Page 1349 - Week 04 - Thursday, 4 April 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Since then the minister has tried various ways to ignore the issue, ignore continuing calls for an independent inquiry to minimise the extent and frequency of violence in our schools, all the time saying that there was no need for and no point in having an independent inquiry. She said such an inquiry would turn into a so called witch-hunt, that schools would be named and shamed, that privacy would be breached, that we had “nation-leading policies”, in her words, in place to address occupational violence in schools and that we had positive behaviours for learning programs, the PBL, under the safe and supportive schools umbrella policy being rolled out in our schools.
In passing, I note that the Tuggeranong school about which parents have raised concerns about unreported and unmanaged violent behaviours occurring on an almost daily basis has the PBL program in place. So how successful has it been? Well, it took the removal of one principal, the engagement of a special second deputy principal with direct responsibility for student wellbeing, additional learning support staff, an additional executive teacher and the withdrawal of at least two families from the school as a desperate last measure because they were forced to choose between “my child’s safety or my child’s education” to see that at last someone was starting to listen and trying to get things back on track.
I note once again that this school has the PBL program. Will that now be the go-to formula for other schools? What about the schools that do not yet have the PBL program? Those same programs we have already seen fail in at least one school are now the basis on which the minister finally last month, and just before the petition was to be presented, established her safe and supportive schools advisory committee. They are tasked with reviewing these existing policies and they have until August this year to report.
The parent-driven petition was presented to the Assembly on Thursday, 21 March and, because it has over 600 signatures, it was automatically referred to the Assembly’s education, employment and youth affairs committee. I can of course make no comment on whether the committee has yet had the opportunity to discuss such a referral. But in any event the minister would be fully aware that automatic referral to the committee would eventuate and that the committee would have the power to initiate an inquiry and set the terms of reference.
You can describe the minister’s actions in introducing this motion as the ABC have done—they have called it a backflip. If one wants to take a more altruistic approach, you could say that the minister has finally recognised that she and her directorate, under her leadership, have been found wanting in management of this serious issue and that she has finally seen the limitations her advisory committee might have in collecting necessary evidence from parents, teachers and people on the front line dealing with this.
She would, or at least should, be aware of the incredulity that has come from the community about setting up an advisory committee only answerable to her in response to concerns raised by parents that she is the one who has ultimately failed in taking action on this issue. When someone has so vehemently argued there is no need for an inquiry, I cannot accept the altruistic explanation, and I am confident that the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video