Great expectations warranted

The Carr Government has been re-elected with public education as the centrepiece of its platform, writes MAREE O'HALLORAN.

The fact public education was so central is indicative of the growing power of the public education movement.

As that power increases, the corresponding ire of the private school lobby is apparent: "I'm disappointed the education policies of both parties try to focus on the 68 per cent of children in government schools..."(Terry Chapman, Association of Independent Schools, The Australian, March 22-23)

He also said the Greens had a "short-sighted and quite irresponsible" policy of redirecting funding for independent schools back to the public education system.

The Association of Independent Schools (AIS) has also expressed its concern that the signs on our schools such as "The issue is public education" attempt to "politicise" education. Is this not the ultimate irony? The powerful private school lobby has, in fact, been successful over the past 40 years in creating a bipartisan view about the funding of private schools. This bipartisan view has yet to crack, although it may be showing some strains. It's disingenuous for the AIS to argue that education policy should not be "politicised". Private school lobby groups act in completely overt "political" ways.

For example, the Catholic Education Commission and the Council of Catholic School Parents wrote to parents in Catholic schools ranking the political parties according to issues like the continued maintenance of the 25 per cent rule that automatically flows on to the private system any increase in state funding to public schools.

With the Vinson Report as its platform, the Public Education Alliance consisting of teachers, parents and principals has been successful in dominating the education debate throughout 2002 and 2003. The Vinson Report became the benchmark for political parties and the media during the election campaign. The appropriation of "Vinson" reached amazing heights on March 14 when the shadow education minister Barry O'Farrell said Professor Tony Vinson would be approached to head a Coalition Government advisory council. A more concerning permutation of the Vinson Report was a claim by a National candidate that Vinson criticised this union about teachers' pay. That claim is untrue but it shows, as always, that Federation will be up against an avalanche of lies as the salaries campaign escalates.

The gains achieved in this election campaign came against very difficult odds. The Carr Government appeared to be unassailable and this proved to be true. A traditional "bidding war" when the Opposition had little, if any hope, of winning was unlikely. There was simply no reason for the Carr Government to comply. The bidding war on issues like class sizes and professional development only occurred because the Vinson Inquiry and Federation's campaign convinced the community.

All six united demands of the Public Education Alliance were addressed to some extent by the ALP before the election. While their promises did not match the Vinson recommendations, particularly in relation to funding, they are far more comprehensive than in previous elections.

Federation must now work to ensure the speedy and best possible implementation of these promises.

The role of Federation in delivering a public education platform can be seen quite clearly in the following editorial in The Australian on March 20:
"In contrast, the able Education Minister, John Watson [sic], has depoliticised education, largely by accommodating the demands of the Teachers Federation and public education lobbies."

The campaign Federation ran, predicated on the Vinson findings, demanded that teachers have great expectations of students, of ourselves and of the Government. It is legitimate for teacher unionists to expect and demand of government the resources and education policies that enable those great expectations to be met.

It is also, of course, warranted for teacher unionists to expect of this government significant salary increases fully funded from Treasury.

Clearly, it's no accident that despite the issue of teachers' pay (including the "Vinson five per cent"), being raised consistently in representations to Government, in paid advertising and in the media, the Government made no offer before the election. It's obvious and trite to say that the Government's bargaining position is better flush from an election victory.

The real issue is to decide whether a Federation state election campaign based on the entirety of "Vinson" or one based on the issue of salaries alone would have been more successful. The former provides us with a positive platform working in the public interest from which to continue to advance our just salaries cause. Teacher unionists must continue to expect and anticipate salary justice while being aware that history would tell us that Government may fight and obstruct us all the way.

The Queensland Government is currently subjecting public school teachers to a round of negative publicity because of their class sizes and salaries campaigns.

Is Bob Carr, the historian, looking to repeat the previous bitter salaries dispute or looking for a better legacy to leave? In the Premier's own words (December 4, 2002):
"Our teachers do magnificent work and the contribution they make to our society is immeasurable."

The Premier has called for "goodwill and creativity on both sides" (Sydney Morning Herald, March 21). Federation has demonstrated, both in putting forward plans to the Government for negotiating salaries and proffering the Vinson Report as the basis for our claims.

The payment of the "Vinson five per cent" in 2003 and the immediate commencement of negotiations for the next award would be an auspicious start for the Government.

Stop the war on Iraq

For further information

March 2003 contents