SpeechDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. This side supported this bill in the first reading but now we have decided that we cannot support this bill from here on the Education (School Donations) Amendment Bill. But before that as the chair of the Education and Workforce Committee I want to thank all members from all sides for their contribution. I also want to acknowledge all the officials for their work but most importantly I want to thank all the submitters. We received 139 submissions on this bill and it looks like it's a big number but if we look at the number of schools that we have if we just look at schools that are from decile 1 to decile 7 schools that are going to receive this discretionary grant to compensate for not asking for school donations—a number of parents a number of students—I think 139 is a very small number. It's a small number and I believe that there was an effect from a shorter truncated select committee process. I believe that if the select committee process was for the full length then we would have received more submissions on this legislation.Why I say this is because I know that some people—they have resources they understand when to submit they know when the legislation is coming before the House they're prepared but then I know that there will be some people that would have never submitted in their whole lifetime and for them if they ever submit it will be like a one-time opportunity in their life. For them they need that time because after their routine work and other things that they have to do in their daily life to get into this legislation to understand what this legislation does and to get over that hesitation of not having the experience of submitting before—it takes time. So truncating the process definitely impacts the number of submissions that we receive and I think we should have received a lot more submissions on this legislation.This legislation when it was introduced it sounded like it was a good thing and that's why we supported this legislation in the first reading. We wanted to see that this legislation goes through to the select committee we wanted to hear from submitters but now based on what we heard in the select committee process we have decided that we cannot support this legislation any more. If I summarise what submitters said in just two points one point would be that using the decile system to decide who gets this grant to compensate for their school donation and who doesn't is not a fair system. The second thing is about the amount of this discretionary grant per student. We understand it's going to be $150 per student but we know that in schools it's not like there is a random donations box and you walk in and you donate as much as you like. Schools actually have a fixed amount that they go out and ask for. They proactively communicate to parents at the start of the year. What they do is in that letter sometimes some schools also explain how this money is going to be helpful for their child and they also go on to explain that if parents are not able to pay that amount in one go then they can set up instalments with their school. So that makes parents feel that this is something mandatory not voluntary. They feel that there is an obligation to pay this payment. As I said schools have a set amount that they ask for. So it's important for us to know what this amount is going to be and how it's going to impact various schools.In the select committee process we did clarify that this is going to be an opt-in thing. It's not like automatically all schools from decile 1 to decile 7 are going to get this grant to compensate for school donations that they will be told not to ask for. This will be a choice for schools that will be provided and it looks like a lot of schools won't actually like to opt in for this option because there are a lot of schools that ask for more than $150 per child.The second thing which we clarified in the select committee process was that if schools are not compliant then some amount can be recovered but that amount should not be more than the original grant that was given to that school. In the select committee process what happened after we had finished listening to all submitters was the Minister informed the select committee that the Minister intends to introduce a Supplementary Order Paper in the committee of the whole House and that is to do with exemptions. That actually makes me laugh because the purpose of this bill is to reduce that burden that parents have because of that letter they receive from their child's school to pay this donation but then there will be some exemptions. So while schools can still be accessing the discretionary grant they can go out and ask for donations. How does this make sense? It doesn't make sense to me. It is very jumbled legislation and with that Supplementary Order Paper if that is introduced in the committee of the whole House as the Minister indicated to the select committee then it's going to become even more jumbled because it won't be able to deliver anything that the Minister thinks this legislation should deliver. So it's really important that we understand what the policy intent is and what we are trying to achieve through this. If the policy intent is that there is financial burden on parents because of school donations that they pay—which is not mandatory but voluntary but sometimes parents feel that they should—then this legislation is not going to deliver that purpose. This legislation will not.During the select committee process we received several submissions. There were some that were quite to the point and there were others that shared some of their own experience. One question that came from around 70 percent of submitters was why there is a cut-off at decile 7—so why is there a cut-off at decile 7? That means: why is this going to be applicable only to schools that are from deciles 1 to 7? Some submissions from decile 10 schools before the select committee said that parents of students that come to their school are not better off than parents of students that go to lower decile schools. So it's unfair. And one submitter Belmont Primary School they finished their submission by saying Equity Minister equity." That is what submitters are asking for and that is why we have decided not to support this legislation. Thank you Madam Speaker."