n - Eureka Street

servants that are accountable to the electedrepresentative who is elected to make justthose sorts of decisions. So that didn't worrytne.'But the Council had an important rolein providing advice to the FederalGovernment on medium and long-termpolicy directions in relation to schools. Ourdemise was not unexpected because wewere targeted for abolition by Fightback!One, and although other things in Figh tback!One were changed, that never was. So itwas not unexpected that, when Dr DavidKemp became Minister for Education, theSchools Council went. What I think is disappointingis that he's not seen fit to replace itwith some sort of similar mechanism.'Morrow describes herself as a politicalrealist. She has been around educationpolitics long enough to understand thatnew brooms will want room to sweep. TheHoward government planned to makeradical changes to schools policies, as newgovernm ents will. What Morrow is worriedabout are the social implica tions of the newderegulation of the system and the way inwhich deregulation was effected.'When the legislation was presented inthe Parliament it was omnibus legislation,that cleverly wrapped up in the sam e Actthings as disparate as ongoing Commonwealth/public financial support forindependent and Catholic schools, andthese new ideas like the abolition of theNew Schools Policy.'Th e N ew Schools Policy wasintroduced in 1986 as a way of ensuringthat funds from the public purse would beallocated on the basis of a number ofplanning requirements. After 1986, if youwere planning to set up a new non -governmentschool, you weren't allowed toput it next door to the existing governmentschool or the existing parish school.You had to demonstrate that you weren eeded, you had to demonstrate thatyou were viable, you had to have~ a certain number of students.'.1. HAT PROCESS AND THE administrativescrutiny that went with it has, as Morrowputs it, 'all gone out the window now'.What the governm ent did before Christmaswas to deregulate, totally, the environmentfor the establishment of n ew n ongovernmentschools.Morrow is precise about the terms ofthis new environment and exactly wherethe burgeoning new independent sector fits:'We should call them publicly supportednon-government schools because many ofthem get up to 80 per cent of their recurrentexpenditure paid from government sources.That is not always known. They are beingprovided with more generous levels offunding than at any time in our previouseducation history, and thereby providinginducements for people to leave the publicsystem and go to the nongovernmentsystem.'MORROW CERTAINLY HA S NO inprincipleobjection to funding for independentschools. But priorities concern her. Andto keep scrutiny of the priorities an issue inthe public forum, she is now gearing up fora campaign, through the establishment ofthe Australian Schools Lobby.'Our Australian Schools Lobby, whichwe set up to draw public attention to thesepolicies, is not opposed to public fundsgoing to non-government schools. We arenot a part of the old DOGS [Defence ofGovernment Schools]movement. We haveno problem with the accommodation thatwas reached. We had no problems with thatas long as the funding system remained fairand as long as governments continued tobelieve that, whatever assistance was givento non-government schools, their majorresponsibility and priority in a democratic'The collaborative arrangements inmanufacturing, in factories, in industryand business, are what generateproductivity. Give people the problem,give them ownership of the problemand support them to sort it out.Why won't we do this in schools?'society where education was mandatory,(and where even to this day 70 per cent of allfamilies are still using governm ent schools)was to ensure that the public school systemremained free (in the sense of tuition beingfree), remained accessible, so that kidscould actually get to the schools, andremained secular. Which is not to say thatwe oppose government schools attendingto the spiritual needs of their students. Butwe believe that for the schools to be reallyaccessible they have to be accessible withoutreligious test.'Morrow has som e personal experienceof accessibility 'without religious test'. Shewas one of very few girls educated at theBrigidines' Kilbreda College in Melbournein the 1950s who was not a Catholic. (Thenumber of n on -Catholic students inCatholic schools h as increased exponentiallysince the 1950s). She tells a storyabout her father's reaction when, as the onenon-Catholic in her Matriculation class,she won the Christian Doctrine prize.'The traditional prize was a Catholicmissal, and my father, who was a butcher,says he was up to his elbows in pickle whenthe phone rang, and the person whoanswered said that it was Mother someone.He took his hands out of the pickle andwent to the phone. The Principal, MotherMargaret Mary, said, in her perfect Irish­Australian voice, " Mr Woodwaarrd, yourdaauughter has, on her m erit, woonn theChristian doctrine prize in Year 12. Nowthis is an unusual situation because she'sthe only non-Catholic in the class, so thetraditional prize is a Catholic missal, andsince Ann is a non-Catholic we don't thinkthat she will have any use for a Catholicmissal. Would you prefer that we boughther a King Tames version of the Bible?"'Dad said no, he would not.'The next question was, "Will you allowher to accept the prize?" "If she's won theprize on h er m erit, of course she can acceptit!" Then cam e the discussion about theKing Tames version. Dad said, "If the prizeis always a Catholic missal then that'swhat she should get."'So I went up on speech night and got aCatholic missal, which I've still got. Andthere was much rejoicing!'Such accommodation is not always thecase in newly established religious orindependent schools, however good or broadthe intentions of their founders. And it isthe bulk of students- the ones whoseVOLUME 7 N UMBER 4 • EUREKA STREET 21