Mike Elliott: Question on School Management Plans

Extract from Hansard

Legislative Council
28 November 2001

Mike Elliott
Leader Australian Democrats
Member of the Legislative Council

Parliament Index
2001 Autumn Sitting Index
Browse by Subject
Search all Democrats material
About the SA Parliament
Hansard on line

The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Treasurer, representing the Minister for Education and Children's Services, a question about school asset management plans.

The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: My question relates to future resource allocations for many South Australian public schools under the Partnerships 21 scheme. Under P21, public schools currently receive funding for buildings from two sources. The first is a dollar per square metre or per child formula that goes directly to maintenance for buildings. This formula differs only between primary and secondary schools. The second is an asset management plan. This plan identifies the objectives and management needs of a school. Based on this plan, money for maintenance is allocated to the school's P21 per capita funding, while money can be secured from the department for special projects.

It has been brought to my attention that there are a number of concerns with the current funding system. First, these funding arrangements do not take into account that the majority of public school buildings were not built with IT and new curriculum demands in mind. I am informed that this has resulted in a situation in some schools where they could not fit extra computers into classrooms, even if they had them. Secondly, these funding arrangements do not take into account that some basic needs must be met by all public schools. I am informed that small secondary and regional schools are struggling because of the combination of small student numbers, and the per capita formula means that not all curriculum areas can be provided, because the necessary classrooms cannot be maintained. Thirdly, these funding arrangements do not take into account the impact of programs outside the normal school curriculum. I have two examples of that.

The first has just been brought to my attention in relation to a federal Department for Education, Training and Youth Affairs plan to start a mobile child care service in the Mallee next year. That move has been welcomed in many Mallee communities, but they have expressed concern that many schools right at this moment are carrying out their asset management plans. This may involve the removal of buildings, because they are outside the funding formula. As a consequence, this mobile service that was proposed to be provided through school sites may not be possible, because the spaces simply are not there.

Another example of concern about programs relates to the North Adelaide Primary School, which first wrote to me and the minister in the middle of the year. My letter arrived in June. They had an out of hours school care program. Under the asset management plan being developed there, buildings on that site were to be removed. The school wished to retain a building sufficient for the out of hours school care program. If they were unable do so, the consequence would have been that every day they would have had to disassemble a facility that was used for music and reassemble it next morning to allow for the out of hours school care program. My questions are:

1. Does the minister acknowledge that, due to a range of reasons, including a reduction in class size-which is being proposed politically at this stage at least-and also the provision of services such as out of hours school care and the program I spoke about in the Mallee, space may be required above the formula available in schools?

2. Does the minister acknowledge that new curriculum with an IT focus as well as problems encountered by small secondary regional schools, often with old school buildings, mean that the per capita maintenance formula does not always work for them?

3. Will the minister reassure the Mallee community that any plans for the establishment and location of child care services in their area will be fully supported by the department through assistance with the school asset management plans? If not, why not?

4. What plan does the minister have to review the current funding formula to take into account the issues raised in my question?

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer): I am happy to refer the honourable member's question to the minister and bring back a reply. I would say at the outset that my experience is that on most occasions these things can be sensibly worked out by local communities and the education department public officers. Sometimes it does not always work out as might be desired, but on most occasions it can be worked out.