Page 4325 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
This bill has been negotiated in some detail over a considerable period of time with the principals association and the Catholic Education Office, and we have reached this balanced position. Parents want this change, and it was a Labor Party election commitment and part of our approach to dealing with antisocial behaviour in our schools.
Ms Burch has alluded to our policy to support all students so that everyone learns. The Catholic Education Office have joined with the government in supporting this bill. My discussions and my office’s discussions with the Catholic Education Office have been productive in relation to this measure, so I can indicate that the government will not be supporting amendments that Mr Doszpot has put forward, and they certainly were not part of our discussions with the principals association or the Catholic Education Office, who support the government’s position on this matter.
The Education Act clearly provides the legislative basis for suspensions, exclusions and transfers. I think it is timely that education systems review their policies and practices. After five years of the ACT Education Act, this part of the act should be reviewed within the context of current community expectations about safety in our schools.
There is no doubt that community expectations change over time, and there is a very high expectation in the territory about safety in our schools. Members would all be aware of a recent tragic incident at a high school in northern New South Wales that clearly has sharpened community awareness about this issue.
Research about the efficacy of school suspensions in improving school safety indicates that a clear stated purpose for suspension, consistency of practices by schools and support provided to suspended students are critical success factors; that is, greater delegated authority of school principals or longer suspensions alone do not lead to improved school safety.
Schools operate in an environment of interagency cooperation and collaboration. Longer suspensions offer principals more options to restore safety, the good order and management of their school and, most critically, to implement interagency support for students and families.
I think it is worth reiterating that it is not intended that this legislative change will result in uniformity around length of suspensions. Principals are very aware of the family circumstances and when a suspension is deemed necessary. It is important to know that the individual needs of the student and family are taken into consideration in these circumstances.
This bill proposes that 10 days be the maximum period for which a student can be suspended by the principal. This change does not mean that all suspensions will be of 10 days duration. In most cases, the suspension period will be considerably shorter than 10 days. However, 10 days will allow schools to establish support services for the student to contribute to that student’s successful return to school. In some of the more complex cases, other agencies will of course already be involved. Ten days will allow the support processes to be reviewed and changed if necessary.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .