VICTORIA's richest private schools made profits of up to $14 million last year, with financial reports showing taxpayers contributed more than half of some schools' gains.

The extent of taxpayers' contributions to the surpluses of schools such as Scotch College, Melbourne Grammar and Geelong Grammar is likely to intensify the debate about funding for private schools.

A review of school funding will conclude next year, but Prime Minister Julia Gillard's election pledge guaranteeing the current funding levels for private schools until 2013 means changes could not occur before then.

Ms Gillard's promise drew criticism from public education advocates and the Greens, on whose support she now relies, who want the funding formula overhauled.

Scotch College, which boasts facilities including a diving pool, 18 tennis courts and an observatory, had a profit of $14 million last year.

It received $4.7 million in yearly government grants.

Melbourne Grammar made $8.2 million above its operating costs after receiving $4.5 million in grants, while Geelong Grammar made $10.6 million after receiving $6.3 million in grants.

The schools also generated millions from donations and extra building grants.

Economist Trevor Cobbold, of Save Our Schools, said government funding was meant to keep a lid on fees, but schools were instead reinvesting in their business to drive a cycle of growth and enrichment.

''Instead of grants making schools more affordable, it's making them more elite,'' he said.

Despite large surpluses in 2009, year 12 fees were up 5 per cent at Geelong Grammar to $27,700 in 2010, 4.8 per cent at Scotch to $22,572, and 5 per cent at Melbourne Grammar to $22,380.

But principals said fee rises would be even higher without the benefit of surpluses or government income, which helped fund building, technology and maintenance costs, and kept class sizes small.

They argued their pupils would cost more to government if they were in the public system, and all students were entitled to receive some funding.

''The government has an obligation to ensure that all children obtain a school education,'' Geelong Grammar principal Stephen Meek said in an email. He said that almost all the school's yearly grants were used to fund scholarships.

Philip Grutzner, principal of Carey Baptist Grammar, which received $6 million in government grants, said parents ''made significant sacrifices to send their students here and the grants help keep the costs of educating their children down''.

Scotch College did not reply to interview requests. Melbourne Grammar principal Roy Kelley said its government funding was minimal given its 1800 students and that education costs had risen faster than its fees.

Haileybury said its yearly government contribution of $13.8 million reflected a less-wealthy student cohort, which attracts more funding.

The Sunday Age looked at six schools' financial reports, lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, as a taste of what will be available in December on the My School website to make schools more accountable for their spending.

Public school principal David Adamson, of Essendon Keilor College, said the reports showed how much was possible if funding was redistributed.

''Transfer that federal money to us for one year and we could do so much. My floors are rotten, the window frames are rotten and the floor rocks and rolls as you walk down the corridor,'' he said.

The federal government funds about 80 per cent of regular private school grants, and the state government the remainder.

Federal grants are a complicated hybrid. In 2001, the Howard government amended the system to fund private schools based on the socio-economic status (SES) of students, rather than a school's resources.

But the formula applied only to schools it advantaged, and not those for whom it would reduce funding, a loophole worth $800 million a year.

In 2007, Labor promised to change the system if elected, but instead has guaranteed funding.

''The government is extending privilege to the already privileged,'' said Australian Education Union head Angelo Gavrielatos. ''It is indefensible.''

Jealous ???

People pay big fees to send their children to private schools, so that their children have the best education.

They pay tax, so their school should recieve funding the same as every one else.

The school doesn't make a profit, the money goes back into facilities

If you take note of the wording of the OP, you`ll see slanted individual cases portrayed as average for their group, there are quite a few examples of propaganda like deceptions in this document, if you care to look.  This slanted type of "journalism" was branded by my Father as a "coward`s lie"

Cockney Doll wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 12:28pm:


When this was investigated in 2005 / 2006 under Howard / Costello the same question was asked ...but their is no state school , no independent or catholic school that receives even $1 million in funding under this scheme they get about $200,000 - $300,000 per school ...

So the discrepancy of same funding is very clear because these ELITE schools got 9$ million or $14 million per school all the while charging each of their students $20,000 per year ... When a state school would get next to nothing in fee's let alone multi million handouts it is a disgrace but as said cant be stopped until 2013

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2010 at 4:14pm:


longy why do you bother     they dont want too understand 

Long it is not the private schools that is the problem it is the

ELITE

no other schools under the SES scheme received $9 million or $14 million .. this is not the same funding or equal funding it is actually atrociously biased.. Their are plenty of site on the internet if you do not understand why ... just google Elite school funding John Howard...

Quote:


and this was supposed to be funded on a needs based system what a crock..

Quote:

i had written ELITE in all posts if i have to bold make it size 16 font so people understand i cant help that ... and yes these schools should not be allowed any funding from the government at all under the needs based scheme like the SES..

They charge 20,000 per year , per student  which is more then enough to cover costs this was supposed to help keep costs down but they have doubled....on top of fees they get very generous funding from the private sector that state schools do not ... they do not need or want for anything yet the state schools are falling apart...

This isn't fair , this isn't equal  but not much can be doe tillthe next review in 2013

Quote:
-longy

Ever noticed that right wingers only ever use the terms, "equitable and fair", when referring to middle and high class government welfare?

The ridiculous argument that taking funding away from the richest schools would cause a flood of Sebastians, and Samanthas into the public system is the most preposterous idea that these defenders of high class welfare call upon, and if any of them really believe that the parents who send their kids to these schools would send them to the local high school if Geelong Grammar raised its fees, you can tell "em they're dreamin'.

The fact that they believe that entrenching wealth to a minority by propping up institutions of elitist privilege is fair and equitable shows just how little concept they hold of the real meaning of those terms.