Joint transcript with Senator Stephen Parry

Journalist: I guess even federal members for Labor are coming out against these school closures.  How can the Government stop this (inaudible)

Christopher Pyne: Well, the Government could solve this tomorrow, the Federal Government could.  It could demand the $13.5 million of BER money back and if that money was paid back it would remove the incentive for closing these schools so there wouldn’t be any savings any more.  Or secondly if the (state) Government refuses to pay the money back, it could remove the money in other ways.  It has a raft of programs in education that they share with the states and the federal Government could simply reduce the funding to one of those by $13.5 million.   If the political will was there, and I welcome Dick Adams and the other Labor members joining the Coalition’s Liberal Senators and the State Liberals to fight these closures, but they really should be putting pressure on their own Government’s not just going to the media and sprouting rhetoric.  If they really wanted to save these schools they would insist that Wayne Swan would remove that $13.5 million in funding. 

Journalist: How damming is it that now Federal Labor members are essentially turning on the decisions that their State Labor colleagues have made? 

Pyne: Look, the state Labor-Greens Government has been incompetent and deceitful about these school closures.  It’s no wonder that the Tasmanian public has reacted with such vigour to closing 20 schools and federal Labor Government is chaos.  They are also in alignment with the Greens and what we’re seeing here in Tasmania is being played out on the national stage and I think Labor members are sick of it.  I think they’re tired of having the tail wagging the dog which is the case in Canberra with the Greens and the Labor Party and finally they’re showing some fight.  I’m glad they are. 

Journalist: You touched on a point that Dick Adams has also mentioned in the paper and that’s the $13 million can be taken away in other ways.  What course of action can the federal government take?

Pyne: Well, the federal government provides funding to the Tasmanian state government for low SES schools, non-English speaking background students, students with special needs, literacy and numeracy programs.  Now, obviously you wouldn’t reduce funding in some of those areas, but there are areas across all of those where you could reduce the $13.5 million and save those 20 schools. 

I’ve been in parliament for 18 years, I’ve seen a lot of waste over that time in Government, not just Labor to be fair, sometimes all Government’s are guilty of waste, but when cuts actually start affecting children and school communities and in a state like Tasmania, which is very de-centralised, the local school in a local village or town is a vital part of that town.  If you close the school, you’re going to lose the GP, you’re going to eventually lose the post office and the local shops and the community will die.  The schools are the heart of a lot of communities in Tasmania and these kinds of cuts are exactly the wrong direction for the Government to go in. 

Journalist: You touched on the Greens.  I’d be keen to get your view on the role the Greens play in this.  The Education Minister in our minority government is of course the leader of the Greens, and we’ve got a minority government in the federal sphere as well.  Should the Greens be doing more to avoid these sort of cuts?  I can’t imagine that going into either the state or federal elections that people could imagine that the Greens would play a part in school closures? 

Pyne: Well, the Greens have moved from being a fringe party that makes a lot of noise on the sidelines that doesn’t have any influence to now being directly involved in Government.  So Bob Brown is really the Prime Minister of Australia in Canberra.  The Labor Party is in government, but the Greens are in power in Canberra, and we’re seeing the same thing here in Tasmania having to actually be responsible for the decisions that they make.  And we’re seeing Nick McKim isn’t really up to the job of being a Minister in a Government.  He’s failed the people of Tasmania and he’s going to have to move from being a popular fringe dweller to a serious Minister and he hasn’t made the transition yet. 

Journalist: What would you say to the State Government line that there’s no other way they can cut funds in education; the money has to come from somewhere, there’s  a billion dollar black hole – do any of those excuses hold water with you?

Pyne: All of these problems are of the Labor-Greens Government’s own making.  It’s a $4.9 billion budget in Tasmania.  This is a $26 million saving.  If they can’t find savings elsewhere in the budget for $26 million which is essentially tin money in $4.9 billion then they are not really trying.  They’ve had 7000 new public servants in Tasmania in the last few years, all of those public servants drawing salaries.  They’ve made their choices and now they have to lie in the bed that they’ve created.  If they can’t find a saving of $26 million elsewhere then they aren’t even trying. 

Journalist: And I believe you also have some concerns on a federal level about funding to non-government schools as well?

Pyne: The Coalition has committed to continuing the quantum of funding that non-government schools get now, plus indexation, plus a capital infrastructure fund.  Labor isn’t committed to that.  If they remove indexation from non-government schools it’d be a $4.2 billion dollar hit to non-government schools across Australia.  The only way non-government schools would be able to replace that money would be through higher fees or sacking teachers and neither of those are palatable in a time where cost of living pressures are obviously so dramatic in Australia.  That’s one issue. 

Labor is also talking about removing funding maintained provisions in the current model.  That would cost hundreds of millions of dollars across Australia and Tasmania leading again to higher school fees and reduced teacher numbers at a time of cost of living pressures being far in excess of anything we’ve seen in a very long time. 

Journalist: What would you say to people who say that non-government schools – it’s far more palatable to remove funding from non-government schools than public schools?

Pyne: Well, non-government schools are already funded about 50 per cent by government; state and federal.  If that funding was removed schools would close and students would go to government schools.  So rather than funding 50 per cent you’d be funding 100 per cent of the cost of that child.  So children being in non-government schools, which is a choice for parents saves taxpayers billions and billions of dollars that you’d otherwise have to find if those children were in government schools. 

ENDS