Sigh. Is anyone out there listening?
What is it that so frightens Labor from taking on this issue?
Is it that every single time it comes up it's classified (by those whose interests are with the wealthy) as "class warfare"? (Nasty OLD Labor politics?) I am so sick of this dishonesty!
Mark Latham (to his credit) tried to address the obscene inequality of education opportunity available to different Australians. It didn't go done well. ("Class warfare" again! The media buys this line every time. Why, I wonder?)
Just take a look at the amount of $$$$ some of the most elite schools in Melbourne have available to them ... & ask yourself whether they actually need government support when other schools are struggling to meet the basic requirements.
Kevin Rudd has told his parliamentarians to visit homeless shelters to understand the issues of the homeless. And good for him. I'd suggest he also suggests that they spend a few days at some of the wealthy schools mentioned in this article ... then a few days at typical state schools in Melbourne's west or north ... then ask themselves where government taxes ought to be spent, where the money is actually needed. If Labor seriously wants a real "Education Revolution" it is pretty clear to many of us about how to go about it. Simple: equal opportunity. How hard is that to grasp?
This issue is not about "class warfare" - it's about giving all kids a half-decent chance in life. The very sad thing is this: students in any number of the SAFEST Labor seats around Australia are getting the crappiest education deals going. 
:
$50m elite schools piggybank
Deborah Gough
February 17, 2008/the AGE
VICTORIA'S top 10 most "profitable" private schools made more than $50 million from school fees and Federal Government largesse in one year alone, with one school pocketing a $12.7 million "profit".
All schools contacted by The Sunday Age stressed that the funds were surpluses because schools are not-for-profit organisations and the money is ploughed back into the school.
The figures do, however, show just how much money some private schools are making, and have sparked calls for the Rudd Government to rethink its commitment to the current funding model.
The top six most cashed-up schools (including their controlled entities) made an average of $7.4 million each in the 2006 calendar year, according to audited financial reports.
The audited figures of the top 10 schools revealed they made a collective surplus of $54.4 million, with their coffers bolstered by $40.5 million in federal grants. The schools' combined wealth put their net worth at $677 million.
Critics described the surpluses as "obscene and gobsmacking".
The Sunday Age investigation found that Scotch College and its controlled entities, which include specific-purpose trust funds and donations, reaped a surplus of $12.7 million in 2006.
The city's other establishment school, Melbourne Grammar, had the second highest surplus with $10.6 million.
Elite boys' schools dominated the top six, with Brighton and Camberwell grammars in the mix, along with former all-boy schools Geelong and Caulfield grammars.
The most profitable all-girl schools were Methodist Ladies' College ($2.6 million) and Presbyterian Ladies' College ($2.3 million).
The investigation centred on 22 schools with fees of more than $17,000 for year 12 tuition. Two of Melbourne's elite Catholic schools, Xavier College and Genazzano FCJ College, were also checked. Records showed that Genazzano did not record a significant surplus, but the financial affairs of Xavier College, Wesley College and Ruyton Girls' School were organised in such a way that full audited figures were not available.
Scotch College acting headmaster Ian Savage said, in a written response to The Sunday Age, that the school made only a small surplus and the $12.7 million took into account special-purpose trust funds.
"Scotch College accumulated funds are invested in the maintenance and development of the school's facilities for the benefit of our students' ongoing education," Mr Savage said.
He said the college granted students a full rebate for all government recurrent funding received by the school.
Victorian Council of School Organisations president Jacinta Cashen described the financial results as "obscene and gob-smacking". She called for an immediate overhaul of the Commonwealth's socio-economic status funding system, which uses a student's socio-economic status to decide the level of school funding for that child.
Victorian Independent Education Union secretary Deb James said many independent schools did not make large surpluses, adding "it is now obscene to continue with these schools squirrelling away quite large sums of money".
Michelle Green, chief executive officer of the Association of Independent Schools of Victoria, defended the schools, saying they needed to fund all capital works programs without government funds.
She said it was wrong to describe the figures as "profits" because the surpluses were not distributed to shareholders.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/02/16/1202760669040.html
) "Worker" is the operative word, or is that a bit too Bolshie for the ALP (& the ACTU) in 2008?
