Page 4320 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Barr needs to answer the question: why? Why would the minister essentially say to principals in the ACT, “I don’t trust you; I don’t trust you to do this in the same way that your colleagues virtually right around the country, in five other jurisdictions, are trusted to do this”? We take a very different approach.
We need to look also at the broader context. When we had our forum in Calwell last year we heard from teachers, students and parents. It was acknowledged, and it needs to be said again, that there are complex issues for schools to deal with. Teachers are dealing with, in some cases, all of the issues that are in our community—some of the worst and some of the best issues that are in our community. They are dealing with mental health issues, students with serious behavioural issues and issues of drug abuse—as they exist in the broader community. We have to give them as many tools as we can to deal with that. Suspension is one part of it; it is not part of a comprehensive strategy.
To his credit, Mr Doszpot has said, “Well, let’s actually start the conversation about what else we can do.” Counselling is one part of it; diversionary programs are another part of it—ensuring that the teachers have the resources to deal with the problem students. These are some of the broader issues which Mr Barr has not addressed. He has made a tokenistic effort here. He said, “Look, I have to show that I’m tough. I don’t really trust the principals, but I have to show that I’m a little bit tough so I’ll give them a little bit of latitude to actually make some decisions in dealing with it.”
Mr Smyth: Tokenism.
MR SESELJA: It is tokenism. It is tokenism at its worst and that is what we are seeing from this minister. There is no comprehensive policy to deal with the issue. It is simply five to 10 days. He has shown that he does not really trust his principals. There is plan to deal with the broader issues—that is, how do we assist some of these students? Many of these students are good kids who are having problems. How do we deal with them?
Ms Hunter: Suspending them for 20 days is not—
MR SESELJA: In some cases we have to suspend them. In some cases it is for the good of their fellow students and indeed for the student involved and their teachers that they be suspended and sometimes for a lengthy period. We believe that is reasonable. We believe that it should not be used as a matter of course, but it should be used as a last resort when dealing with some of the most difficult students. But what else will we do for them? This is the conversation we need to have. What are some of the diversionary programs that will be put in place to try and get some of these kids back on track, to give them the opportunity to come back into the education system to complete their education and to have some of the tools for life that are needed?
I commend Mr Doszpot for his approach to this. The approach of the minister and the Greens is to not trust principals. It is to say that our principals cannot be trusted as much as they are in other states. That is the wrong approach. But this does need to be part of a broader discussion of all of the issues in dealing with problem behaviour.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .