Mr ABBOTT (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs)(10.29 a.m.) —in reply—I am pleased to be here to comment on the debate on the Indigenous Education (Supplementary Assistance) Amendment Bill and to sum up on behalf of the government. As speakers have made clear, this bill has essentially two purposes. The first is to remove the requirement that a non-government, non-systemic school must have 10 per cent of its students as indigenous before it is eligible for funding under this scheme. The second is to provide for supplementary funding in line with increases in the educational price index. It is envisaged that, over the next four years, over $5 million could be provided in addition to the already allocated funding to indigenous education in this way. I think we would all agree that the objectives of the bill are benign and to be applauded.

The member for Werriwa (Mr Latham) has raised the very interesting proposition that in fact there should be no restrictions on the number of indigenous students at any non-government, non-systemic school for money to be paid. I have to say that it is an interesting suggestion and on leaving this place, I will ask the department to look into it.

I am advised that at this point in time, it is administratively very difficult and the reason for that is that the program in question is very much a performance based program. It is unlike most other programs in the department in that it is very heavily monitored. I am advised that indigenous education supplementary assistance program agreements require rigorous monitoring to show progress against performance targets. Every school that receives funding under this program is required to establish a performance baseline and it is visited at least twice a year by departmental officers in conjunction with Aboriginal consultants to ensure that those performance targets are being met.

I am advised that general Commonwealth agreements do not contain these outcome-focussed approaches. Previously under the former government, systemic schools were given a lump sum and they could choose to provide funds to non-systemic schools and I am pleased to point out to this chamber that they can still do this. They can still do this under these new legislative proposals.

Each recipient of funds must have an indigenous education agreement. These require monitoring to ensure targets are met. The administrative costs of supporting these extra 260-odd agreements is, as I said, unsustainable, as I am advised at the present point in time.

The member for Werriwa has made some interesting comments in his contribution to this bill. I am very happy to ask the department to look again at this issue to explore the possibility of extending these schemes and I will do so.

I would point out in conclusion that my understanding is that under this scheme as it operated under the former government, direct grants to non-systemic, non-government schools were not possible at all and so these government amendments are in fact an extension of the scheme. They are a step in the right direction; they are a step in the direction that the member for Werriwa is seeking so I hope, on that basis, he will support the bill. I hope on the basis that we will have a look at the proposal that he is putting up that the opposition will support the bill.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.