2010/14: Should the government offer tax concessions to help parents purchase school uniforms for their children?

Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window

Related issue outlines:
no related issue outlines

Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).

Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis

For later or follow-up newspaper items (additional to the items displayed in the newspaper items section at left) , go back to the Newspaper Index section of the Echo site.

2010/14: Should the government offer tax concessions to help parents purchase school uniforms for their children?

What they said...

'Money for uniforms? Oh, please. Just finance public schools properly'
Brenton White, from a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald

'I believe having a school uniform gives people a sense of self, a sense of discipline, a sense of how to present yourself to the world'
The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard

The issue at a glance
On July 13, 2010, the new Labor Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, announced that the government was about to introduce tax concessions to assist parents purchase school uniforms. The initiative has revived debate on the importance of school uniforms and also on the merits of the government's tax concession. This is an extension of the taxation rebates currently available to parents of school-aged children to reduce the cost of their children's education. All such rebates are dependent of the parents' income and the number of children the parents have.
Parents will be able to claim up to 50 per cent of the cost of uniforms in addition to the existing education expenses included in the scheme. They are eligible for a rebate of up to $390 per child each year for primary school child or $779 per child each year for those in secondary school.
The existing items parents can claim under the Education Tax refund include the cost of computers and computer equipment, textbooks and trade tools for secondary school trade courses.

Background
(The following is an edited version of the Wikipedia entry on 'School uniforms'. The full text of this entry can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_uniform)

A school uniform is an outfit-a set of standardized clothes-worn primarily for an educational institution. They are common in primary and secondary schools in many nations.[where?] When used, they form the basis of a school's dress code.
Traditionally, school uniforms have tended to be subdued and professional. Boys' uniforms often consist of dark short or long trousers and light-colored shirt, often with a tie. Girls' uniforms vary greatly between countries and schooling systems, but typically consist of a dress or a blouse worn either with a skirt or culottes or under a pinafore. In some countries, gender-specific uniforms have been a point of contention, with some schools permitting female students to choose either skirts or trousers while still requiring male students to wear trousers. The use of a blazer or suit-like jacket for either gender is also fairly common, especially in countries with relatively cold weather.
School uniforms in Australia have traditionally followed the British models. Most private and government schools, in all Australian states, have a compulsory uniform policy, at least for secondary schools, though the degree of enforcement varies. For boys, the uniforms generally include a button-up shirt and/or polo shirt together with either short trousers (especially for summer wear) or long trousers, often in grey. Where short trousers are to be worn, long (knee-length) socks in school colours are often required. Girls' uniforms generally include skirts, culottes, dresses, jumpers, blouses and/or poloshirts and sometimes also trousers and shorts.
At private schools, uniforms for either gender often include a blazer, tie and hat. A different uniform specifically for sports is usually worn for physical education activities. These can include skin tight leggings, shorts, tennis skirts/netball skirts.
Government schools, especially primary schools, in Australia tend to be more flexible with the way the school uniforms are worn than most private schools, which are strict regarding presentation of the school uniform.
In recent times Year 12 students at some Australian schools have been allowed to wear special jumpers (Leavers Jumpers) or printed tops to denote their final-year status. In some schools this has taken the form of a different coloured jumper (sometimes white or cream), or a special commemorative year-12 top (often a rugby top) with the last two digits of the year and a name or nickname displayed. Alternatively, tops are sometimes printed with the names of all students in that year level. Some schools also have different ties or blazers for senior years.

Internet information
On July 13, 2010, the Australian Labor Party's Internet site included a media release titled 'Gillard Government to ease school costs with new Tax Refund for Uniforms'. The release was attributed to
Julia Gillard,Simon Crean and Wayne Swan. It includes details of the tax rebate and details of what the current Family Tax Benefit Part A makes available to parents. The full text of the release can be found at http://www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/gillard-government-to-ease-school-costs-with-new-tax-refund-for-uniforms/

On July 13, 2010, the ABC News report included coverage of the Gillard government's announcement of the uniform tax rebate. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/13/2951711.htm

On July 13, 2010, The Age published a news report titled, 'Gillard announces tax break on school uniforms'. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.theage.com.au/national/gillard-announces-tax-break-on-school-uniforms-20100713-108gi.html
The online report includes video footage of an interview with the prime minister, Julia Gillard, given at the time she announced her government's policy on school uniform rebates.

On July 14, 2010, The Sydney Morning Herald published a report titled 'Tailor-made for parents, rebate can go to blazers' and written by Matthew Knott and Clare Barnes. The article gives the opinion of a number of parents sending their children to private schools and suggests that most will not be eligible to claim the rebate. The full text of the article can be found athttp://www.smh.com.au/national/education/tailormade-for-parents-rebate-can-go-to-blazers-20100713-109iu.html?skin=text-only

On July 15, 2010, The Geelong Advertiser published an editorial titled 'Julia Gillard's call for uniform approach'. The editorial is in support of the school uniform tax rebate. The full text of this editorial can be found at http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2010/07/15/191645_opinion.html

On July 16, 2010, The Sydney Morning published a series of letters on the uniform issue under the general heading 'Conformity is not essential for good education'. These letters can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/conformity-is-not-essential-for-good-education-20100715-10ck3.html

On July 16, 2010, The Central Western Daily published a news report which gave a variety of parent opinions on the proposed school uniform tax rebate. The report is titled 'Nothing uniform about expenses' and was written by Lisa Cox. The full text of the report can be found at http://www.centralwesterndaily.com.au/news/local/news/general/nothing-uniform-about-expenses/1887199.aspx

On July 17, 2010, The Australian published a report which was a collection of school students' opinions on the wearing of school uniforms. The report is titled 'Students enter school uniform debate' and it was compiled by Stephen Lunn. The full text of the report can be found at http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/students-enter-school-uniform-debate/story-e6frg6n6-1225892936438

On July 17, 2010, The Australian published a news report detailing fears that uniform manufacturers might exploit the proposed school uniform tax rebate to increase the cost to consumers of school uniforms. The report was titled 'Fears tax break on uniforms will drive up prices' and was written by Milanda Rout and Stephen Lunn.
The full text of the report can be found at http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/fears-tax-break-on-uniforms-will-drive-up-prices/story-e6frg6n6-1225892939908

The United States education information Internet site 'Family Education' contains an overview of arguments for and against school uniforms summarised Ann Svensen and titled 'School Uniforms: Pros and Cons'. The full text of the overview can be found at http://school.familyeducation.com/educational-philosophy/individuality/38676.html

Arguments against the government offering tax concessions to help parents purchase school uniforms
1. Schools are not able to enforce the wearing of uniforms
Although most Australian state education departments have regulations recommending students wear school uniforms, they do not generally give schools the power to require students to comply with these regulations.
The policy of the Queensland education department is typical of that applying in other states and territories. It states that although students should wear a school uniform, they cannot be prevented from accessing any formal educational opportunity because they are not wearing a uniform.
The Queensland regulations state, 'Schools should develop sanctions for non-complying students ensuring that students are not:
Excluded, suspended, or at risk of having their enrolment cancelled for not complying with student dress codes;
Given any sanction that damages their academic or external career prospects such as negative mentions in references or school reports;
Prevented from continued participation in essential curriculum activities, except where necessary for reasons of safety (in which case, alternative educational activities are provided); and
Disadvantaged where required dress code items are not available because of circumstances beyond their control.'
It has been claimed that it is futile to assist families to purchase school uniforms when the purchase of such uniforms is not effectively compulsory as it is unable to be enforced.

2. The tax concession is limited
It has been claimed that limiting the rebate to families that are receiving the will mean that it is not available to middle class families whose incomes are over the limit. It has been claimed that this is unjust for the parents that will miss out, especially as many of these send their children to private schools where the uniforms are generally more expensive than those worn in state schools.
In an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald on July 14, 2010, it was stated, 'Sue Pilgrim thinks Julia Gillard's plan to make the cost of school uniforms a tax deduction is a "fabulous idea".
The only problem is the North Parramatta mother of two, who has spent about $2000 on private school uniforms over the past three years, would not receive a cent.
Ms Pilgrim, whose two daughters, aged 13 and 16, attend Our Lady of Mercy College in Parramatta, will not qualify for the tax break because she and her husband earn a combined income of more than $100,000.
"It cheeses me off a bit," she said. "It's a great help for families on Family Tax Benefit A, but for middle-income earners like me, we miss out."'

3. The tax concession is not adequate for parents with reduced means
It has been claimed that the refund is not being delivered in a way that offers useful assistance to parents on low incomes. It is noted that parents first need to pay for uniforms at the start of the school year and will only receive their partial rebate half way through the year when they receive their tax return.
The refund, worth up to $390 for a primary school child and $779 for a secondary student, will not be available until families lodge their tax returns in 2012-13.
The policy has been criticised because it means that parents in difficult financial circumstances will have to try to find the initial money before they are eligible to apply to have part of it restored to them. It has been suggested that the assistance would be far more useful if it were made available to parents at the start of the year before they had to buy the uniforms.
It has also been claimed that the amount being offered is insufficient. The maximum amount of rebate that is offered is 50 percent. Matt Pickering has two children who attend Calare Public School and a third child who will begin school next year, has stated, 'Things are getting tough and any help is appreciated ... but if they're serious, lower income earners would be offered a 100 per cent rebate and middle income earners 50 per cent.'
The leader of the Opposition, Mr Tony Abbott, has similarly remarked, 'It's all well and good to try to offer more help to parents but if she had been fair dinkum about giving more help to parents why didn't she as the Education Minister do this at the start of the year?'

4. School uniforms limit children's individuality
It has been claimed that school uniforms foster conformity and discourage individuality. On July 16, 2010, a letter was published in The Sydney Morning Herald from Annabella Zanetti. Ms Zanetti stated, 'Julia Gillard's statements about supporting mandatory school uniforms are misguided. While I understand many parents' and community members' arguments for school uniforms, they do not necessarily help to foster a ''sense of self''.
At Mosman High School, which has no uniform, I never experienced the pressure to have the ''latest, most fashionable gear''. Much of my clothing was second-hand and inexpensive.'
The same letter writer went on to claim, 'Relationships between students and teachers, particularly in the senior years, were often based on mutual respect, which is much more effective for good pedagogy than authoritative discipline, which is what school uniforms aid.
I feel I was better prepared for the real world, I was more self-reliant and I had more self-confidence as a result of being able to express myself through my clothing and hairstyles. I learnt how to ''present myself to the world''. Many students there left the school with a very well established sense of self.'

5. The tax rebate is a populist attempt to win votes
It has been claimed that the tax rebate is a simplistic attempt to win votes by appearing to do something about education rather than addressing real educational issues like class sizes and the quality of teachers.
Annette Kent, in a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald, has written, 'Is there anyone else out there who would rather see the education revolution involve smaller classes, more highly qualified teachers and state-of-the-art technology being made available in our schools?...
Please get a grip, Julia, and realise education in Australia will improve only when the quality of the teaching improves. This will require a leader who values teaching as a profession and holds as paramount the individual needs and abilities of the students, regardless of whether they are wearing a blazer or T-shirt.'
Brenton White in another letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald, wrote, 'Money for uniforms? Oh, please. Just finance public schools properly.'
It has further been suggested that the uniform rebate is an attempt to purchase votes. On July 13, 2010, Crikey published an opinion piece from Bernard Keane, which stated, 'The government is ... keenly aware of cost-of-living issues for low and middle-income earners. Like "mortgage stress", so-called "cost of living" pressures are mainly self-inflicted and reflect household consumption and lifestyle choices. But voters don't want to be told that. They want to be told governments will subsidise their high-consumption lifestyles and efforts to keep up with their neighbours.'

6. School uniform manufacturers are likely to increase their prices
Concern has been expressed that the uniform rebate will have little real effect because uniform manufacturers are likely simply to increase the cost of school uniforms.
Mr Nicholas Abbey, the president of the Victorian Council of School Organisations president has stated that the federal government would have to ensure no uniform manufacturer would took advantage of the rebate and increased prices, otherwise the rebate scheme would have no impact on families' ability to meet the cost of school uniforms.
Mr Abbey further stated, 'One would hope there would be sufficient resources put aside for oversight from the federal government.'
Without such oversight there is concern that the rebate scheme could actually make the situation of parents worse. This would be particularly the case for those families that did not qualify for the rebate scheme.

Arguments in favour of the government offering tax concessions to help parents purchase school uniforms
1. Tax concessions will assist those parents who need help paying for their children's school uniforms
It has been claimed that this uniform rebate is a measure that will help parents struggling to pay the costs of their children's school uniforms.
On July 15, 2010, The Australian published a letter from Andrew Heslop. Mr Heslop wrote, 'If some families need government financial support to ensure their children can wear warm, suitable clothing to school, then so be it. A uniform can reduce the stigma for those whose parents cannot afford the latest "in" fashion label.'
The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has stated, 'This is a measure to help ease the cost of getting kids to school.'
It has been estimated that some 1.3 million families could benefit from this extension of the Family Tax Benefit Part A . Family Tax Benefit Part A helps families with the cost of raising children. It is generally paid for dependent children and dependent full time students under 25 years who are not receiving Youth Allowance or similar payments like ABSTUDY or Veterans' Children Education Supplement.
The existing items parents can claim under Family Tax Benefit Part A as part of the Education Tax refund include the cost of computers and computer equipment, textbooks and trade tools for secondary school trade courses. Uniforms have now been added to this list of items.
The deductions parents can claim are quite substantial. Under Family Tax Benefit Part A, parents are able to claim up to $390 for each child attending primary school, and up to $779 for each child attending secondary school. The benefit is income-dependent and influenced by the number of children a family have.

2. School uniforms discourage unhealthy social competition
It has been claimed that when students do not wear a school uniform, they are left in a position where there is destructive competition between them about what they will wear.
The Prime Minister, Julie Gillard, has stated, 'Having a school uniform helps undercut the kind of unhealthy competition we can see at schools to have the latest, most expensive, fashionable gear...'
It has been suggested that such competition is particularly damaging for those students who are unable to afford the more fashionable clothing. This means that these students may be left feeling stigmatised and inferior.
Norman Munro, a British counsellor and psychotherapist has stated, 'There is no doubt that when a school adopts a uniform policy, it is sending a clear and unequivocal message to parents and students alike. It is saying that this is an inclusive organisation where everyone is seen to be equal, and will be treated as such. School is about learning, not about showing off or scoring fashion points.'
Martin Culkin, principal of Dandenong High School in Melbourne's east, has stated his belief that uniforms were important in low socio-economic districts such as his.
Mr Culkin stated, 'A uniform gives students a symbol of connection both within the school and outside. And it assists in the removal of differentiation of economic capacity when it comes to buying clothes. On non-uniform days we do see some fashion competition.'

3. School uniforms encourage discipline and focus among students
It has been claimed that wearing a school uniform encourages students to focus on their school work and reduces discipline problems in schools.
The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has stated, 'I believe having a school uniform gives people a sense of self, a sense of discipline, a sense of how to present yourself to the world.'
In the United States, no long-term, formal studies have been done on the effectiveness of school uniforms, but many schools have kept their own informal statistics.
California's Long Beach Unified School District's records are probably cited most often. This urban district adopted a mandatory uniform policy in 1994. Since then, school crime has dropped by 76 percent, while attendance has reached an all-time high.

Anthony Poet, assistant principal at the Pueblo Del Sol Middle School in Arizona, recently instituted a uniform policy in his school. Since his school began requiring uniforms, the school has documented a significant drop in discipline problems. Mr Poet has said he cannot be sure whether it is the uniforms or the act of instituting the policy that has made the difference.
Dr. Hilfer, a school psychologist, has suggested, 'Discipline problems may be decreasing in schools with uniforms because the schools (and the parents) have begun taking the issue of discipline more seriously.' Whatever the cause and effect relationship, those in support of school uniforms argue they are generally helpful as part of any attempt to develop or maintain an effective discipline policy.

4. School uniforms reduce wealth-based stereotyping of schools
It has been claimed that school uniforms reduce wealth-based distinctions between different schools. It is argued that if all students wear similar uniforms, then class based divisions will be less obvious both within and between schools.
In a discussion forum in which posters were responding to Julia Gillard's school uniform proposal, one of the posters noted, 'Stereotypes are when people are judged, normally on first impressions, religion, culture, clothing or character.
People will no longer be judged by their clothing, because they will all be wearing the same thing. I mean, think about it: a boy walks into school wearing lots of black. Stereotypes will judge him by what he wears, and he will be labelled as a goth or emo. With a uniform, clothing stereotypes will be non-existent.
People with less money may not be able to afford as many clothes as the rich kids. This will not show when they begin to wear the same clothes. With a uniform, it will be impossible to differentiate between social classes because people will wear the same thing.'

5. School uniforms are important in ensuring student safety at school and during excursions
It has been claimed that school uniforms are important as a means of protecting students. It has been suggested that they achieve this in two ways.
Firstly, school uniforms are important when a school takes students on an excursion. They mean that it is easier for supervising teachers to locate and oversee their charges when the children are wearing school uniform.
Secondly, school uniforms make it easier for teachers to recognise when intruders have entered a school yard. When students do not wear a uniform it is very difficult to recognise when an unauthorised person, especially a young person, has come onto school property, as they do not stand out from the rest of the student body.
They are essential when taking students on excursions. They are essential in identifying intruders. One of my children attended Fort Street in a non-uniform phase. She describes how some toughs invaded the playground and staff couldn't tell who was supposed to be there and who wasn't.
On July 16, 2010, The Sydney Morning Herald published a letter from Margaret Hargrave Sutherland which stated, 'They are essential when taking students on excursions. They are essential in identifying intruders. One of my children attended Fort Street in a non-uniform phase. She describes how some toughs invaded the playground and staff couldn't tell who was supposed to be there and who wasn't.'

6. School uniforms can reduce the formation of gangs wearing particular insignia
It has been argued that school uniforms help reduce violence in schools in part because they help reduce gang formation.
Though school uniforms are not compulsory in the United States a number of American governments have promoted them as a means of reducing the development of a gang culture and so as a way of reducing violence within schools. It is believed that if all students within a school are required to dress in the same way, this will prevent them wearing gang uniforms that mark one student off from another and so encourage hostility between different groups.
Norman Munro, a British Counsellor and psychotherapist has stated, 'In 1996, President Clinton instructed the then Secretary for Education Richard W Riley to send a Manual on School Uniforms to every School District in the country. The manual set out the Government's position, creating guidelines for all schools on which they could model their uniform requirements.
The Government view was that the adoption of school uniform would reduce violence and indiscipline in schools...'In 1996, President Clinton instructed the then Secretary for Education Richard W Riley to send a Manual on School Uniforms to every School District in the country. The manual set out the Government's position, creating guidelines for all schools on which they could model their uniform requirements. The Government view was that the adoption of school uniform would reduce violence and indiscipline in schools...'

Further implications
If the current federal government wins the upcoming election, it will be interesting to see if the tax rebate on uniform costs which it is offering to many parents will alter the different state governments' policies on school uniforms. Currently in most Australian states and territories, though school uniforms are required, they are not mandated to the extent that schools can limit the educational opportunities of students who do not wear them. More rigorous policies are likely to be contentious as it would be difficult to justify suspending or expelling students simply because they did not adhere to their school's dress code. Should popular support for school uniforms intensify, then it is possible that State governments might attempt to make their policies stronger.
It is to be hoped that this would not happen without significant community debate and thorough study of the supposed benefits of wearing school uniforms.
Obedience or compliance are not automatically desirable and if schools are going to be better able to enforce school uniform policies then the benefits of wearing a school uniform would have to be demonstrated as conclusively as possible.
There have been a number of informal studies conducted in the United States that do appear to suggest that requiring students to wear a school uniform has a positive effect on school discipline and reduces truancy; however, the casual connection between uniform-wearing and an increase in other desirable student behaviours has yet to be established.
Thus far, it seems the jury is still out on the desirability of school uniforms. While this is the case, it would seem to lend support to those commentators who have argued that there are better educational costs for the government to contribute to - textbooks, computers, even the cost of transporting students to school.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline (more media sources in the Internet Information section above)
AUST, July 17, page 7, news item by Rout and Lunn, `Fears tax break on uniforms will drive up prices'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/fears-tax-break-on-uniforms-will-drive-up-prices/story-e6frg6n6-1225892939908

AUST, July 17, page 7, news item (photo) by S Lunn, `Students enter school tie debate'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/students-enter-school-uniform-debate/story-e6frg6n6-1225892936438

AGE, July 15, page 16, cartoon by Dyson.