HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2024-11-28 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

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

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. B.I. BOYER (Wright—Minister for Education, Training and Skills) (15:45): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Education and Children's Services Act 2019. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. B.I. BOYER (Wright—Minister for Education, Training and Skills) (15:46): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

It is my pleasure to speak on this really important piece of legislation that I have just introduced today, which I hope will be something that many if not all members of this place and the other place are supportive and aware of, and that is the treatment of our teachers, school staff, principals, and I mean in preschools, primary schools and high schools, not just in the public system but across all sectors of our education system in South Australia—Catholic, independent and public—and that is the treatment of those staff primarily by parents.

Today I joined the Premier and Jayne Heath, who is the Chief Executive of the South Australian Secondary Principals' Association, better known as SASPA, and Penny Sweeney, who is the principal of Swallowcliffe primary school, which is out in the northern suburbs in Davoren Park. We spoke about the quite substantial bit of work that had been done over a number of months now to get us to the point where we find ourselves today where we can introduce this bill, which will make some very, very significant changes to the act, which grants powers to our school leaders and to me, as the Minister for Education, in terms of how we respond to abusive behaviour from parents, or perhaps it might be grandparents or carers, towards our school staff.

I am afraid that I must start my contribution today by talking about what has brought us to this point, and that is an enormous increase in the number of cases of bad behaviour exhibited by parents towards school staff in South Australia over the past five years. In fact, we have seen a 200 per cent increase in the number of barring notices issued by public schools alone and a more than 250 per cent increase in other operational responses, which might be formal warning letters and reminders about expectations of respectful behaviour. These are alarming figures. I know everyone in this place would agree.

It is not something that is happening in isolation in South Australia. In all the meetings and conversations I have had with my interstate and territory colleagues and the federal Minister for Education, Mr Jason Clare, we have had the same message from those jurisdictions about the same kinds of increases in the same bad behaviour from adults towards preschool, primary school and high school staff.

My message to those people who have been responsible for that abusive behaviour is: enough is enough. We are not going to sit idly on our hands in this government and do nothing, especially at a time when it is harder to retain education staff and attract new people to the profession of teaching than it has perhaps ever been before.

I say that against a backdrop of unprecedented teacher vacancies interstate. I mean that. That is not hyperbole. We are talking about teacher vacancies in the order of thousands in single states, particularly in the Eastern States: 3,000, I think, in New South Wales alone at one point in time, and more than 2,000 in Victoria at one point in time. This means there are classes that do not have a qualified teacher in front of them. It is the worst case scenario.

We are not immune from those kinds of pressures here in South Australia, and we are doing absolutely everything we can to avoid being in the same kind of situation that those states have found themselves in. Currently, in South Australia we have 44 vacancies. I think we are the only jurisdiction in this country where in the last three years the number of vacancies has got better and not worse, which is a credit to the work of our department.

I must say I think it shows that some of the commitments that this government made from opposition, a number of which were crafted by the now Deputy Premier and former Minister for Education, were almost prescient in the sense that as time has gone on we have seen how important they are. That is, for instance, a commitment to increase permanency in the system by at least 10 per cent.

We are moving heaven and earth to meet that target. We are converting at a rate we have never converted before. At the start of this week, I was at St Helen's Park Kindergarten, where we announced that we have just converted 100 preschool staff to permanency, which I understand is as much as the sum total of conversions to permanency in the early years in the last 10 years all in one year.

When I say that we are doing steps and have taken active measures to avoid being in the same situation as other states with those vacancies, I mean it. There is hope of tangible things, including throughout what was a very torturous enterprise bargaining negotiation last year, which people will certainly remember. It is not something that I will forget in a hurry. There were things that came out of that process which are going to protect our workforce into the future.

One of the things I might refer to is our decision to bring back the regional zone incentive, which is some extra money paid to staff who choose to move to regional, rural or remote parts of the state, and that amount grows depending on which zone or which rural area you work in. We also, throughout that enterprise bargaining process, in the end committed to not just making it ongoing for those staff who are currently getting the allowance, which generally finishes at the end of five years, but also brought it back for those staff who used to receive it and had then, essentially, maxed out at the end of their five-year period.

These are really important things, because I can tell you as someone who went to public school in the country and whose father taught at the public school that I went to. This was in the 1990s and getting staff then was nigh on impossible. I remember the feeling of loss, not just at the school but in the general community, when you would get a young gun teacher, in this case who came down from Melbourne to Portland. Students would think they were fantastic. They would inject some fresh talent into the school, join the netball club and join the football club. They were absolutely welcomed as only regional communities can do, and when they then decided to go back, for whatever reason, it was a huge loss, not just to the school community but to the whole country community as well.

I know that whenever we are feeling pressures around how we fill vacancies in metropolitan areas, you can guarantee that they are feeling it more acutely in the country. That is why a Labor government bringing back those regional allowances is something I am going to bang on about in this place for as long as I get to be a member of this place.

I might just circle back to why we are doing that and why this bill on which I am speaking today is so important. Aside from those things that I just mentioned, of course the other thing we need to do is to protect our workforce. We need to grow our workforce and to convince young people that teaching is not just a noble profession but a profession that they will enjoy and thrive in, in which their employer will protect them. We need to be taking action against the really unsavoury kind of behaviour that we are seeing increasingly directed towards our staff.

When I say 'unsavoury', that is understating things. We are talking about physical violence from some parents. We are talking about staff, regularly female staff, because we have a highly feminised workforce, being physically hit by parents. I have heard stories of them being spat on, stalked, harassed, pursued, moving to encroach upon a person's physical space, standing outside the school grounds and yelling and swearing. I remember speaking to one regional principal, who said for a period of time, because of unrest in their school, she had decided she needed to take action to address that. She did not feel safe going to the shops without two of her sons or her partner, because she felt that someone in community might actually physically assault her. That is the kind of stuff we are talking about here.

When I talk about a 200 per cent increase and I talk about abusive behaviour, it is as serious as you can possibly imagine. I have spoken to so many of those staff—principals, senior long-serving teachers, new staff, SSOs, business managers, the front desk task, who often cop the brunt of it, I must say. The one sitting there at the front, our admin staff, often has to cop that. The toll that this kind of behaviour takes on them is really profound. It directly results in them quitting. It directly results in these people deciding that they are not going to do the job anymore. They just do not see the point in subjecting themselves to it anymore, especially in an economy at the moment where there are other job opportunities for people and they can choose to go elsewhere.

Of course, it is not just our existing staff. I will touch soon on how we have broadened the scope of where we can take action as a department in terms of the online forum, but that is where we have seen a lot of the growth. The other people who see that behaviour, who may not have been witness to it if it occurred on a school premises, are those who are studying teaching and those young people who are thinking that they might want to be a teacher when they are older.

If you were to see some of these Facebook or Instagram community forums, where, for instance, someone might put up what appears on the face of it to be quite an innocuous post asking for people's feedback on a local school that that they are considering for their child, you would read what is often then a 400 or 500-comment pile on on the school, which names staff, names principals, and which makes in lots of cases totally unfounded and highly defamatory claims against them. I would challenge you to think that a young person who was sitting there reading that, who had before that moment fancied themselves as a preschool teacher, primary school teacher or high school teacher, would still think that that was the profession for them after seeing the kind of abuse that the existing workforce is subjected to. It is absolutely abhorrent kind of stuff.

This bill here today goes directly to the things that we can do to tackle it. I want South Australia to have the most modern, fit-for-purpose legislation in this case. That means it is not just about the penalties, although they are important and we are increasing the penalties here, but also making sure that our legislation is actually fit for purpose for the year 2024, not 1964, not 1994 when I was in school high school, because back then there was no online forum through which people could subject staff to abuse.

Now, I would say it is almost the primary method of abusing staff in the education system, sometimes, and increasingly so, in an anonymous way too. Of course, if you are a teacher at the local school, knowing your community, knowing your students and knowing your families like you do, you would know who is saying those things about you, even if it was made under an anonymous comment. Of course, the hurt that that causes is really profound and something we need to take action about.

As I said at the start of my speech, we are not orphans here; we are not the only place in Australia or internationally dealing with this. It is a global trend, sadly. The latest Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey, published in March of this year, found that the behaviour of some parents and caregivers is a major contributor to the stresses faced by school leaders, with principal responses suggesting parents were the top source of issues—this is parents, not students—that involved bullying, cyber bullying, gossip, slander and sexual harassment. Of those principals who reported being threatened with violence, two thirds experienced this from parents and caregivers. We are talking about an issue that is emerging not just here in South Australia but nationally.

The bill that I have introduced today seeks to address these problems by building on and improving what we already have by way of protections in part 8 of the Education and Children's Services Act 2019. Part 8 sets out relevant offences for misbehaviour and trespass on the premises of schools, preschools and education and care services and for abuse and offensive behaviour directed towards teachers and other staff acting in the course of their duties, wherever that occurs. I will come to that in a second. That is an important point around the context and the environment in which that abuse occurs.

Part 8 provides for designated persons in respect of premises, such as principals of schools and directors of preschools, to direct a person away from the premises in response to such behaviour and/or issue a notice barring a person from the premises or from other premises used or to be used by the school, by the preschool or by the service. However, the specific terms of part 8 have meant those powers have not been able to be leveraged in relation to some types of harmful behaviour. This includes, for example, vexatious communications with or about a member of staff, offensive behaviour targeted at students when involved in an education activity away from the premises of the relevant school, preschool or service.

By this we mean including but not limited to school camps, excursions and sports days. I have to say that so many of the specific examples that have been passed on to me as the minister by our staff have referenced things like sports day, where some of the worst behaviour is actually exhibited, or occurring just outside the boundary of the school where parents think they might be able to behave like this and get away with it: yelling abuse from outside the school gate, for instance.

The bill aims to address these issues and to improve the overall ability of leaders at schools, preschools and education and care services to ensure safe learning and working environments. We say this in this place a lot: everyone has the right to be treated well in their workplace but for some reason, which sadly is not clear to me, many people forget that schools are the workplaces, classrooms are the workplaces for teachers and they deserve the same kind of respect in that place that any of us here or elsewhere would expect in our workplace.

The bill will amend part 8 of the act to make it an offence to behave in a disorderly or intimidating manner on premises and increase the penalties for all offences under part 8 from $2,500 to $7,500. The bill will also broaden the grounds on which a designated person can issue a barring notice in respect of the premises of a school, preschool or education and care service to include where the designated person reasonably believes the following:

that the person while on those premises poses, or would pose, a risk to the safety or wellbeing of any other person on the premises;

that the person, while on any related premises being used by, or for an activity or in connection with, the school, preschool or education and care service, poses, or would pose, a risk to the safety or wellbeing of any other person on the related premises;

that the person poses, or would pose a risk to the safety or wellbeing of any person related to a relevant school, preschool or education and care service while the related person is in transit between relevant premises;

the person, while on premises, poses or would pose a risk of causing significant disruption to the learning or working environment;

that the person has engaged in vexatious communication with, or regarding, a member of staff or other person employed at the premises.

The bill will also provide for the minister to publish guidelines in relation to barring notices and require a designated person in issuing a barring notice to comply with those guidelines set out that a notice may:

bar a person from premises to which part 8 applies, or a part of the premises specified in the notice;

bar a person from any related premises for any period specified in the notice during which the related premises are being used by, or for an activity conducted by, or in connection with, the school, preschool, or education and care service;

prohibit a person from communicating with or otherwise contacting (whether that is electronically or by other means) a member of staff or other person specified in the notice employed at the premises;

prohibit the person from communicating on any online platforms of the school, preschool, education and care service or department specified in the notice;

subject to any guidelines published by the minister, provide that a barring notice may, in specifying premises or related premises in relation to which a person is barred, include any area within 25 metres of a boundary of the premises. That is what I referred to earlier, where we were seeing some of this behaviour exhibited which was outside the school grounds.

I would also like to make mention, especially given our joint sitting yesterday, that the state First Nations Voice to Parliament provided detailed and considered feedback on the bill. I thank them for their engagement. While they were generally supportive of the bill, the Voice provided suggestions to ensure that the provisions operate in a culturally sensitive way and do not disproportionately impact on First Nations people.

To this end, the bill provides for guidelines to be published by the minister in relation to the consideration of the particular needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff, students and children and their families in the issuing of any barring notices. The government looks forward to discussing these matters with the Voice as the bill progresses through this place.

In closing, 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 particular needs and nor would we wish that to happen. They seek to promote positive interactions with the staff of schools, preschools and other services by improving safeguards against the worst kinds of misbehaviour.

There is no place in our schools, preschools or our education and care services—regardless of whether they are public, Independent or Catholic services—for violent, abusive or threatening behaviour. Our teachers deserve a workplace in which 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. I commend the bill to the house, and I seek leave to have the explanation of clauses inserted in Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

These clauses are formal.

Part 2—Amendment of Education and Children's Services Act 2019

3—Amendment of section 90—Application of Part

This clause amends section 90 to extend the application of the Part to premises which are the premises of an approved learning program that has been prescribed by the regulations.

4—Insertion of section 90A

Section 90A is inserted.

90A—Interpretation

Proposed section 90A inserts several definitions for the purposes of the measure.

5—Amendment of section 91—Offensive or threatening behaviour

This clause extends the application of the offences in section 91(1) and (2)(b) to include disorderly and intimidating behaviour, which is consistent with other amendments made by the measure. The heading of the section is amended to reflect this change, and the maximum penalty for the offences is increased from $2,500 to $7,500.

6—Amendment of section 92—Trespassing on premises

This clause increases the maximum penalty for an offence against the section from $2,500 to $7,500.

7—Amendment of heading to Part 8 Division 3

This clause amends the heading of Part 8 Division 3 to reflect that the Division deals with the making of barring notices.

8—Substitution of section 93

Section 93 is proposed to be substituted as follows:

93—Power to bar person from premises, etc

Proposed section 93 gives a designated person in respect of premises to which Part 8 applies the power to issue a barring notice to a person if the designated person reasonably believes that person poses a risk to any other person on the premises, or on related premises, or to the learning and working environment or activities carried on at the premises or related premises. Subsection (3) provides a list of certain circumstances in which a person will be taken to pose a threat. A barring notice may also be issued to a person if the designated person reasonably believes that the person has engaged in vexatious communication with a member of staff or other person employed at the premises. A barring notice may prevent a person from entering premises, or engaging in conduct, specified in the notice. Provision is made in relation to the preconditions for the making of a barring notice, the form a barring notice must take, the premises and activities to which a barring notice can apply, and the consequences for the breach of a barring notice. The Minister may make guidelines in relation to barring notices, which must be followed when a designated person issues such a notice.

9—Amendment of section 94—Review of barring notice by Minister

This clause amends section 94 such that a person who is issued with a barring notice under section 93 that applies for at least 2 weeks may apply to the Minister for review of the barring notice, except to the extent that the notice applies to a non-Government school, preschool, approved education and care service or approved learning program.

10—Amendment of heading to Part 8 Division 4

The heading of Part 8 Division 4 is amended to reflect that barring notices may now also apply in respect of a related premises.

11—Amendment of section 95—Certain persons may restrain, remove from or refuse entry to premises

Amendments are made to section 95 to reflect the changes made to section 93, such that an authorised person in respect of premises to which Part 8 of the Act applies may, in circumstances where the authorised person reasonably believes that a person poses an imminent risk, either to the safety and wellbeing of any other person on, or to the learning and working environment or activities carried on at, the premises or related premises, the authorised person may direct that person to leave the premises or related premises. The authorised person may also direct a person to leave the premises if the person has engaged in vexatious communication with a member of staff or other person employed at the premises. Provision is made for certain circumstances in which a person will be taken to pose a risk.

12—Amendment of section 135—Proceedings for offences

Section 135 is amended to require that proceedings for an offence against the Act may only be commenced by the Chief Executive, or a person authorised by the Chief Executive, with the written consent of the Minister.

Schedule 1—Transitional and savings provisions

1—Barring notices

Provision is made such that a barring notice made under the Act prior to these amendments that is in effect as at the commencement of the amendments will continue in force as if it had been issued under section 93, as substituted by this measure.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Basham.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT