Bills

Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 28 November 2024.)

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (16:24): I rise today and indicate that I am the lead speaker for the opposition in regard to this bill, the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill 2024. In doing so I also note the opposition's support of the bill before us today and acknowledge that there has been an indication to the opposition that there will be a range of amendments moved by the government in regard to the bill as introduced to make some changes that have already been foreshadowed and signposted to the opposition. Largely, I do not think there are any issues in regard to those particular amendments, but we will work through those through the regular process of committee as we endeavour to move through progress on the bill.

The bill before us is seeking to make changes to the interpretation of the existing act around a range of issues to update those interpretations to ensure that they are better contextualised in the setting of education and the delivery of education services to our young people today. It is unfortunate in many respects that the parliament needs to be discussing and debating this issue. I think everybody understands that for many children who are in an educational setting their primary and strongest advocates are often their parents or their caregiver or the person who has responsibility for them.

Unfortunately, from time to time, there are instances where that strong advocacy can step over a line. There have been instances—and the minister obviously has significantly more information available to him in regard to those instances—reported through the Department for Education that were included in the minister's speech and information that is provided publicly that demonstrate significant increases in behaviour that nobody in this place can condone by any stretch of the imagination.

As I said, the bill seeks to update the interpretations that are relevant to better contextualising in a modern context the education setting and understanding many of the activities that are undertaken in this regard, issues of offensive and threatening behaviour and behaviour that continues over a period of time. We are now in a world where online chat groups, forums and Facebook groups are where these issues can often be perpetrated. The bill today seeks to contextualise those issues into the understanding.

It also seeks to ensure that behaviour of that nature that is undertaken in settings outside the school itself but still part of the child's educational setting are captured by the regime. For students who are going away on school camps and undertaking learning outside the standard learning environment on campus, it is clear that updates to this act should ensure that all those education settings are captured by the bill before us today.

To go back to why we are here: there were, frankly, harrowing and unacceptable examples provided by the minister in his speech, which were communicated more broadly publicly, in regard to the interactions between parents, caregivers and teachers. While there are existing powers under the act to provide barring notices and to respond in other ways, the real burning fire as to why this bill is before us today is outlined by the significant increases that have been seen in both those two areas.

The minister noted the 200 per cent increase in the number of barring notices that have been issued in public schools alone, and that in itself is significant, but also a 250 per cent increase in other operational responses, which may take the form of many things but may be warning letters or reminders about expectations of respectful behaviour. Quite frankly, I agree with the minister that that is an alarming rise. I note that in the minister's second reading speech he made clear that this issue is one that has arisen since the change in government. It was brought to his attention in 2023 by the Australian Education Union South Australian branch and, I am sure, many teachers in his travels as the education minister getting out and about through schools in South Australia.

It is important that we address this for a range of reasons. I think it is important to ensure that all parents understand the expectation that is on them as truly the supporters and advocates of their children when it comes to their children's schooling journey. I do not think anyone in this chamber, by any stretch, wants to diminish that role, but what this amendment bill is seeking to do is make it very clear where that line stands and that it is unacceptable on any occasion to talk about physical violence towards a teacher.

To see the stories that have been alluded to again, where teachers have effectively been stalked, harassed, pursued and yelled at from beyond the grounds or inside—it is clear that that is unacceptable in any setting, no matter how passionate somebody is, but particularly in the context that a school is a workplace for those teachers who go there each and every day.

It has been noted that the work that was done by the former education minister, the member for Morialta, and acknowledged by the minister again in his speech to this place on this bill as well, about the moves that the public sector is trying to achieve in terms of retaining workforce permanency was part of that. But clearly, if somebody is not able to come to their workplace without fear of this sort of behaviour occurring, that is something that needs to be addressed.

One of the other precursors for these changes was laid out in the Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey that was conducted in March last year, which found that the behaviour of some parents and caregivers was a major contributor to the stresses faced by school leaders, with principal responses suggesting parents were the top source of issues.

Let us reflect on that. The primary issue taking up the time of principals within our schools at the moment is not necessarily a focus on children's wellbeing, not necessarily a focus on children's learning and not necessarily a focus on where improvements can be made within the school, but one of the primary stressors and things that take up the time of our leaders within our schools at the moment is the behaviour of parents.

Clearly, we support this bill and support the changes that are being proposed within the bill. The significant increasing of penalties across the board in the interventions available and also the changes within barring notices, of course, are helpful in that, but it is clear that there is a broader culture piece of respect that we need to ensure that every parent understands.

I have been lucky enough in my interactions with our local public school that I have seen nothing but respectful discourse. In fact, one of the things that I have been pleasantly surprised by—and in fact inspired by, in some ways—is the fact that the school leader is seen at least once a week out on the school crossing point on the entry into school: there greeting children and greeting parents as they drop their children off at school. I think that sends a pretty important message that the leadership of the school is available to each and every parent or student, and it also ensures that there is a clear and open line of communication should ever it need to happen. I really respect the way that that particular school leader has gone about making himself available.

As I have said, there is no reason that, across whichever parts of the state, any of our teachers or our principals should be subjected to the sorts of things that have been outlined in the contribution by the minister. The steps that have been proposed in this bill to increase penalties and to change provisions around the issuing of barring orders are reasonable. I look forward to the committee stage of the bill, where we will look in further detail at the amendments that have been proposed by the government to this point and also ask just a couple of questions more broadly around some of the clauses that have been proposed. With those words, I commend the bill.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (16:36): I, too, rise in support of the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill 2024. I do so for good reason. Teachers, leaders and other school staff, not to mention students, deserve to feel safe at work and in their places of learning. All schools and preschools can and should be environments in which everyone who walks through the door feels appropriately supported. Sadly, that right has been undermined by a 200 per cent increase in barring notices issued by government schools and an increase of more than 250 per cent in other formal responses, including warning letters and respectful behaviour reminders.

The feedback received by this government is loud and clear. A major contributor to teacher and school leader stress is the unacceptable behaviour of some parents. In fact, reports by principals threatened with violence tell us that two-thirds of their intimidators are parents or caregivers. It is an uncomfortable truth, it is plainly unacceptable and it is why we are taking action.

The bill we debate today seeks to address these problems by strengthening the Education and Children's Services Act 2019, specifically part 8. Today, after significant consultation with those who the bill protects, the state government proposes that we expand the types of harmful behaviour captured by the act, including vexatious communications with or about a staff member, offensive behaviour directed at students involved in an education activity away from their school, and offensive behaviour outside a school's boundary, such as yelling abuse from outside the school gate.

It will increase the penalties for all offences under part 8 from $2,500 to $7,500 and add a 25-metre protected area around a school where any notice applies to directly address that point of abuse being hurled from outside a school's boundary, in particular that with an intention to intimidate staff, students or other parents. Having recently spoken with school principals in my electorate of Davenport, I know that these proposed changes, if agreed to, will be warmly received. My confidence in that statement sadly stems from the experiences of principals and teachers in my community.

I was told a story of how several years ago a primary school student attempted to take their own life inside a classroom. The incident resulted in the school entering lockdown and unfortunately the trauma did not end there. As you would expect, learning of an incident like this, whether you are a school staff member, another student, or the child's family, would be exceptionally difficult, and until you find yourself in such a situation—and I sincerely hope nobody does—it's hard to know how you would react. But that does not give anyone the right to walk into a school and direct their frustrations at school staff. School staff are employed to help our children grow and develop, not render advanced mental health treatment.

Following the incident the student's caregiver became aggressive with staff, resulting in police attendance. The caregiver then turned down offers of external mental health support for their child and generally refused to cooperate—which, in itself, is cause for serious concern. Teachers have enough on their plates and managing legitimate student welfare concerns while caregivers push back on offers of assistance, all the while hurling abuse, is not in the job description. Understandably, all of this culminated in what the principal describes as the most challenging day of their career.

But it is not the only example of why these strengthened laws are required. I have also received reports of an incident in which a parent, sadly one involved in a family dispute, laid hands on a teacher, an act which can only be described as physical assault. No matter the sensitivities, there is no event in which a parent's or caregiver's personal circumstances can be used as an excuse for assaults on school staff or acts of intimidation, and it is disappointing that this is a matter that we need to address so specifically.

In the wake of this additional incident, staff were said to be scared leaving school each day not knowing if and when an incident like this might occur again and if they themselves could be targeted. As a matter of fact, the words used by one principal were, 'Every teacher could share a story.' Disappointingly, in some instances intimidation tactics appear to extend beyond the school grounds as well.

I am sure it comes as no surprise to learn there are teachers and school staff across the state that have received threatening emails from parents and caregivers. I remember this particular principal describing many of those emails as always coming in capital letters and bold. These are threats directed at good people and those doing an important job, which is to ensure our children receive the education they need to succeed in life. Put simply, teachers cannot give 100 per cent to the job if they are working in fear. So now we are left to draw a clear line in the sand.

A matter on which I have spoken previously, and an initiative that I know is already making a real difference, is the mobile phone ban introduced by this government earlier in the term. The Department for Education data shows that there was a 63 per cent decline in critical incidents involving social media in terms 1 and 2 of 2024, compared to the same period the year before the ban was in place. This is a significant step in the right direction.

Another concern for South Australian teachers is an unrealistic expectation for schools to resolve bullying that occurs over social media at home, knowing that students simply cannot access these platforms at school anymore. Again, South Australia was on the front foot here with world-leading reforms to restrict social media access for children having been adopted by the federal government last year.

While I have the opportunity I would like to thank our federal colleagues for moving so quickly to enact our proposal. Each of these policies reflects this government's commitment to a workforce that is among the state's hardest working, and it is fair to suggest among the state's most passionate too. It is a workforce that is so deeply committed to the job and to their students and in turn it is our responsibility to ensure that those school employees feel safe at work and as safe as they possibly can.

The bill we seek to speak to today, as well as those I have just referenced, are born from a want to improve outcomes for the education sector, and that is an improvement in student wellbeing as well as improvement for staff wellbeing. As a sizeable majority of parents and caregivers do the right thing by their children and their school communities I am thankful for the fact that this legislation will have little to no impact on their school engagements. However, for the few that do require stronger deterrents and who do need their behaviours regulated, know you are on notice. To the teachers who called for more, I trust this bill brings about the change that you have been seeking. Thank you again for your detailed contributions during consultation, your dedication to your students and your want to protect your colleagues in the workplace. We are a stronger state for all that you do, and with that I commend this bill to the house.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (16:44): I rise to speak on the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill 2024 introduced in this place by the Minister for Education, Training and Skills. As a former teacher, I can say how privileged I felt on completing my studies, being entrusted with the most precious thing in the lives of hundreds of parents I met over the years, namely, their children, who were to become my students—four years of tertiary study preparing you for the classroom environment, preparing you to be the best teacher you could be, knowing that each child was special and brought with them their own story, their own journey.

A teacher's job does not finish at the end of the school day. There is much preparation that goes into lessons and responding to the needs of each child in your classroom. Just as no child is the same, no day is the same, and you must be prepared to respond to the learning needs and evolving situations as they arise. Our educators, principals, teachers and support staff understand that learning environments from preschool through to primary and high school are important, and they make a significant contribution to student outcomes today and into the future. That is why I stand to add my voice here today in support of this bill, a bill that makes some significant changes to the act, a bill that will provide our school leaders and the Minister for Education the authority to respond to abusive behaviour from parents and family members or carers towards staff in our schools.

In doing so, it will fulfil our government's commitment to improve protections for staff and students in our schools and preschools made during recent enterprise bargaining negotiations. We have listened to our school leaders, to our teachers and other staff along with their representatives about cases of threatened violence relating to some parents and caregivers. We have heard that it has increased over the years, and that it is a major factor contributing to stressed educators and the reason why some who have been teaching for a relatively short period of time, and some for many years, are, with a heavy heart, making the decision to leave the profession.

This is happening around Australia. We do not want this to be the case for South Australia. Given that many would have completed four or more years of study, along the way accumulating a HECS debt, it is a decision that is not made lightly. It is a loss to the individual, their family and our school communities. With a 200 per cent increase in the number of barring notices issued by government schools and more than 250 per cent in other responses, including formal warning letters and reminders about respectful behaviour, the passing of this bill is so important.

It is not just our government schools; it is important to our independent and Catholic schools as well. The minister has assured us that these concerns are being raised in meetings with interstate counterparts and the federal Minister for Education. They are not isolated to South Australia. The bill before us will build on the types of harmful behaviour already captured by the act. This includes, for example: vexatious communications with or about a member of staff; offensive behaviour targeted at students when involved in education activity away from the premises of the relevant school, preschool or service; and offensive behaviour that occurs just outside the boundary of the premises such as yelling abuse from outside the school gate.

It will increase the penalties for all offences under part 8 of the act from $2,500 to $7,500, and it will add a 25-metre area around a school where any notice applies. This is to curb behaviour where banned parents stand on the edge of school grounds in an attempt to interact with or intimidate staff, other parents and students. More specifically, the bill allows for a barring notice to be issued in respect of a school, preschool, or education and care service where the designated person reasonably believes that it is necessary.

Considerable consultation on the bill revealed stakeholders strongly support the changes. In my electorate of Torrens, I have had a number of conversations with stakeholders, with parents, with grandparents and with teachers. Some stakeholders suggested areas where the bill could be strengthened and that feedback was considered in the bill before us today. Others provided feedback on operational and policy considerations or concerns to support the implementation of the changes in a way that is inclusive and promotes the best interests of children.

Importantly, for clarity, the bill as with the current provisions in part 8, will not prevent parents, caregivers and other community members from raising reasonable complaints or advocating for their children's needs. Respectful behaviour in a timely manner and appropriate setting is all that is sought.

Measures that form part of this bill aim to promote positive interaction with the staff of schools, preschools and other services by improving safeguards against the worst kind of bad behaviour. Further, contained within is also a thorough review process available to any person who receives a notice, whereby a minister of the day can overturn or amend a notice.

There is no place in our schools, preschools or education and care services for violent, abusive or threatening behaviour. Our teachers, our educators, our support staff and principals and our students deserve an environment where they can feel safe and free from harassment and harm. For our children and students to thrive, we need to ensure our schools, preschools and education and care services can focus on providing the best education and care possible.

The bill demonstrates a government that is listening, acknowledging the issue and addressing the problem. We value our educators, who put their students front and centre. In addition, we have taken steps to secure our teaching workforce, implementing our election commitment to convert some temporary staff to permanent positions as a priority, along with our decision to reinstate the regional zone incentive, with extra money paid to staff who choose to move to regional, rural and remote schools in our state. Of course, we also have the autism teachers in our primary schools, who are playing a significant role supporting classroom teachers. Our government understands our responsibility to address the issues confronting our teachers today and also, importantly, secure future generations of teachers. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr DIGHTON (Black) (16:51): I rise to support this legislation. Like the member for Torrens, I am a former teacher and also a school leader. I can speak from firsthand experience about why this legislative reform is needed. Before I do, I want to start by talking a little about why positive partnerships between schools and families are so important. Absolutely, in my experience student achievement, student development, student wellbeing occurs when there is a really positive and constructive relationship between parents, families and the school.

I have already spoken a bit in the house about the importance of belonging and community. When families work in partnership, when there is that positive relationship between a school, between teachers, it helps to create a sense of belonging. Later, I will talk a bit about some examples of incidents that have not assisted to create a sense of belonging.

As the head of campus at Sacred Heart College, the first thing I would say to families when I met them for the first time was to encourage them to really feel like it was a partnership, that they were part of the journey, a really critical part, in the development of their children in their learning. Unfortunately, with the busyness of our world and our society, there are some parents who struggle. Having just started the journey with my son, who has just started at school, I can attest to that busyness of life and then coming home to help him with his letters, which I probably have to do tonight at some stage, so I can understand that.

But it is critical that if a parent engages with their children about their learning, that has an impact on their achievement. In fact, there are a number of studies which point to that very thing, that the improvement and the academic achievement can be linked to the way parents engage in learning. Even the simple thing, instead of saying, 'How was your day?' and changing that to, 'What did you learn?' is a powerful way of ensuring that you are engaging with the child in learning.

I would say, and I want to be really clear, that my experience as a school leader for the past eight years, and a teacher for 16 years, is that absolutely overwhelmingly the families and the parents that I have engaged with have been incredibly positive, and I think that would be the experience throughout many of our schools, in that the vast majority of our families are very positive and I think it is important to recognise that.

There is a particular area—again, I have raised this but I want to raise it again because I think it is relevant to this idea of working in partnerships: one of the changes that we have seen in our schools over the past—certainly in my time as a teacher—is the increase in students with a disability or students who have an educational adjustment due to their learning disabilities and difficulties. According to the latest report by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), 25.7 per cent of school students last year received an educational adjustment due to disability. That is up from 18 per cent in 2015.

Supporting families and supporting students with a disability is a great example of the critical need to work in partnership with our families, and for schools to work in partnership with families. For students with disabilities, the educational adjustment includes a personalised plan for learning or an independent education plan, depending on the different terminology in it, and this is critical to supporting a student in their learning, and making sure that the teacher has a full awareness of the recommendations from external providers about what will best support students with their learning. What I found and what is critical is that there are regular reviews about that. Again, that is the importance of working in partnership, that ability for parents to come in, talk to teachers, review plans, and make sure that those plans are suitable.

If passed, this bill will fulfil the government's commitment to improve protections for staff and students in schools. I think that is really important, and I know that this is a bill that will cover all sectors including independent and Catholic as well as public schools, because there has been wide consultation. The bill will provide a framework for all schools, both for the department but also for independent and Catholic schools to use. Whilst many schools would have good processes and policies in place already that outline, for example, the types of communication that can occur between families and perhaps response times, the opportunities for engagement for people to meet with teachers and school leaders, this will provide some additional assistance.

There has been an increase in the number of barring notices issued in government schools and more than a 250 per cent increase in other responses such as formal warning letters and reminders about expectations of respectful behaviour. Those are examples. Unfortunately in my time, I have also had to write letters regarding expectations, providing parents with reminders of respectful behaviour. The behaviour of some parents and caregivers is a major—

The Hon. K.A. Hildyard interjecting:

Mr DIGHTON: No, it was not to the member for Reynell. I am happy to put on the record that the member for Reynell's child was excellent, and she was an exemplary parent in the community where I was lucky enough to teach.

The Hon. K.A. Hildyard interjecting:

Mr DIGHTON: Yes, thank you. The behaviour of some parents is a regular contributor to stress. I will go into it in a bit more detail, but certainly I experienced behaviour from parents that absolutely contributed to my stress, both through the day and into the night unfortunately. I saw the impact absolutely on the teachers I led and supported in terms of their emotional response after receiving what could only be described as intended harmful emails directed at them. I can assure the house that it can have a significant impact on teachers, a significant impact on their ability to perform their core role, which is the teaching of our students.

I note also in particular that two-thirds of reports by principals and school leaders who were threatened with violence related to parents and caregivers. That has not been my experience, but I am certainly aware of the surveys in South Australia and around Australia about the impact on principals. I am aware that in some jurisdictions there are difficulties in appointing principals and leaders to roles because of the stress of the role, and some of that is caused by threats and those types of things that are directed towards them.

In speaking with the minister and listening to other speeches in here of the significant amount of feedback and consultation that occurred with the various stakeholders, schools and representative unions, including the Australian Education Union and the Independent Education Union and others, I am aware of this particular issue, and the lived experience that I have seen from my teachers would be clear about those impacts.

The bill will—and I think this is particularly important—expand the types of harmful behaviour captured by the act. These include vexatious communications with or about a member of staff; offensive behaviour targeted at students when involved in an educational activity away from the premises of the relevant school; offensive behaviour that occurs just outside the boundary, such as yelling abuse; increased penalties; and a 25-metre area around the school where the notice applies.

I want to pick up on a couple of those particular changes. Vexatious communication can be in the form of emails. Unfortunately, it is also in the form of social media now, where it is commonplace for that to occur. It is certainly an area where I have seen an increase in that particular type of behaviour. I have, unfortunately, also witnessed behaviour from parents and caregivers towards other students outside of the school. Again, it is really disappointing that that behaviour would occur. The impact on the particular students that I saw was really detrimental. If we think about learning, it is difficult enough without having to put up with that sort of threatening and inappropriate behaviour.

My experiences were that I would receive emails from families which were intended to cause distress. I found that absolutely challenging. As someone who has just gone through a really quite difficult by-election, I feel like I am pretty tough, but it certainly had an impact on me, and from what I have seen it has a significant impact on teachers, both creating a significant emotional response and then also meaning they have to take time away from school to manage the distress caused by that aggressive behaviour from parents towards them.

I note the significant consultation. I do want to reiterate that this is absolutely about making sure that there are provisions that support positive interactions. While there are elements that talk about the increase in penalties and that sort of stuff, it might be seen as if the focus is on the stick, but absolutely this is about making sure that there is really clear understanding about ensuring that parents understand the responsibility and the benefits of having positive relationships with schools and with teachers.

There is absolutely no place in any workplace for this sort of behaviour to occur, particularly in schools, where teachers are, in my experience, absolutely dedicating themselves and going out of their way because they are absolutely passionate about children and absolutely passionate about supporting learning. They should not have to put up with behaviour that is vexatious or aggressive in any way.

We must be committed to raising the profession in the eyes of the public. We must raise the profession so that we attract more and more teachers to the profession and encourage more and more people to choose it as a great vocation. A legislative reform like this will assist that to happen. It will make it really clear, and be a clear reminder, to our families, to our parents and to our public that teachers absolutely need to be respected in their role as teachers.

I have talked a lot about teachers, but I would also like to recognise that, in my experience, teachers would not be able to do their work without the absolute support of educational support workers and admin staff. I know of particular situations where it has been the educational support officers, student support officers or admin staff who have borne the brunt of inappropriate and aggressive behaviour. I want to encapsulate the people who work in schools—teachers, educators and support staff—as examples of people who absolutely need to be supported. These legislative changes will do that. I commend the bill to the house.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (17:06): I rise to support the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill 2024 because whether it is violence or abuse in the home, on the sports field or in our schools it is never acceptable. It is not acceptable for our teachers, principals, school services officers, admin staff or preschool educators to feel unsafe at work due to the actions of parents and caregivers.

This bill, if passed, will fulfil the government's commitment to improve protections for staff and students at schools and preschools, made during the recent enterprise bargaining negotiations. Schools and preschools need to be safe and supportive environments which, like all other work environments, deserve to be free from violence, threats or abuse, whether physical, verbal or psychological.

Shockingly, there has been a 200 per cent increase in the number of barring notices issued by government schools and a more than 250 per cent increase in other responses, such as formal warning letters and reminders about expectations of respectful behaviour. This can no longer be tolerated. The behaviour of some parents and caregivers is a major contributor to the stresses faced by teachers and school leaders. Two-thirds of reports by principals who were threatened with violence are related to threats directly from parents and caregivers.

It is clear that decisive action needs to be taken to protect the educators, students and volunteers in our schools, as feedback from leaders, teachers, other staff and their representatives has been clear for some time now: this issue is getting worse and so we are taking action.

This bill seeks to address these problems by building on and improving the protections in part 8 of the Education and Children's Services Act 2019. We need to ensure that deterrents are in place to ensure parents and caregivers think twice before displaying any violence, threats or abuse in our schools and preschools. The bill does this by expanding the types of harmful behaviour captured by the act. This will include, for example, vexatious communications with or about a member of staff, such as approaching, communicating with or otherwise contacting the person, whether electronically or otherwise, or publishing material about the person, whether electronically or otherwise. As we know, this so often occurs on social media platforms, where it can spiral out of control and have terrible impacts on the people being targeted.

It also covers offensive behaviour targeted at students when involved in an educational activity away from the premises of the school. This might be at a camp, at a sports or swimming carnival, at swimming lessons, excursions or school functions, or offensive behaviour that occurs just outside the boundary of the premises, such as yelling abuse from outside the school gate. No matter where this violence, threat or abuse occurs, it is not acceptable. In fact, recently in my electorate, a school staff member was harassed by a member of the community at the local hardware store.

This bill will also increase the penalties for all offences under part 8 from $2,500 to $7,500 and add a 25-metre area around a school where any notice applies. This is to curb behaviour where banned parents stand on the edge of school grounds in an attempt to interact with or intimidate staff, parents or students.

I understand that feedback on the bill revealed stakeholders strongly support these changes, and I am not surprised given these changes are in fact common sense. I further believe there was some feedback related to operational and policy considerations or concerns to support the implementation of the changes in a way that is inclusive and promotes the best interests of children. This is what we always like to hear from our educators.

As parents, we know there are times when it is legitimate to raise concerns regarding our children's education. I must say I am fairly pleased to be finished with the educational journey of my two children but, of course, whilst they were at school I did want them to receive the best education possible. Therefore, the measures in this bill, as with the current provisions in part 8, will not prevent parents, caregivers and other community members from raising reasonable complaints or advocating for their child's needs. Rather, they seek to promote positive interactions with the staff of schools, preschools and other services by improving safeguards against the worst kinds of misbehaviour.

Much better outcomes are achieved when calm and constructive conversations are held to improve children's educational outcomes. There is no place in our schools, preschools or other education and care services for violent, abusive or threatening behaviour. In fact, there is no place anywhere for this, and that is why our government is taking action. Our teachers deserve a workplace in which they feel safe and free from harassment and harm. Every worker deserves to feel safe and free from harassment and harm. They deserve to return home safely, not mentally stressed or physically injured due to the behaviour of others.

For our children and students to thrive, we need to ensure our schools, preschools and education and care services can focus on providing the best education and care possible. This, unfortunately, cannot occur if they are concerned about attending work or cannot live safely in their personal life due to the behaviour of a few parents and caregivers.

I would like to thank every teacher, principal, school services officer, preschool educator and volunteer in our schools for their service to all our children. It might be a minority of parents and caregivers, but one incident is too many. I commend this important bill to the house.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (17:13): I would like to make a few comments in support of the bill. As I just indicated, I support the bill. I also understand the need and the purpose of the bill. A number of previous speakers have elaborated on that, so I do not wish to repeat all those provisions.

I would like to make some observations, though. The observation that I would like to make is really an extension of the insightful comments made by the member for Black. It goes without saying the relationship between the school, the parent and the child underpins the success or otherwise of the child's wellbeing, growth and education. What we need to do is ensure that there is a positive relationship between the school—whether it is the principal, the teachers or whoever represents the school—the parents or the caregivers of the child and the child themselves.

When that relationship is not a positive one, even though, if you like, the conflict may be between the parents or the caregivers and the school, it is the child's wellbeing that actually suffers the most. I am sure as MPs we have all had parents come to us when the relationship between the school and the caregivers or parents has broken down in some ways or there has been some barring order given. My observation or concern is, rather than just having barring notices and doing this sort of activity—which is important; in the end, it is important to protect teachers and schools, etc., and I am not disputing that. How do you rebuild the relationship, though?

It is one thing to set expectations through laws, policies and procedures, etc., which are part of that foundation. How do you actually rebuild the relationship to make sure that this does not continue? I have seen some of these relationships spiral out of control to the extent that I am not sure even a barring order is sufficient, and in fact sometimes I think the police are involved as well, and that helps nobody.

So just a word of caution is to make sure that we, as a government, as a society, put mechanisms in place and make resources available to make sure that we fully understand what are the drivers to the behaviours that lead to the break-up or the breakdown of the relationship between the school and the parents or caregivers. If we do not get that right, as I said, it is often the children who suffer the most. I have seen children withdrawn from schools where the relationship between the parents or caregivers and teachers or the school have broken down. I have seen children withdrawn from school and not being in some school setting. That is not a good outcome.

It will always be the case that there will be parents and caregivers at the margin where you can do as much as you try and it just will not work, and I accept that. What we need to ensure though is that, apart from those few on the margin, when parents do for some reason act inappropriately, we get a better understanding of what is driving that behaviour to see if we can actually intervene in different ways to address that behaviour. We do want them to behave properly and appropriately towards teachers and principals. I think it is appropriate.

Nobody should be subjected to abuse. I am sure MPs here do not like it when their staff are abused by people coming into their offices. I do not like that, so clearly I do not like any teacher, principal or anybody in a school setting getting abused either. It is not appropriate. But sometimes when we make the time and resources available to understand what drives that behaviour, we actually do get a better outcome, and ultimately the beneficiary of that better outcome is the child themselves.

What we do not want is parents and caregivers behaving inappropriately, the child is withdrawn, and then we have the next generation of people who perhaps behave in the same way. That is the worst outcome. So while I acknowledge the need for this legislation and I support it, I think sometimes we need to go beyond the law to resolve a problem. It needs perhaps some resources and other things to actually be addressed, and that would be my observation and caution, while I support these new changes.

Ms CLANCY (Elder) (17:18): I rise today in support of the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill 2024. In the years since COVID, Australia has seen a countrywide teacher shortage. Fortunately, here in South Australia, we have implemented strategies to recruit and retain teachers across both metropolitan and regional areas.

Our state government has focused on competitive remuneration packages, enhanced support within classrooms and support for early career teachers through mentorship programs. However, research continues to indicate that most teachers are not sure if they will remain in their profession until retirement. The proportion of teachers planning to leave the profession before retirement has continued to grow from under a quarter in 2020 to more than a third now.

There are many different reasons teachers choose to leave the profession, and the reasons tend to not be very surprising. Teachers report that their jobs are becoming increasingly more demanding as the range and diversity of tasks expected of teachers continues to contribute to unsustainable workloads. As the sister of a teacher—shout-out to Mr Clancy—I understand teaching is emotionally demanding work and it is work that takes place before, between and after the school bell rings. Teachers must constantly consider the emotional needs of their students and manage behavioural challenges within their classrooms while continuing to teach.

One way we have been able to support teachers is through our mobile phone ban in public secondary schools that came into place in 2023, which has shown significant improvement in student behaviour and interactions. On the anniversary of the ban's introduction, Department for Education data showed that there had been a 63 per cent decline in critical incidents involving social media in the first two terms of last year compared with the same period in 2023 before the ban was in place. These incidents included cyberbullying, circulation of explicit materials, derogatory content being posted online and other concerning online behaviour.

The data also showed a decline in matters reported to the department centred on students not complying with the mobile phone policy or overall behaviour involving phones, along with a reduction in the incidence of violence, particularly involving kicking or punching. Changes like this benefit not just the students but school staff too. In the wake of the phone ban coming into place, principals reported immediate changes in student behaviour, with many wanting to engage in extracurricular activities or clubs in break times. Happier students take a little bit of pressure off our incredibly hardworking teachers.

Understanding the extent of teachers' work—including time spent working on weekends, doing administrative tasks, and the ever-increasing correspondence with students and families via emails and apps like Seesaw—is crucial to improving the work-life balance of South Australian teachers.

As we have all witnessed recently in the news, it is not just the behaviour of students that teachers are now having to worry about. It is incredibly disappointing that there has been a 200 per cent increase in the number of barring notices issued by government schools in South Australia, while other responses such as formal warning letters have increased by 250 per cent. Data shows approximately one-third of incidents involving the issue of a barring notice involved people who had already been warned about their behaviour.

The latest Australian Principal Occupational Health Safety and Wellbeing report found that the behaviour of some parents and caregivers is a major contributor to the stresses faced by school leaders. Parents and carers were reported by principals to be involved in bullying, cyberbullying, gossip, slander and sexual harassment. Shockingly, of those principals who reported being threatened with violence, two-thirds experienced these threats from parents and caregivers. Teachers report that these types of behaviours from parents are impacting their physical and psychological safety at work, their wellbeing and their capacity to carry out their work effectively: to teach our kids. I hear it over and over again from friends who are teachers: it is getting harder, and in large part that is more often than not because of the behaviour of the parents, not the students.

I suspect that when you picture yourself teaching, you see yourself at the front of a classroom, enthusiastically sharing knowledge and encouraging students. You do not see yourself sitting at home at night on your phone fielding abusive emails after 9 o'clock at night. Teachers are now threatened and harassed not only in their physical workplace but via email and on social media and that can happen at any time, day or night. Feedback received from leaders, teachers and support staff has included being audio or videorecorded without consent and being subjected to gossip and inappropriate online commentary.

It is clear these issues are only getting worse and action is required. The changes proposed by this bill will empower site leaders to respond to a broader range of behaviours that compromise the safety of teachers and students within school grounds.

In relation to barring notices, site leaders will now be able to issue them in a broader range of circumstances, such as if they believe a person poses a risk to the physical, emotional, psychological or wellbeing of any person on site or related premises being used by a school. This change is necessary to protect the school community at external events, such as sports days or off-campus excursions from the person issued with a barring notice.

A site leader will also be able to issue a barring notice to a person engaging in vexatious communication with staff. This is behaviour including but not limited to: an unreasonably high frequency of communication; repeatedly and deliberately ignoring reasonable requests; unreasonably diverting school resources; communications intended to cause distress or harassment; or causing a source of stress for staff members.

Expanding barring notices for vexatious communication is necessary to address inappropriate and derogatory material being published about staff online and on social media platforms. Under the current act, a police officer, teacher or school leader can direct a person to leave school premises. Under our changes, the circumstances for a direction to leave will line up with the circumstances a person can be issued with a barring notice for. On the ground, this will mean a police officer, teacher or school leader will have the authority to direct a person to leave premises being used by a school, such as a pool, sports centre or the Museum. This will enable teachers to safely conduct their students at a range of educational premises without the threat of a barred person interrupting their work.

Currently, a person who has been directed to leave is not permitted to return for 48 hours. This bill will change the time period to two business days or until the school has finished using the related premises. A person directed to leave on a Friday would previously have been able to return on the Monday morning, not giving staff the time to consider or put in place further action. Two business days will allow staff to prepare their next steps within working hours and not add to their existing after-hours workload.

It is important to note that while the circumstances under which a barring notice or direction to leave can be issued have been broadened, the threshold for using this response does remain high and therefore are relatively rare in our schools.

It is incredibly unfortunate that we have to make these provisions within the act to protect teachers and students. Schools should already be safe places and teachers should be respected, appreciated and celebrated for the incredible work they do for our children and young people.

We cannot allow teachers to continue to be harassed while doing their jobs while on school grounds or out in the community. The Malinauskas Labor government will continue to do everything we can to ease the burden on South Australian school teachers; protect them and their wellbeing and keep them in our classrooms. I commend this bill to the house.

The Hon. B.I. BOYER (Wright—Minister for Education, Training and Skills) (17:27): I appreciate the opportunity to add a few comments to my second reading speech and to acknowledge those who have spoken in support of this bill today. First of all I thank the member for Colton and I thank the opposition for indicating their support for these measures. It is always good to hear that we can maintain a bipartisan position on things like keeping our teachers and SSOs and principals safe, not only due to issues around school safety but also issues around how we can maintain our teaching workforce and how we can encourage more young people to put their hand up and be teachers. These are going to be issues that will stay with us for many years.

I also acknowledge the members for Elder, Black, Gibson, Davenport, Torrens and Light for their contributions as well. I know being a member of parliament, particularly in the state parliament, is one of those occupations where you do have a lot to do with schools. You do build up a relationship with teachers and with principals, particularly as you seek to support them in the important work that they do. I might add that there are a lot of people in this chamber and this parliament at the moment who have school-age children, whether it is primary or secondary school, so we see these issues up close. In the case of the member for Elder and others, some have direct family members, or in the case of the newly minted member for Black, who was a teacher himself, they understand what this kind of abusive behaviour towards existing staff can do.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind—and I am sure the former ministers for education, the members for Morialta and Port Adelaide, would agree—it has been a big contributing factor, particularly post-COVID, for a lot of early retirements. People are deciding that, if they are faced with that kind of abusive behaviour from a parent and are nearing the end of their career, they simply do not want to put up with it anymore. I think it sends a very negative message to those who might be contemplating being a teacher in the future, so it is important that this parliament takes all the steps available to it to protect our teachers wherever we can. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

At 17:30 the house adjourned until Thursday 20 February 2025 at 11:00.