Education reform must aim to provide a fair go for all, not choice for some

These benefits are particularly important for Australians in the bottom thirty per cent, increasing their after-housing final income by at least 30 per cent. Recent social policy changes have wound back some of these benefits with a resultant reduction in these redistributional effects. During the 90s, the distribution of such non-cash benefits became more skewed towards higher income households. This can be attributed in part to reduced spending, relatively speaking, on public goods.

While there are few current data available, the most recent UN Human Development Index, a composite measure of GDP per capita and health care and education indicators, reveals that we have dropped from 7th to 15th place on the league table.

Education is also vital in improving life chances and reducing inequality in the long term, particularly by improving access to employment and conferring higher income earning capacity. It also opens people's lives to enriching and enjoyable experiences.

Over the last 50 years, Australia has had a strong commitment to a high quality public education system. Under this government, that commitment is being undermined.

By international standards, Australia still has average to high standards of education, but there is substantial educational inequality. And at least part of this inequality can be attributed to the education levels, occupation and income of students' parents. Indigenous students and those from rural areas are particularly disadvantaged. Gifted students from poorer families are less likely to achieve their full potential.

It is clear that students from poorer families start behind the eight ball and are not given enough extra assistance to overcome things such as:

• poor study conditions at home;
• less encouragement by parents whose own experience of schooling has been marred by low achievement;
• language and cultural barriers;
• absence of books and other educational resources at home;
• attendance at schools with poorer facilities, a more diverse school population including more children with behavioural and social problems and teachers working under pressure; and
• lower expectations of their capacity.

International comparisons show bigger gaps between the best and the worst performers in Australia than in other developed counties. OECD data confirm that on measures of literacy, the poorest performing students here do worse than the poorest performing students in high ranking countries, including most of Europe. And the relationship between reading ability and social background is also more marked in Australia. We are one of the least equitable countries in the developed world. This points to inequalities in the functioning of our education system and a failure to compensate for pre-existing disadvantage.

Investment in public education rose impressively during the 70s and 80s. There are signs that this effort is stalling. For example, in the 70s 5.6 per cent of GDP was spent on education, a figure which had been reduced to 4.5 per cent by the end of the 90s, despite significant increases in education participation. Our spending on the all-important pre-school years is low by world standards and there are too few early intervention programs for at-risk families.

Until recently the participation rate of lower socio-economic groups in post-compulsory schooling, including universities, was increasing. School retention and completion rates, after growing rapidly, stalled in the 90s and our levels are now well below those of the U.S. and Canada.

Of more concern is the failure to close the socio-economic gap in performance and retention, especially for males. The gap may, indeed, be widening. A similar trend to lower participation is evident in vocational education and training for the most disadvantaged.

As many commentators have argued, one reason for this gap is the increasing advantage enjoyed by non-government schools which educate the better off. In the thrall of narrow fiscal ideology and reduced grants from the Commonwealth, successive State governments have restricted funding to their schools. Simultaneously, the Howard Government has poured money into the wealthiest private schools at the expense of the government school sector.