Is Australia fulfilling its obligations towards its children, in particular fostering their development to their fullest potential, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child? This article addresses this complex question by elaborating three alternative conceptualisations of the right to development to one's fullest potential, based on the literature on human rights principles, and on the writings of the philosophers John Rawls, Michael Walzer, and Amartya Sen. The analysis suggests that while Australia performs well in comparison with other rich countries according to indicators of educational achievement, disparities in educational outcomes are large, implying that many children fail to realise their right to education to their fullest potential. This is not surprising. More surprising is the contrast between the diligence with which educational outcomes in Australia are measured, and the lack of accurate information on public resource inputs (except at the most highly aggregated levels) to achieve those outcomes. The paper concludes that while the measurement of student outcomes is an important step in the realisation of all Australian children's right to education to their fullest potential, the failure to accurately monitor resource inputs represents an equal failure by Australian governments to protect and promote children's rights.