Rudd’s Education Revolution—New Spin on Old Policy
February 22nd 2008 01:47
When Gough Whitlam took office in 1972, he stated Labor’s ‘three great aims’: egalitarianism, voter involvement in policy, and ‘to liberate the talents and uplift the horizons of the Australian people’ (Marginson, 1997, p.16). There is an only one way talent, and horizons can be lifted, and that is through education. One of the old appeals of the Australian Labor Party was their common-man policy focus—the worker, and his rights. Gough Whitlam’s charisma and intelligence personified the aspirations of the ordinary Australian. Here was a new breed of Labor politician—highly educated, and willing to put government money behind policy.
In Whitlam’s own words he outlines his laborist/socialist driven agenda: The (quality of life) ‘depends more and more on the things which the community provides for all its members from the combined resources of the community (Whitlam, 1985, p.3). Labor assumed full responsibility for higher education and put government funds behind that assumption, a total of $2.7billion a rise of 176% (Marginson, 1997, p.30). Underpinned by the human capital theory of the 1960s, the Martin Report’s recommendation of providing opportunity to develop talent, which in turn supplied the human capital needed to sustain economic growth, couldn’t be denied (Marginson, 1997, p.36). Here can be seen the symbiotic relationship between citizen training (education), and economic growth. The former feeding the latter.
Capitalism drives Western economies, the reality of which is the unequal distribution of wealth. Certainly, opportunity abounds, but the rich do get richer and the poor get poorer. Naturally, this doesn’t sit well with laborist/socialist policy. In Whitlam’s own words: ‘Education should be the great instrument for the promotion of equality’ (Whitlam, 1975, p.5) Enter the Karmel Report and its ‘radical egalitarianism’ as Marginson terms it: educational equity, equality of opportunity via needs based funding (Marginson, 1997, p.53). However, instead of creating a more level playing field, self-management emphasis had schools doctoring audits to suit their own economic ends. Although the Labor initialised Karmel Report gave more money to government schools (Marginson, 1997, p.69), the private-sector schools ended as the real beneficiaries and citizenship training grounds remained divided: those who could afford it (private school), and those who could not
[ Click here to read more ]
Capitalism drives Western economies, the reality of which is the unequal distribution of wealth. Certainly, opportunity abounds, but the rich do get richer and the poor get poorer. Naturally, this doesn’t sit well with laborist/socialist policy. In Whitlam’s own words: ‘Education should be the great instrument for the promotion of equality’ (Whitlam, 1975, p.5) Enter the Karmel Report and its ‘radical egalitarianism’ as Marginson terms it: educational equity, equality of opportunity via needs based funding (Marginson, 1997, p.53). However, instead of creating a more level playing field, self-management emphasis had schools doctoring audits to suit their own economic ends. Although the Labor initialised Karmel Report gave more money to government schools (Marginson, 1997, p.69), the private-sector schools ended as the real beneficiaries and citizenship training grounds remained divided: those who could afford it (private school), and those who could not
| 140 |
| Vote |
Read More
Add Comments
Comments (1)
