EDUCATION AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES DEPARTMENT, KPMG REPORT

Mr PISONI (Unley) (16:14): My question is for the Minister for Education. Why, after nine years of this Labor government, did it take a KPMG report to tell the minister that his department should have regular meetings with SAPOL in order to promote—and I quote from the report—'safety for children and their families'?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Education, Minister for Early Childhood Development, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (16:14): Forgive me if I take the member for Unley's citing of a report with just a pinch of salt, because we have had some recent experience from the member for Unley where he just simply gets it horribly wrong.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Let's go through them, because you do have to be very careful. We had him suggesting that we have over 50 per cent of our teachers—

Mrs REDMOND: Point of order.

The SPEAKER: Point of order, Leader of the Opposition.

Mrs REDMOND: The only response from the minister so far is a direct reflection on the person asking the question, rather than any attempt to answer the question at all.

The SPEAKER: Minister, I direct you to answer the question.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is difficult to know what the member for Unley is talking about when he cites just a small component of the report, and the history is that he continually cites things out of context—

Mr PENGILLY: Point of order. I refer to standing order 127(2).

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Minister, can you please answer the question?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It has been a consistent—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for MacKillop, be quiet.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Minister, be quiet.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: There have been consistent policies in our department extending back for as long as certainly I have had association with the agency, and I am sure well before that, that criminal conduct is brought to the attention of police. That is an orthodox matter and you expect it to be complied with in all cases.

The truth is that one of the reasons we have put in place this review today is that the principal in question took the view that it was best to encourage the parents in question to make the report to the police. That, in fact, happened, so on the very day of the assault, the police were notified and, in course, the young man in question, who was the assailant, was charged. So that is the factual material here. The concern that has been raised about not reporting to police did not actually have an effect in this particular case, because the relevant parents did, in fact, make a report to the police, and the assailant in question was charged.

What arises out of this is that there is a concern amongst certain school principals that, on occasions when matters have been reported, there has been a response to the effect that, unless we have parents backing up these issues, it is very difficult for us to do anything with the material that is presented, and so that has been a source of discouragement, it is said, by some principals. I accept that it is not a sufficient answer to the question and that, in all circumstances, especially of serious assaults, they should be immediately reported to the police.

There is another dimension to this matter, and that is that, if every single push in the schoolyard was reported to police, we would create an absurd situation. I have had the opportunity to consult with the Assistant Commissioner of Police and have a discussion about this question, and there is a view that an appropriate protocol should be put in place.

In respect of this particular region of the education department, I have seen the policy concerning reporting to police, and it is absolutely crystal clear. It is a lock-step process and that is why, in fact, we are conducting the independent review into this matter. An internal review is underway, as you would expect, but I believe that, given the fact that we have a very clear policy, and it appears on the face of it not to have been complied with in this case, it was important to have an independent review to get to the bottom of that question of the relationship between the education department and the police, and some of these suggestions about the reasons why principals might be reluctant to go directly to the police, rather than through the conduit of parents.

There are some significant issues there that I think do need to be grappled with, and that is why we are having the independent review, and I think Mr Cossey is well placed to do it. He has the respect of both the police and also of the teaching profession, having worked in both the justice and education systems.