Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 10 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3056 ..

MR STEFANIAK: Sadly, Mr Speaker, over the years - really, I think, since about 1969 - marijuana has been smoked in our schools. It is not unlawful any more. It used to be a criminal offence. Unfortunately, that is something that occurs. The department attempts to ensure that we have very relevant drug programs. We have enhanced those this year and, as a result of those matters mentioned on the radio, I have directed the department to take further steps in relation to addressing this because it is against the law. However, Ms Reilly, you would have heard those two students say also that the SWOW students would be welcome there; that the college students would welcome them. They also disputed a number of claims made in relation to the smoking of marijuana.

Why move to a college? As I think a number of people from SWOW said, they were not quite so worried about a college environment because the students were more mature there. Allegations of intimidation, abuse, et cetera, were far less apparent in a college - this is my understanding of what the SWOW students said on the radio - than they would be in a high school. That indicates a need too and strengthens our resolve to improve the program in relation to high school age students. It would be totally inappropriate, Mr Speaker, to have that program in a high school.

Where else are you going to have it? A few suggestions were made to me at a meeting that I went to where some SWOW people were present. They suggested a place at the university or a primary school. I think those could equally be said to be not particularly appropriate. Certainly, at a primary school, we are dealing with a completely different age and cohort of young persons. And a university, of course, is a completely different kettle of fish again. In terms of where this program should be, a college, when you look at it and analyse it, is about the best possible place to run an alternative education program, especially for students who might not fit into the normal high school cohort. That is, in a nutshell, the rationale behind that, Ms Reilly, and I have yet to hear anyone come up with a better suggestion.

MS REILLY: We are still talking about high school students. Why have the special programs at Ginninderra High School and at Calwell High School been allowed to stop - I understand that there were problems with resourcing and I understand that they were considered to have failed - if you were so concerned about high school students?

MR STEFANIAK: Those programs were somewhat different from the programs and the philosophy in terms of SWOW. We do need alternative programs. Those programs were not as successful as the program which we envisage in relation to SWOW, Mr Speaker. We are really talking a bit of chalk and cheese there. We accept that there is a very great need for a proper alternative program for high school students. In recent years especially that is what occurred at SWOW with the changing demography of that place, the change in the nature of the provision of the Years 11 and 12 studies, especially, and the changing needs of the students there. Over the last few years it seems that not quite so many are doing Year 12 certificates and getting TER scores. Indeed, the numbers in that age group have definitely gone down over the last number of years. The majority of students in that program are Years 8 to 10. That indicates a real need for a SWOW type of alternative education program to be developed, and that is something that the Department of Education is doing.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .