Since Catholic schools are publicly funded the boards which govern those schools should be composed of the general public. Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, non-religionists and other taxpayers should have the right to sit on those boards and have a voice in determining the curriculum and other matters concerning the schools. The same should apply to other publicly funded private schools. Who pays the piper should call the tune.

Bovine excrement David F !

So catholic schools get some of my atheist tax money to teach nonsense.
It is evil money.I expect the bad vibes will eventually destroy the catholic dictatorship.
Teach democracy in school.
Catholics vote for your own pope not have one imposed on you.
Infallible ? Ha ha ha.

The author writes, ‘Leading the charge was the Catholic Church, which, through the Democratic Labor Party, drove a split in the ALP to influence its supporters to cast their second preferences for the Coalition parties. These had a more conciliatory attitude to the funding of private schools.’ This is highly misleading, though perhaps unintentionally so, because it implies that the Catholic Church created and controlled the DLP and that the DLP then split the ALP.
The ALP split over communism, after Dr Evatt launched an attack on the Victorian branch of the party in 1954. The DLP came into existence after the Split, not before it. It was neither created nor controlled by the Catholic Church, though the majority of its members were Catholics. For a comprehensive account, you can read Robert Murray’s The Split, Gavan Duffy’s Demons and Democrats, Brian Costar, Peter Love and Paul Strangio’s The Great Labor Schism or even Ross Fitzgerald’s own The Pope’s Battalions (my favourite because it is the only one I get mentioned in).
The DLP did advocate state aid, and DLP preferences were the reason that the Coalition governments throughout the country came to provide state aid. However, it was Gough Whitlam’s Labor Party which really pushed the issue. It finally realised that it had to support private schools to win elections.
The danger in the socio-economic funding proposal mentioned in the article is that wealthier government school parents will end up paying school fees and this will mean the end of the government school system.

The catholic and private sector are only doing what comes naturally. What organisation in its right mind is going to turn down public money which makes a huge difference to them? I say that it is the government that is failing the poor. Ever walked through the grounds of a public school and then a private? The difference is scary. My children both attend a public school - I can't afford private fees and I truly believe in public education - and I marvel at the wonderful job the teachers do considering that they are doing it under much tougher conditions than their private and catholic school cousins. The level of staffing and resourcing of public schools needs to be dramatically increased. Public schools can not compete with catholic and private on the level of funding and resourcing they currently get. The schools that are dealing with the poorest, toughest, most disadvantaged students in this country get the least amount of money and this government should be ashamed of itself. Every Australian child is entitled to a decent education and at the moment the teachers in public schools are trying to provide it with little or no help or thanks from this government. Smart country - I think not!

It is surprising how the "poorly funded" and non comprehensive schools still manage to get better results on average than the public schools.

The forced "integration" of private property would actually be nationalisation, which I think would be pretty unpalatable and a poison pill for any political party.

So now the Catholic Schools are short of a quid? Need a bigger tax break perhaps?

What ever happened to the "user pays" principle?

If you want to send your children to a religious madras or any other sort of private school then that's entirely your decision but don't expect to be subsidised by those who don't.

I would rather see my tax dollars going toward improving the conditions of the majority rather than bailing out select influential groups.