Matters Referred to Auditor-General Pursuant to Section 6 of the Public Information Act The Referral of a Complaint to the Auditor-General On 1 August 2013 a Member of the Legislative Assembly referred to me, pursuant to section 6(1) of the Public Information Act (the Act), a copy of a letter that had been sent to Northern Territory households and alleged that the contents of the letter may have breached the principles laid down in the Act. The letter in question outlined the reasons behind the Northern Territory decision to decline the offer Government’s from the Commonwealth with regards to a new school funding formula. Review of the Allegations I reviewed the contents of the letter and concluded that the Act was not contravened. I arrived at that conclusion because I did not consider that the letter: included any overt statements that might be construed as promoting a particular political party’s interests; included statements that were misleading or factually inaccurate; or confused statements of facts from statements of comments. The statements made in the letter and, in particular, the table that was included as part of the letter were, in my opinion, based on data that are verifiable. The figures contained in the table represent the difference between what the schools listed might expect to receive over a six year period under existing funding arrangements and what they might expect to receive under the funding model proposed by the Commonwealth if not for the safety net included by the Commonwealth to ensure no school received less than it did previously. In essence, schools that currently receive funding that is greater than the Commonwealth’s Schooling Resource Standard (SRS) will be limited to nominal annual funding increases of 3 per cent until such time as their real funding levels have declined to match the SRS. In contrast, schools that are funded at levels that are below the SRS will receive real funding increases until such time as they reach the SRS level. While the data set out in the table was confined to schools that might expect to face real declines in funding I formed the view that the intention of the letter was to demonstrate the extent to which some schools might be disadvantaged under the proposed Commonwealth funding model.
Matters Referred to Auditor-General Pursuant to Section 6 of the Public Information Act The Referral of a Complaint to the Auditor-General On 1 August 2013 a Member of the Legislative Assembly referred to me, pursuant to section 6(1) of the Public Information Act (the Act), a copy of a letter that had been sent to Northern Territory households and alleged that the contents of the letter may have breached the principles laid down in the Act. The letter in question outlined the reasons behind the Northern Territory Government’s decision to decline the offer from the Commonwealth with regards to a new school funding formula. Review of the Allegations I reviewed the contents of the letter and concluded that the Act was not contravened. I arrived at that conclusion because I did not consider that the letter: included any overt statements that might be construed as promoting a particular political party’s interests; included statements that were misleading or factually inaccurate; or confused statements of facts from statements of comments. The statements made in the letter and, in particular, the table that was included as part of the letter were, in my opinion, based on data that are verifiable. The figures contained in the table represent the difference between what the schools listed might expect to receive over a six year period under existing funding arrangements and what they might expect to receive under the funding model proposed by the Commonwealth if not for the safety net included by the Commonwealth to ensure no school received less than it did previously. In essence, schools that currently receive funding that is greater than the Commonwealth’s Schooling Resource Standard (SRS) will be limited to nominal annual funding increases of 3 per cent until such time as their real funding levels have declined to match the SRS. In contrast, schools that are funded at levels that are below the SRS will receive real funding increases until such time as they reach the SRS level. While the data set out in the table was confined to schools that might expect to face real declines in funding I formed the view that the intention of the letter was to demonstrate the extent to which some schools might be disadvantaged under the proposed Commonwealth funding model.
2013_August.docx