Public vs private school funding: the equity question Australia ignores

Every parent wants the best education for their child. Yet Australia's school funding system creates a puzzling paradox: we publicly fund private schools that charge fees while our free public schools often lack basic resources. It's an equity question that successive governments have danced around for decades, but one that deserves a direct democratic response from the people who actually fund the system.

The numbers don't add up

Let's start with the facts. In 2025-26, the Australian government allocated approximately $18.2 billion to school education funding. Of this, around $6.8 billion went directly to private schools, despite these institutions also collecting fees from families that can range from $5,000 to over $40,000 per year.

Meanwhile, public schools -which educate 65% of Australian students -receive the bulk of their funding from cash-strapped state governments. The result? Many public schools operate with:

• Larger class sizes (averaging 24 students vs 20 in private schools)
• Older facilities and equipment
• Fewer specialist teachers for subjects like music, arts, and languages
• Limited resources for students with additional learning needs

The Gonski Review identified this funding inequity over a decade ago, yet we're still having the same conversations while educational inequality widens.

The political dance continues

Why hasn't this been fixed? Because school funding sits at the intersection of politics, privilege, and parental anxiety. Politicians from all sides tread carefully, knowing that:

• One in three students attends a private school, representing families across the political spectrum
• Private school communities often have significant political influence
• Parents who've stretched financially for private education feel their choices are under attack
• Teachers' unions and public education advocates demand better funding for the majority

The result is a policy stalemate where everyone talks about 'choice' and 'excellence' while avoiding the fundamental question: Should taxpayers fund schools that charge fees when free schools are underfunded?

International comparisons tell a story

Australia is unusual globally in how generously we fund private schools. In countries with high-performing education systems like Finland and South Korea, government funding flows almost exclusively to public institutions. Even in the United States, with its strong private sector tradition, direct government funding of fee-charging schools is far less common.

Yet these countries often outperform Australia in international education rankings, suggesting that spreading public money across competing systems may actually harm overall educational outcomes.

The real cost of inequality

This funding imbalance doesn't just affect school budgets -it shapes Australian society. When well-resourced private schools can offer smaller classes, better facilities, and more opportunities, they create advantages that compound over generations. Students from these schools are more likely to:

• Achieve higher academic results
• Attend prestigious universities
• Enter high-paying professions
• Send their own children to private schools

Meanwhile, public school students -including many from working families -face systemic disadvantages that no amount of individual effort can fully overcome. This isn't about personal choice; it's about structural fairness.

Where direct democracy changes everything

This is precisely where traditional politics fails and direct democracy succeeds. Rather than politicians making backroom deals that satisfy no one, imagine if Australians could directly vote on school funding principles:

• Should government funding prioritize free public education before subsidizing fee-charging schools?
• What level of private school funding (if any) do taxpayers consider fair?
• How should we balance 'parental choice' with educational equity?

These aren't technical questions requiring policy expertise -they're value judgments about the kind of society we want to build. Every Australian who pays taxes or sends children to school has a legitimate stake in these decisions.

Direct democracy would force an honest conversation about priorities rather than allowing politicians to make vague promises about 'supporting all schools' while maintaining an unfair status quo.

A path forward

Some argue that reducing private school funding would simply force more families into an already crowded public system. But this misses the point: properly funded public schools could accommodate growth while providing excellent education for all.

Other countries have managed this transition successfully. When public schools offer small classes, modern facilities, and diverse programs, families choose them willingly rather than feeling compelled to pay private school fees.

The question isn't whether we can afford to change our funding model -it's whether we can afford not to. Educational inequality undermines social cohesion, wastes human potential, and perpetuates disadvantage across generations.

Your voice, your choice

For too long, school funding has been decided by politicians trying to balance competing interests rather than addressing fundamental equity questions. But these decisions affect every Australian family and community.

Direct democracy offers a different path: giving people the power to directly shape education policy based on their values and priorities. No more political compromises that satisfy no one. No more funding systems that make little sense to anyone except those who benefit from the status quo.

Ready to have your say on education policy? Take our policy quiz to see where you stand on school funding and other key issues facing Australia. Because the best education policy is the one chosen directly by the people who live with its consequences.