[auschoolfees]

Parents that have status of temporary residents (457 visa holders) are currently forced to pay school fees for having their children attending public primary school education. In NSW this amount to $4500 pr. year/child. On top of that come application & administration fees.

It turns out that requiring temporary resident students to pay the school fee probably is a breach of an UN treaty.

Back in 1990 Australia signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (also abbreviated CROC). The convention sets out an agreed set of non-negotiable standards and obligations to protect the rights of children. As a signatory to the Convention, Australia is bound by its obligations by international law. Why it this interesting in regards to school fees in Australia? Well, the Convention also states in article 28 section (a) that :
"..primary education is compulsory and available free to all". This is in complete contradiction to the current practice by the NSW & ACT governments. The convention does not state any exemptions to the term "free to all".

In my opinion, "Free to all" also include temporary resident students that attend public primary school thought-out AU. However, I have also read one comment on The Australian website stating "that the UN convention on the rights of the child only bound the commonwealth, not the state governments, and it would be a matter for the federal government to negotiate with the states."

I initially started looking into this matter after having read an article on the Irish Echo website some months ago. There are few articles available on the net about this matter but none of them come to a final conclusion whether the current practice is unlawful.

I would like to hear other users on their opinion and if anyone actually filled any complained about the NSW and ACT government acting against the convention.
There are approximately 2,600 children of 457 visa holders enrolled in NSW public schools. If we all question the current practice it might be that we would be heard.

You can find the complete text of the convention by searching for United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The earlychildhoodaustralia website also has a detailed description about the convention.

[mrsgreenstar76]

Originally Posted by auschoolfees Parents that have status of temporary residents (457 visa holders) are currently forced to pay school fees for having their children attending public primary school education. In NSW this amount to $4500 pr. year/child. On top of that come application & administration fees. It turns out that requiring temporary resident students to pay the school fee probably is a breach of an UN treaty. Back in 1990 Australia signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (also abbreviated CROC). The convention sets out an agreed set of non-negotiable standards and obligations to protect the rights of children. As a signatory to the Convention, Australia is bound by its obligations by international law. Why it this interesting in regards to school fees in Australia? Well, the Convention also states in article 28 section (a) that : "..primary education is compulsory and available free to all". This is in complete contradiction to the current practice by the NSW & ACT governments. The convention does not state any exemptions to the term "free to all". In my opinion, "Free to all" also include temporary resident students that attend public primary school thought-out AU. However, I have also read one comment on The Australian website stating "that the UN convention on the rights of the child only bound the commonwealth, not the state governments, and it would be a matter for the federal government to negotiate with the states." I initially started looking into this matter after having read an article on the Irish Echo website some months ago. There are few articles available on the net about this matter but none of them come to a final conclusion whether the current practice is unlawful. I would like to hear other users on their opinion and if anyone actually filled any complained about the NSW and ACT government acting against the convention. There are approximately 2,600 children of 457 visa holders enrolled in NSW public schools. If we all question the current practice it might be that we would be heard. You can find the complete text of the convention by searching for United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The earlychildhoodaustralia website also has a detailed description about the convention.

Yes, but it's not compulsory for parents to uproot their children & move them across to the other side of the world. Parents are making a conscious choice to take their children and place them in schools that they know they will have to pay for. They aren't forced to do it - they have the option to stay in a country where the education is free. So if they choose to migrate, they'll know that their children's educations need to be paid for (assuming they've done even a modicum of research beforehand). With the exception of refugees, migration is a luxury. So to say paying for their education in a country they have chosen to go to (again, in full knowledge) is a breach of the UN treaty is, quite frankly, absurd.

[Bermudashorts]

I agree with Mrs GS. Those parents have the option of free education for their children in their own country.

If I chose to live in another country as a temporary resident, I would not expect to e treated the same as the citizens of that country. I would find out what it means for me e.g. do I have to pay school fees, and then decide if that is acceptable to me or not. Certainly if moving with a sponsoring employer, I would take steps to ensure that my employer provides the package that is acceptable to me.

If it were not acceptable to me then the answer is very simple, I wouldn't move.

[auschoolfees]

I agree that probably all parents that move to AU on a 457 visa with school aged children are aware of the fact that schools are not free of charge. However, this fact doesn't justify that the NSW and ACT states act directly against a convention that has been signed by AU. It is a legal binding document that include all children, no matter their residential status. If they didn't wanted to make primary school free of charge they shouldn't have signed the convention or at least made a reservation against this, but they didn't.

457 Visa holders are currently not entitled to either medicare, child care or free primary school education but are still required to pay full tax and one may ask what does it give them? Are skilled migrants simply a cash cow?.

[mrsgreenstar76]

Originally Posted by auschoolfees I agree that probably all parents that move to AU on a 457 visa with school aged children are aware of the fact that schools are not free of charge. However, this fact doesn't justify that the NSW and ACT states act directly against a convention that has been signed by AU. It is a legal binding document that include all children, no matter their residential status. If they didn't wanted to make primary school free of charge they shouldn't have signed the convention or at least made a reservation against this, but they didn't. 457 Visa holders are currently not entitled to either medicare, child care or free primary school education but are still required to pay full tax and one may ask what does it give them? Are skilled migrants simply a cash cow?.

If they dislike the downsides, they're free to go elsewhere. 457 holders are meant to be temporary solutions to skills shortages. Obviously a lot do go on to apply for PR & citizenship, & so they'd get more rights then.

NSW & ACT are well within their rights to charge to cover the cost of educating children that may not end up contributing to their economy (since their parents' visas are meant to be temporary).

Again, migration is a choice. They can't whine about the cost of fees when they have knowingly migrated whilst their children are of school age.

[bingobob777]

Originally Posted by auschoolfees I agree that probably all parents that move to AU on a 457 visa with school aged children are aware of the fact that schools are not free of charge. However, this fact doesn't justify that the NSW and ACT states act directly against a convention that has been signed by AU. It is a legal binding document that include all children, no matter their residential status. If they didn't wanted to make primary school free of charge they shouldn't have signed the convention or at least made a reservation against this, but they didn't. 457 Visa holders are currently not entitled to either medicare, child care or free primary school education but are still required to pay full tax and one may ask what does it give them? Are skilled migrants simply a cash cow?.

Yep and thats why it's pointless coming for anything other than big bucks. It leaves a bad taste, God knows why anyone stays on beyond their 457 Visa after being screwed for a few years.

[hoofie2002]

Whats the OPs agenda on all thus? First post and its all about that? is the OP an expat or are they just trolling for a cause.

I think the chances of getting the State governments to drop that one are zip

[quoll]

Originally Posted by hoofie2002 Whats the OPs agenda on all thus? First post and its all about that? is the OP an expat or are they just trolling for a cause. I think the chances of getting the State governments to drop that one are zip

Yup, more likely to see some of the other states concerned about balancing their education budget working out that they, too, could charge fees. I wouldnt be bleating too loud about it, might give the other states a lightbulb moment!

[pumpkin blossom]

I don't have kids. I was shocked when I found out that the Australian citizens I work with have to pay school fees (for all levels) here in SA.
So by that theory, the WHOLE of SA could question the fees. I would imagin if there was a case some lawyer living here would have done it by now.

And by the way 457 visa holders ARE entitled to Medicare if they are from a country with a reciprocal arrangement. They are just required as part of the terms of their visa (which if they don't like they can refuse to come to Australia) to have health insurance as well.

I can't see too many people being very sympathetic with you here.

[pumpkin blossom]

Ps, I even heard the other week on the radio they were discussing school fees. The principle for Brighton high which charges adelaide's highest fees for a public school (so said the radio), saying that their pupils parents LIKE paying the highest fees!!

[bingobob777]

Originally Posted by pumpkin blossom I don't have kids. I was shocked when I found out that the Australian citizens I work with have to pay school fees (for all levels) here in SA. So by that theory, the WHOLE of SA could question the fees. I would imagin if there was a case some lawyer living here would have done it by now. And by the way 457 visa holders ARE entitled to Medicare if they are from a country with a reciprocal arrangement. They are just required as part of the terms of their visa (which if they don't like they can refuse to come to Australia) to have health insurance as well. I can't see too many people being very sympathetic with you here.

Well I am.

I think the UK should start charging Australian kids living there for access to schools and it should be double what British get charged here since the British schooling is better and the aussie kids stupider

[moneypenny20]

Originally Posted by auschoolfees Well, the Convention also states in article 28 section (a) that : "..primary education is compulsory and available free to all". This is in complete contradiction to the current practice by the NSW & ACT governments. The convention does not state any exemptions to the term "free to all".

Why should Temporary Visa holders get free education, PR and citizens don't, anywhere in Aus. We all pay some type of fees, regardless of what name they give them.

Most people like to join an expat forum, settle in and then post something possibly contentious, not create a username and join simply to post this. However I'm assuming you're after support from others and not just trying to cause trouble so good luck.

[renth]

Originally Posted by auschoolfees 457 Visa holders are currently not entitled to either medicare, child care or free primary school education but are still required to pay full tax and one may ask what does it give them? Are skilled migrants simply a cash cow?.

457 visa holders are not skilled migrants.

I don't see why we (the taxpayers) should subsidise the schooling of 457 visa holders' kids.

[pumpkin blossom]

Originally Posted by renth 457 visa holders are not skilled migrants. I don't see why we (the taxpayers) should subsidise the schooling of 457 visa holders' kids.

Yes they are. You have to have skills to get this visa. It is a huge misconception that anyone can get a 457 visa. And many people are let down when they can't get it.

[iamthecreaturefromuranus]

Originally Posted by bingobob777 Well I am.

Me too. The school fees charged by NSW and the ACT are just a cash generating scam.