Comments on Paul Kelly “PM needs magic to get a Gonski”, 17/04/2013, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/pm-needs-magic-to-get-a-gonski/story-e6frg74x-1226622025078
While the offer of 2 for 1 is appealing to the states in general, it is not on an equitable basis between the states and some states like WA and the ACT are so much disadvantaged by such an offer. Besides, it is so much short of the Gonski recommended amount and who know in how many years the total amount will reach the Gonski amount.
Further, the government approach will create the undesirable effect of undue federal influence on state role and responsibility of school education.
Such a policy by the federal government, if implemented, is very undesirable and will not be a good public policy.
I think a better policy for any federal government on increasing school funding and to implement Gonski would be to offer an package of matching at least on a one to one basis in increased school funding with the states to a set amount in a future year with few strings attached by the federal government. The total amount should be divided among the states on a national Gonski formula basis based on student numbers and on those disadvantaged students numbers. When a state has already have a higher school funding, the matching should be higher by the federal government.
That should be the best policy for a federal government needs to follow in future in any areas where states have the responsibility to provide the services but the federal government wants to contribute to those services to achieve a better outcome.
The principle is to for the federal to help but with little interference in the running of those state services.