HERE we go again. The federal government is considering a radical shift in education funding.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The suggestions include either the federal government or states and territories take over all responsibility for public and private education.
The proposals are contained in a leaked discussion paper. Initially, Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Education Minister Christopher Pyne appeared at odds over a proposal to means test wealthy parents but later on Monday, Mr Abbott dropped his support for a means test.
The various proposals would potentially supersede the prevailing Gonski model, which was based on student need.
If the states and territories assumed full responsibilities for public and private education it would cost them $15 billion. Currently the federal government funds private schools, but also is responsible for 40 per cent of public school funding, through GST and tied grants.
Mr Abbott had earlier not ruled out fee-paying wealthy parents but Mr Pyne immediately used social media to rule it out, saying the government "does not, and will not support a means test for public education. Full stop. End of story".
You can get giddy contemplating these changes, and the history of education - Essential Learning, Tasmania Tomorrow, Australian Technical Colleges, Gonski . . .
Together with changes to the pension, the Abbott government appears to be headed for the high moral ground of battlers, while Bill Shorten's Opposition is busy harvesting support from middle Australia. They are trying to poach each other's political constituency.
Whatever the motives, voters are in for a rollercoaster ride up until next year's federal election as each party looks for the populist "wow" factor.
To some extent the contest has already started, with debate raging over the rights of Australian citizenship for those fighting with terrorists.
Voters should not be swayed by the rhetoric alone, but focus carefully on what is being planned. In every sphere of politics there is always the fine print.