australia or send my children out of the country for their schooling.

The School Chaplaincy Program has no place in a pluralistic democratic society. I am extremely disappointed in the Labor government for continuing a Howard initiative of this kind. Government subsidising of a missionary effort to a captive population of school children should be stopped.

david f

With views like yours it is no wonder people are deserting the State systems in droves. Who would seriously want their kids educated by failed secular humanist dogma that has led to multitudes of ills in society today.

Mr Bonnor writes: "...she seems increasingly unable or unwilling to get her mind around some of the complexities of this huge portfolio." This is not only patronising, it is false. In fact, Ms Gillard has shown a good grasp of the educational debate. One example is her recent comments on literacy and numeracy teaching. Another is her judgement in declining to follow Mr Bonnor and others down the path of ideological warfare with the independent sector. Perhaps she is aware, as Mr Bonnor appears not to be, that parents in the independent system pay the same taxes as everybody else, and they are entitled to receive some return on that, as parents in the state school system do.

It is always a shame when people blog on with nothing substantial to say. Ian D – can you go a bit beyond what seems like just mild abuse?

Nickisname – Do Julia Gillard’s comments on literacy and numeracy paint her as being any better informed than previous ministers who also played around with such things, while declining to address much harder and potentially divisive issues? Witness Julie Bishop’s burying of that damning report from her own department on school funding. The new minister hasn’t shown any sign of wanting to overtly address the issues the report raises.

Is the article pointing the way to ideological warfare… or is it simply raising questions which both the minister and a couple of bloggers wish would go away?