Queensland Bills Explanatory Notes Queensland Bills Explanatory Notes[Index] [Search] [Download] [Bill] [Help]
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State
Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Explanatory Notes
Short title
This short title of the Bill is the Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools)
Amendment Bill 2013.
Policy objectives and the reasons for them
The objective of the Bill is to amend the Educational (General Provisions) Act 2006 (EGPA)
to support the implementation of initiatives to strengthen discipline in Queensland state
schools by:
ˇ providing Queensland state school principals with stronger disciplinary powers and more
flexibility and autonomy around the making of discipline decisions;
ˇ bolstering the grounds for suspension and exclusion; and
ˇ reducing administrative burdens to enable quick and firm responses to problem
behaviour.
On 8 April 2013, the Queensland Government announced its goal to enhance school
discipline as part of the Queensland Government action plan for Queensland schools: Great
teachers = Great results. The action plan recognises the importance of clear and consistent
discipline in a high quality education system; and aims to provide Queensland's state school
principals with a greater level of autonomy in making decisions about how to run their
school. Strengthening principals' powers underpins this reform agenda.
Discipline plays an important role in a young person's social development and facilitates
good order and management in a school. Good order and discipline are necessary to create a
safe, supportive and focused environment for students and teachers. The maintenance of a
disciplined learning environment is of benefit to not only the school community, but to the
community as a whole. Schools and their leaders require powers that enable them to
efficiently and effectively manage school discipline.
Chapter 12 of the current EGPA deals with the good order and management of state
educational institutions. Departmental officers, through consultation with state school
principals, identified certain obstacles that principals face in implementing strong school
discipline. The obstacles are caused by over-prescription in chapter 12 of the EGPA,
particularly with regard to the range of disciplinary options available to principals and the
limitations on when disciplinary strategies can be utilised. For example, behaviour
Page 1
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
improvement conditions can only be imposed for challenging behaviour that might result in
exclusion and are limited to requiring the student's engagement in a behaviour management
program. Detentions may only be implemented for part of a lunch recess and for short periods
after school. These restrictions limit the ability of principals to address early signs of
challenging behaviour and develop strategies that benefit the student and the school
community.
Chapter 12 sets out lengthy and detailed processes that principals are required to follow when
making suspension, exclusion or cancellation of enrolment decisions. For example, principals
are required to discuss or meet with parents regarding suspensions decisions and must meet
with parents regarding exclusion decisions. When proposing to exclude a student, principals
must give students a notice that includes details about making a submission to the principal
against the decision. A show cause process must be followed when a principal decides to
cancel the enrolment of a student above compulsory school age for non-participation in the
educational program.
This over-prescription has placed an administrative burden on decision makers (primarily
principals), and the red tape connected with discipline decision-making diverts the valuable
time of principals away from their broader school management responsibilities. The detailed
processes for suspension, exclusion and cancellation of enrolment decisions can also delay
timeliness of action. This is particularly problematic when action is necessary to protect the
interests of other students and staff.
Chapter 12 sets out a limited range of formal strategies that principals can use to impose
discipline. It also contains few mechanisms that enable a principal to develop strategies
cognisant of community expectations or tailored to meet the needs of individual students.
The absence of early intervention strategies in the current legislative framework has led to a
strong reliance on suspension and exclusion options. However, principals have also raised
concerns that the existing grounds for suspension and exclusion are not broad enough to
enable them to respond to student misbehaviour in the way expected by their school
communities.
The amendments proposed in the Bill address these limitations and align with the reforms
under Great teachers = Great results to strengthen Queensland state school principals'
disciplinary powers.
Achievement of policy objectives
The Bill achieves its objectives by amending the EGPA as described below.
Broadening discipline options and principals' powers
Head of power for principals to control discipline
The Bill inserts a general head of power into the EGPA that ensures state school principals
have responsibility and power to control and regulate student discipline at their school. This
provides principals with broad and flexible powers to implement discipline interventions and
strategies in their school.
Page 2
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
The general head of power clarifies that principals can implement a greater range of
discipline strategies than those currently set out in chapter 12 of the EGPA. It also facilitates
the development of disciplinary strategies that account for the needs and expectations of local
school communities.
While the Bill does not prescribe the types of disciplinary interventions or how they are to be
imposed, it will enable the Director-General of the Department of Education, Training and
Employment (DETE) to make policies or procedures that provide guidance about how
principals should control and regulate discipline. The policy and procedures will not be used
to force particular disciplinary action on principals. Rather, they will guide principals to adopt
appropriate processes that ensure adherence to natural justice principles and protect the safety
and wellbeing of students and staff. The Bill clearly expresses the power to make policy or
procedures about detention (conducted by principals or teachers), community service
interventions, discipline improvement plans and other matters the Director-General considers
appropriate. The Bill requires that principals comply with any policy or procedure made by
the Director-General.
Community Service Interventions and Discipline Improvement Plans are two innovative
discipline strategies principals can utilise under the general head of power. It is envisaged that
these strategies may be used to address inappropriate student behaviour prior to resorting to
suspension or exclusion. Community Service Interventions involve students performing work
or service in their local community with a host organisation or under the supervision of a
school staff member. They are designed to develop discipline by changing attitudes,
improving skills, enhancing self-respect and respect for others through commitment and
teamwork. Participation is dependent on the cooperation of students and parents.
A Discipline Improvement Plan is a written agreement that can be used at any time to prevent
escalation of inappropriate behaviour by setting out strategies/steps for behaviour
improvement. For example, a plan might involve commitment to regularly attend school or
participate in a social skills initiative or a drug and alcohol education program. Discipline
Improvement Plans are intended to be a flexible document that is adaptable to local contexts.
To maximise capacity of these interventions to change student behaviour, the Bill provides
clear authority for Community Service Interventions, actions under a Discipline Improvement
Plan and detention to be performed on a non-school day, for example a Saturday.
Grounds for suspension and exclusion
Through the introduction of more flexible early intervention approaches to addressing student
misbehaviour, the Bill aims to reduce the number of students suspended or excluded from
state schools. Suspensions and exclusion interrupt a student's education and can cause
students to fall behind their peers academically. Consequences of a disrupted education
include an increased likelihood to engage in antisocial behaviour and eventual school
dropout.
Nevertheless, it is important that principals have the ability to remove students from schools
in certain circumstances, for example where it is necessary to ensure the good order and
management of the school and protect the safety and wellbeing of students and staff. In this
regard, the Bill further strengthens principal's disciplinary powers by bolstering the existing
grounds for suspension and exclusion. This addresses concerns raised by principals that the
existing grounds for suspension and exclusion in chapter 12 of the EGPA are not broad
Page 3
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
enough to enable them to respond to student misbehaviour in the way expected by their
school communities.
The Bill will expand the grounds for suspension and exclusion to cover conduct occurring
outside the school that adversely affects or is likely to adversely affect other students or the
good order and management of the school; or where the student's attendance poses an
unacceptable risk to the safety or wellbeing of other students or staff of the school.
The Bill strengthens a principal's ability to respond when a student is charged or convicted of
a criminal offence with additional grounds of suspension and exclusion included specifically
in relation to criminal charges and convictions. Previously these specific grounds only
applied to mature age students. The Bill does not maintain this distinction.
The Bill includes new grounds for suspension of a student who has been charged with a
serious offence or another offence in circumstances where it would not be in the best interests
of other students and staff at the school for the student to attend the school while the charge is
pending. A serious offence is an offence prescribed in the Commission for Children and
Young People and Child Guardian Act 2000. This includes sexual offences such as rape, drug
trafficking, armed robbery, torture, kidnapping and attempted murder. A suspension made on
this basis lasts until the charge is `dealt with' and a notice has been given proposing exclusion
or ceasing the suspension, or until the principal or Director-General decides to exclude the
student, or cease their suspension prior to the charge being `dealt with'.
To ensure timeliness of decisions about suspensions upon charges, the Bill will require the
principal to make a decision about whether to propose exclusion as soon as practicable after
the charge has been dealt with.
The Bill includes a new ground for exclusion on the basis that a student has been convicted of
an offence and it would not be in the best interests of other students or staff for the student to
be enrolled at the school. This provides clear power to remove students (not only mature age
students) from schools who have been convicted of an offence, but only if the student's
continued enrolment is not in the best interests of the school community.
The powers to suspend and exclude a student are discretionary, i.e. there is no compulsion for
the Director-General to exclude on the basis of a conviction or a charge.
Increased powers for short term suspensions
Principals can currently suspend a student for a `short term' of up to five school days or a
`long term' of between six and 20 school days. As is the case currently under the EGPA, a
student only has a right of review against long term suspensions. The Bill will increase the
short suspension period from up to five school days to a period of up to 10 school days,
making the long term suspension period 11 to 20 school days. This will act as a stronger
deterrent for student misbehaviour and signal to students and parents the authority of
principals in state schools.
Streamlining processes and reducing `red tape'
Suspensions, exclusions and cancellation of enrolment
Currently exclusion decisions can be made by three categories of decision makers; principals,
Page 4
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
principal supervisors and the Director-General. The Bill streamlines the legislation by
removing provisions that allow for decisions to be made by the principal's supervisor.
Principals will be responsible for exclusion decisions in their school. The Director-General
will be able to make decisions about exclusion from the school the student is enrolled in,
certain or all state schools. The Director-General will make decision about exclusion from the
school the student is enrolled in if the principal and the Director-General reasonably believe it
is appropriate, for example, where it would be inappropriate for the principal to exercise the
power because of bias. The Director-General can delegate decisions to appropriate officers,
including the principal's supervisor.
The Bill has removed the grounds for mature age students and applied new grounds to all
students to ensure that principals can suspend or exclude a student in a wide range of
circumstances irrespective of the age of the student.
The Bill simplifies suspension, exclusion and cancellation of enrolment processes and
reduces associated red tape. For example, the Bill will not dictate how principals must
communicate with students and their parents throughout suspension, exclusion and
cancellation of enrolment processes. This provides principals with more flexibility to act in a
way that is sensitive to individual circumstances.
The Bill enables suspensions to commence immediately upon telling the student. This
facilitates immediate responses to student behaviour, with written notice to be provided as
soon as practicable thereafter to confirm the nature of the decision.
The Bill will remove the requirement on a principal to invite written submissions prior to
excluding a student. This reduces administrative processes prior to making a final decision to
create more time for investigations and fact finding. The Bill will retain the right for a student
or parent to review a final exclusion decision.
Guidance will be provided to principals in policy documents to ensure natural justice
principles remain at the forefront of good decision making about disciplinary actions. The
Bill requires that principals comply with Departmental policy and procedure.
Removal of behaviour plans
The Bill omits requirements in chapter 12 of the EGPA for principals to develop a behaviour
plan for their school. Nevertheless, a behaviour plan will remain an essential management
tool for school communities to agree on appropriate standards of behaviour. The requirement
that schools have a plan that describes the proactive approach to managing behaviour is
retained in DETE's new policy and procedure.
Alternative ways of achieving policy objectives
There are no alternative ways of achieving the policy objectives other than through
amendment to existing legislation.
Estimated cost for government implementation
Any costs from implementation will be met from within existing resources.
Page 5
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Consistency with fundamental legislative principles
The Bill is generally consistent with fundamental legislative principles. Potential breaches of
fundamental legislative principles are addressed below.
Legislation should have sufficient regard to the rights and liberties of individuals -
Legislative Standards Act 1992, sections 4(2)(a)
The Bill may be argued to adversely affect the rights of students and parents as it expands
disciplinary interventions, permits disciplinary measures to occur outside of school hours
(e.g. detention and Community Service Interventions) and expands grounds for suspension
and exclusion, including on the basis of charges and convictions for criminal offences.
These reforms are considered justified as a student's right to education must be balanced
against the competing rights of other students, teaching staff and the broader school
community to access and attend a safe, supportive and focussed learning environment.
Disciplinary measures are necessary for the maintenance of the good order and management
of the school. Published departmental policy and procedure will ensure appropriate measures
are adopted to protect student safety and wellbeing during disciplinary interventions.
In recognition of a student's right to education, the Bill contains requirements to ensure
continuing access to educational programs during both short and long suspensions.
The Bill does not alter current arrangements for students who are suspended with a proposal
to exclude, whereby the principal or Director-General will take reasonable steps to ensure the
student has an educational program and access to a regional case manager during the period
of their suspension. Under DETE policy and procedure the case manager is responsible for
engaging the student in an educational program after the exclusion decision has been made.
The Bill also retains the requirement for the Director-General to take reasonable steps to
provide an educational program for students who are excluded from all state schools.
The Bill also retains review rights for persons adversely impacted by long term suspensions,
exclusions and cancellation of enrolment decisions.
ˇ Greater range of discipline strategies for principals
The Bill inserts a general power into the EGPA that ensures state school principals have
responsibility and power to control and regulate student discipline at their school. This
enables principals to expand disciplinary interventions, and permits disciplinary measures to
occur outside of school hours. This in turn provides principals with alternative and flexible
disciplinary responses that may reduce reliance on suspension and exclusion processes.
These can provide more meaningful consequences for student misbehaviour and act as real
drivers for behavioural change.
The Bill enables the Director-General of DETE to make policies or procedures that provide
guidance about how principals should control and regulate discipline. In addition, the Bill
also requires that principals comply with any policy or procedure made by the chief
executive. This ensures principals adopt appropriate processes that ensure adherence to
natural justice principles and protect the safety and wellbeing of students and staff.
Page 6
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
As a further safeguard, the policy and procedure must be available to the public for inspection
and published on the department's website.
ˇ Suspension and exclusion
The Bill expands the grounds for suspension and exclusion to cover behaviour or conduct
occurring outside of the school that would adversely affect other students at the school,
impact on the good order and management of the school, or where the student's attendance
poses an unacceptable risk to the safety or wellbeing of students or staff. The new grounds
will ensure a principal could act to ensure the safety and wellbeing of students.
The Bill also strengthens a principal's ability to respond when a student is charged or
convicted of a criminal offence with additional grounds of suspension and exclusion included
specifically in relation to criminal charges and convictions. Previously grounds relating to
criminal offences only applied to mature age students; however, under the Bill this distinction
is no longer maintained. Further, only the Director-General has the clear authority in the
current EGPA to exercise exclusion on this basis. This expanded power is considered
necessary to overcome existing limitations in the EGPA.
The Bill contains a power for principals to suspend a student who has been charged with:
a. a serious offence as defined under the Commission for Children and Young People
and Child Guardian Act 2000; or
b. an offence (other than a serious offence) and the principal is reasonably satisfied it
would not be in the best interests of other students or staff to attend the school while
the charge is pending.
The amendment gives to the principal for the first time clear authority to respond to criminal
activity (whether charges or convictions) and to act in the best interests of their school
community. The inclusion of this power enables principals to take action considered
necessary to protect the interests of students or staff.
The Bill provides that the suspension can last until the charge is `dealt with' and the principal
makes a decision to exclude. `Dealt with' is defined to essentially mean until the charges are
withdrawn or there is a verdict.
However, in the exercise of this power there are the following safeguards contained in the
Bill regarding suspension on charge-related grounds:
ˇ there is a discretion whether or not the principal exercises the power to suspend;
ˇ a suspension on a charge-related ground may also cease prior to being dealt with if a
notice ceasing suspension is given under new section 289 or the student is otherwise
excluded or enrolment cancelled;
ˇ new section 283 mandates that a decision be made about whether to exclude a student
as soon as practicable after a charge is dealt with; and
ˇ there is a right of review to the chief executive against the suspension.
Page 7
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Further, as stated above, the Bill contains requirements to ensure continuing access to
educational programs.
The Bill also includes a new ground for exclusion on the basis that a student has been
convicted of an offence and it would not be in the best interests of other students or staff for
the student to be enrolled at the school. This provides the principal (and Director-General)
with the clear power to exclude students, not just mature age students from schools, who have
been convicted of certain offences but only if the student's continued enrolment is not in the
best interests of the school community.
This additional requirement ("not be in the best interests of other students or staff") mitigates
against the occurrence of unjust outcomes that may result if exclusion is based solely on
conviction.
There are also safeguards contained in Bill such as discretion on the part of the decision
maker (principal or chief executive) to exercise the power to exclude and a right of review of
the decision to exclude. Again, the Bill contains an obligation to provide an educational
program to the student during suspension pending an exclusion decision.
The Bill provides that exclusion decisions must be made within a stipulated timeframe - a
decision of a principal within 20 school days, and a decision of the chief executive within 30
school days from the issue of the notice proposing exclusion. This is a significant change
from the current EGPA and recognises that exclusion is a serious decision affecting a
student's rights and that the student should be informed of the date when the decision is
required. This amendment promotes effective and timely decision-making.
Legislation should have sufficient regard to the rights and liberties of individuals --
rights of a person are affected by an administrative power subject to appropriate review
- Legislative Standards Act 1992, sections 4(3)(a)
The Bill expands a principal's power to suspend students for short periods of up to 10 school
days (currently it is five school days). The right of review to such decisions will be judicial
review. It is recognised that the principal's increased powers to impose short term
suspensions may mean more students are subjected to suspensions of up to 10 school days
without a right of review apart from judicial review.
This potential breach of the FLP that rights of a person are affected by an administrative
power subject to appropriate review is considered justified. The current legislation
contemplates a non-review period as acceptable for a short period of time (i.e. up to 5 days).
An extension of this period to 10 school days is not sufficiently long so as to offend principles
of natural justice.
The Bill does not alter the current arrangements under the EGPA for long suspensions and
final exclusion decisions (even those made by the Director-General) to be subject to review
by the Director-General. This is consistent with current practice under the EGPA and
recognises that the Director-General is best placed to make decisions about internal
departmental management.
Finally, as in the case under the current EGPA, in circumstances where the Director-General
has made a decision to exclude a student from all state schools, the most significant type of
exclusion decision, external review to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal is
available.
Page 8
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Judicial review will continue to be available for all decisions made under chapter 12 of the
EGPA.
Legislation should have sufficient regard to the rights and liberties of individuals -
consistency with principles of natural justice - Legislative Standards Act 1992, sections
4(3)(b)
To have sufficient regard to rights and liberties, legislation must have due regard to natural
justice. The Bill removes some existing statutory natural justice requirements such as the:
ˇ requirements for the principal to meet with parents before making a suspension
decision;
ˇ capacity for an affected student to make a written submission against a proposed
exclusion decision; and
ˇ show cause process prior to cancellation of enrolment of a student (who is above
compulsory school age).
These changes are warranted on the basis that these requirements impose a regulatory burden
on principals in situations where natural justice can be achieved in more flexible ways. The
proposals do not aim to reduce rights, but rather to allow more flexible and timely approaches
that suit individual family needs and school community needs and promote more informed
decisions.
Natural justice principles will remain at the forefront of good decision making about
disciplinary actions. The Bill requires principals to comply with DETE policy and procedure,
which will ensure that decision makers follow due process and adhere to natural justice
principles. Policy and procedure will outline best practice steps decision makers should take
when choosing to apply a disciplinary measure. This will provide accountability and
transparency to the decision making process, while giving flexibility to the approach adopted
in a given situation.
The Bill retains the requirement to provide a notice of a suspension, exclusion and
cancellation decision and the right to make a submission against a long suspension, exclusion
and cancellation of enrolment.
Consultation
An exposure draft of the Bill was released for targeted public consultation with the
Queensland Secondary Principals' Association, Queensland Association of State School
Principals, Queensland Association of Special Education Leaders, Outdoor and
Environmental Education Centres Association, P-10/12 Principals' Association, P & Cs Qld
(formerly, Queensland Council of Parents and Citizens Association) and the Queensland
Teachers' Union. Stakeholders were invited to provide comment. Briefings were also
provided to key stakeholders to receive verbal feedback and to facilitate more informed
written feedback.
Page 9
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Consistency with legislation of other jurisdictions
The Bill is specific to the State of Queensland, and is not uniform with or complementary to
legislation of the Commonwealth or another state.
Page 10
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Notes on provisions
Clause 1 provides that the short title of the Act is the Education (Strengthening Discipline in
State Schools) Amendment Act 2013.
Clause 2 provides that the Act commences on a day to be fixed by proclamation.
Clause 3 provides that the Act amends the Education (General Provisions) Act 2006 (the
EGPA).
Clause 4 amends section 36 of the EGPA to clarify that the chief executive can use a person's
criminal history obtained under chapter 2, part 5 of the EGPA for the purposes of chapter 12,
part 3 and to provide that a principal of a state school can only use criminal history
information obtained under chapter 2, part 5 of the EGPA for the purpose of making
decisions regarding suspensions and exclusion of students under chapter 12, part 3, divisions
2 or 3. These are consequential amendments as a result of the Bill.
Clause 5 amends section 37 of the EGPA to provide that the restrictions on disclosure of
information obtained under chapter 2, part 5 of the EGPA do not apply to the disclosure of
the information in certain circumstances, including to the principal of a state school in order
for the principal to suspend or exclude a student under chapter 12, part 3, divisions 2 or 3.
These are consequential amendments as a result of the Bill.
Clause 6 makes consequential amendments to section 53 of the EGPA to reflect amendments
made by the Bill to chapter 12.
Clauses 7 and 8 make consequential amendments to sections 200 (Child's exclusion or
suspension) and 237 (Suspension or exclusion) of the EGPA to reflect amendments made by
the Bill to chapter 12.
Clause 9 omits chapter 12, part 1 (Behaviour plans for State schools) from the EGPA and
inserts a new part 1 (Student discipline).
New section 275 provides that the principal of a state school must control and regulate
student discipline. This confirms a principal's authority in the school as to matters of school
discipline and clearly gives a principal a broad flexible head of power to impose disciplinary
interventions appropriate to the local circumstances. Subsection (2) further ensures principals
have maximum flexibility in their responses to inappropriate behaviour by making it clear
that discipline interventions can be carried out after school hours and on non-school days, for
example Saturday detention.
New section 276 allows the chief-executive of DETE to make policy or procedure about the
way in which principals of state schools are to control and regulate student discipline.
Subsection (2) makes it clear a policy or procedure can be developed in relation to detention
(issued by a principal or a teacher), Community Service Interventions and Discipline
Improvement Plans. Subsection (3) requires the chief executive to make policies and
procedures available for inspection. Subsection (4) requires that in relation to student
discipline principals must comply with any such policy or procedure.
Page 11
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Clause 10 omits chapter 12, part 2 (Detention of students enrolled at State schools) from the
EGPA. Principals and teachers will rely on the broad head of power to impose detention in
the future, guided by DETE policy and procedure.
Clause 11 amends the heading for chapter 12, part 3 of the EGPA to remove the reference to
behaviour improvement conditions. This is a consequential amendment due to the removal of
behaviour improvement conditions from the chapter. Clause 12 omits current chapter 12, part
3, divisions 1 to 3 (suspension and exclusion of students) from the EGPA and inserts the
following new divisions:
Division 1 Preliminary
New section 280 provides relevant definitions for the operation of part 3.
Division 2 Suspension of students by principal
Subdivision 1 General provisions
New section 281 provides the principal of a state school with the head of power to suspend a
student. The principal of a state school at which a student is enrolled may suspend the student
from the school if reasonably satisfied a ground exists under section 282 for the suspension.
Further, new subsection (2) makes it clear the principal may act under this division whether
or not a student has already been suspended or excluded under this part.
New subsections 282(1) and (2) set out the various grounds for suspension under this
division. The grounds are:
ˇ disobedience by the student;
ˇ misbehaviour of the student;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, other
students;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, the good
order and management of the school;
ˇ the student's attendance at the school poses an unacceptable risk to the safety or
wellbeing of other students or staff of the school;
ˇ the student is charged with a serious offence;
ˇ the student is charged with an offence other than a serious offence and the principal is
reasonably satisfied it would not be in the best interests of other students or staff of
the school for the student to attend the school while the charge is pending.
New subsection (3) clarifies that conduct of the student that may be ground for suspension
does not have to happen on school premises or during school hours.
New subsection (4) provides that each of the grounds under subsection (1)(f) and (2) are to be
termed a `charge-related ground'.
New section 283 provides for the duration of a student's suspension and when the suspension
starts. Subsection (1)(a) provides that generally suspension may be for not more than 10
school days. Although subsection (1)(b) provides that in certain circumstances (i.e. on a
ground other than a charge-related ground and if the principal is reasonably satisfied the
Page 12
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
ground is so serious that the suspension should be for more than 10 school days) suspension
is for not more than 20 school days. Subsection (1)(c) provides that for a suspension on a
charge-related ground the suspension continues until the charge is dealt with (as defined by
section 280) and the principal makes a decision to exclude or not under section 288.
A suspension on a charge- related ground may also cease if, prior to being dealt with, a notice
ceasing suspension is given under new section 289 or the student is excluded under sections
295, 302 or the student's enrolment is otherwise cancelled under section 316.
Section 283 requires a notice to be given about the suspension; and for suspensions for more
than 10 school days or on a charge-related ground, the notice must state that the student may
make a written submission against the suspension to the chief executive.
New section 284 requires that a principal who suspends a student must take reasonable steps
to arrange for the student's access to an educational program that allows the student to
continue their education during the suspension. The scope of the educational program
provided will depend upon the length of the suspension.
New section 285 provides that a student may make a written submission to the chief
executive about the suspension only if they are suspended for more than 10 school days or
until a charge is dealt with. A note directs attention to section 331 (Parent may also make
submission, representation or application).
New section 286 sets out how submissions against suspension must be dealt with.
Subdivision 2 Charge-related suspensions
New section 287 sets out that subdivision 2 applies if the principal has suspended a student
on a charge-related ground.
New section 288 requires that as soon as practicable after a charge is dealt with, the principal
must decide under section 293 whether to propose to exclude a student. The section requires
that if the principal decides not to exclude the student, they must tell the student the
suspension has ended (and then give notice).
New section 289 provides that if a student is suspended on a charge-related ground and prior
to the charge being dealt with the principal is satisfied it would no longer not be in the best
interest of other students and staff for the student to attend the school, the principal may end
the suspension. New subsection (2) makes it clear that this is despite what is stated in section
283(1)(c).
Subdivision 3 Chief executive's powers
New section 290 enables the chief executive to exercise the powers of a principal under this
division if the principal or the chief executive reasonably believes it would be appropriate to
do so. An example of such circumstances is provided in the section. It would be appropriate
for the chief executive to exercise the powers of a principal if the principal was prevented
from doing so by the principles of natural justice relating to bias.
Page 13
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Division 3 Exclusion of students by principal
New section 291 provides the principal of a state school with the head of power to exclude a
student. The principal of a state school at which a student is enrolled may, under this division,
exclude the student from the school if reasonably satisfied a ground exists under section 292.
Further, new subsection (2) makes it clear the principal may act under this division whether
or not a student has already been suspended or excluded under this part.
New section 292 sets out the grounds for excluding a student under this division. These are:
ˇ persistent disobedience by the student;
ˇ misbehaviour of the student;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, other
students;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, the good
order and management of the school;
ˇ the student's attendance at the school poses an unacceptable risk to the safety or
wellbeing of other students or staff of the school.
Subsection (1) provides that each of these is a ground for exclusion only if suspension of the
student from a school under division 2 is inadequate to deal with the disobedience,
misbehaviour, conduct or risk.
Subsection (2) provides that it is also a ground for exclusion under this section if the student
has been convicted of an offence; and the principal is reasonably satisfied it would not be in
the best interests of other students or staff for the student to be enrolled at the school.
Subsection (3) clarifies that conduct of the student that may be a ground for exclusion does
not have to happen on school premises or during school hours.
New section 293 applies if the principal is reasonably satisfied a ground exists to exclude a
student from the school and proposes to exclude the student. Subsection (2) requires that the
principal must give the student a notice in the approved form about the proposed exclusion
and if the student is already suspended, tell the student the suspension continues until a final
exclusion decision is made, or suspend the student pending the making of the final decision
about the exclusion. Subsection (3) makes it clear that the suspension commences when the
principal tells the student about the suspension.
New section 294 requires a principal who suspends a student under section 293 to take
reasonable steps to arrange for the student's access to an educational program that allows the
student to continue the student's education during the suspension.
New section 295 requires that the principal must make a final decision about whether to
exclude or not exclude the student within 20 school days after giving the proposed exclusion
notice and prescribes the process for making the decision and informing the student. The
section provides that the exclusion can be for a period of not more than one year or
permanently and that the time period of exclusion cannot exceed the period stated in the
proposed exclusion notice under section 293.
Page 14
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
New section 296 provides that if a student is excluded under this division, the enrolment is
taken to be cancelled.
New section 297 enables the chief executive to exercise the powers of a principal under this
division if the principal or the chief executive reasonably believes it would be appropriate to
do so. An example of such circumstances is provided in the section. It would be appropriate
for the chief executive to exercise the powers of a principal if the principal was prevented
from doing so by the principles of natural justice relating to bias.
Division 4 Exclusion of students from certain State schools or all State schools by the chief
executive
New section 298 provides the chief executive with the head of power to exclude a student
from certain state schools, or all state schools, if reasonably satisfied a ground exists under
section 299. Further, new subsection (2) makes it clear the chief executive may act under this
division whether or not a student has already been suspended or excluded under part 3. This
will ensure the chief executive can exclude the student from certain schools or all schools
despite the fact the student has already been suspended or excluded from the school at which
they were enrolled.
New section 299 subsections (1) and (2) set out the grounds for excluding a student under this
division as:
ˇ persistent disobedience by the student;
ˇ misbehaviour of the student;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, other
students;
ˇ conduct of the student that adversely affects, or is likely to adversely affect, the good
order and management of the school;
ˇ the student's attendance at the school poses an unacceptable risk to the safety or
wellbeing of other students or staff of the school.
Subsection (1) provides that each of the above is a ground for exclusion under this division
only if exclusion of the student from a school under division 3 is inadequate to deal with the
disobedience, misbehaviour, conduct or risk.
Subsection (2) provides that it is also a ground for exclusion under this section if (a) the
student has been convicted of an offence; and (b) the chief executive is reasonably satisfied it
would not be in the best interests of other students or of staff for the student to be enrolled at
the schools.
Subsection (3) clarifies that conduct of the student that may be ground for exclusion does not
have to happen on school premises or during school hours.
New section 300 applies if the chief executive is reasonably satisfied a ground exists to
exclude a student from certain state schools or all state schools and proposes to exclude the
student from the schools. Subsection (2) provides that the chief executive must give the
student a notice in the approved form about the proposed exclusion and suspend the student
(or, if the student is already suspended or excluded - continue the suspension or exclusion)
from the schools pending the making of the final decision about the proposed exclusion.
Page 15
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
Subsection (3) makes it clear that the suspension commences when the chief executive tells
the student about the suspension.
New section 301 requires that if a student is suspended under section 300, the chief executive
must take reasonable steps to arrange for the student's access to an educational program that
allows the student to continue the student's education during the suspension.
New section 302 requires that the chief executive must make a final decision about excluding
the student from the schools within 30 school days after giving the proposed exclusion notice
and prescribes the process for making the decision and informing the student. The section
provides that the exclusion can be for a period of not more than one year or permanently and
that the time period of exclusion cannot exceed the period stated in the proposed exclusion
notice in section 300(2).
New section 303 provides that if a student is excluded under this division from a state school
at which the student is enrolled, the enrolment is taken to be cancelled.
New section 304 provides for the continuing education of certain excluded students. The
section applies to a student of a state school who is of compulsory school age or a young
person in the compulsory participation phase and who is excluded under the division from all
state schools. Subsection (2) requires the chief executive to take reasonable steps to arrange
for the student's access to an educational program that allows the student to continue the
student's education during the exclusion.
Clause 13 makes a consequential amendment to renumber chapter 12, part 3, divisions 4 to 6
as divisions 5 to 7.
Clause 14 makes a consequential amendment to the heading of section 305 of the EGPA to
renumber the reference to division 4 as division 5 as a result of the renumbering of divisions.
Clause 15 makes consequential amendments to section 309 of the EGPA as a result of the
renumbering of divisions.
Clause 16 makes consequential amendments to section 311 of the EGPA as a result of the
renumbering of divisions.
Clause 17 makes a consequential amendments to section 312(2)(a) of the EGPA as a result of
the new divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 18 makes consequential amendment to section 313 of the EGPA as a result of the new
divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 19 makes consequential amendment to section 315 of the EGPA as a result of the new
divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 20 omits chapter 12, part 3, division 7 (Cancellation of enrolment of students of more
than compulsory school age) and division 8 (Behaviour improvement conditions) from the
EGPA, as in force immediately before the commencement. With respect to Behaviour
improvement conditions, principals will rely on the broad head of power to impose discipline
improvement plans, guided by DETE policy and procedure.
Page 16
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
The following new division is inserted:
Division 8 Cancellation of enrolment of students who are older than compulsory school age
New section 316 provides a principal with the head of power to cancel the enrolment of a
student who is older than compulsory school age if reasonably satisfied that the ground under
section 317 exists. Subsection (2) ensures that the enrolment of a student of compulsory
school age can not be cancelled under this division.
New section 317 specifies that for section 316 the ground for cancellation of enrolment is that
the student's behaviour amounts to a refusal to participate in the educational program
provided at the school.
New section 318 applies if the principal cancel the enrolment of a student under section
316(1). Subsection (2) outlines the notice requirements and information a principal must give
about the cancellation. Subsection (3) provides that a student who receives a cancellation
notice cannot make an application for enrolment at the school during the period stated in the
notice. The period cannot be more than 12 months after the giving of the notice.
New section 319 provides that a student may make a written submission against a
cancellation to the chief executive. The section also outlines what the submission should
address. A note directs attention to section 331 (Parent may also make submission,
representation or application).
New section 320 sets out how submissions against a cancellation of enrolment must be dealt
with.
Clause 21 makes a consequential amendment to section 328 of the EGPA to renumber a
reference to division 7 as division 8 as a result of the new division inserted by clause 19.
Clause 22 amends section 329 to allow for enrolments at other state schools during periods of
suspension under this part if approved by the chief executive. This amendment alters the
current position under section 329 that there is no entitlement to enrolment at another state
school during a period of suspension. The amendment permits flexibility in dealing with
student's circumstances in providing access to educational programs, particularly for those
students who may be subject to suspension while waiting the finalisation of a criminal
charge. One option for such students is enrolment in the school of distance education.
Clause 23 amends the heading of section 331 of the EGPA to better reflect the operation of
the section that parents may make submissions, representations or applications about the
suspension, exclusion or cancellation of enrolment of a student. The clause also makes
consequential amendments as a result of the new divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 24 makes consequential amendments to section 332 as a result of the new divisions
inserted by clause 12.
Clause 25 makes consequential amendments to section 362 of the EGPA as a result of the
omission of chapter 12, part 2 (Detention of students enrolled at State schools) and the
inclusion of new sections 275 and 276. Principals will rely on the broad head of power to
impose disciplinary interventions appropriate in the circumstances of non-compliance with a
state school dress code. However the section ensures part 3, divisions 2 to 4 and 8 do not
Page 17
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
apply to noncompliance with the dress code. This will continue to ensure students are not
subject to suspension, exclusion or cancellation of enrolment as a discipline for
noncompliance with dress codes.
Clause 26 makes consequential amendments to the heading of chapter 15, part 4 of the EGPA
as a result of the new divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 27 makes consequential amendments to section 401 of the EGPA as a result of the
new divisions inserted by clause 12.
Clause 28 inserts a new part 7 into chapter 20 of the EGPA (sections 516 to 526) to provide
transitional provisions for the Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools)
Amendment Act 2013 (the amending Act).
New section 516 provides definitions of terms for the new part 7.
New section 517 ensures that existing policy or procedure made by the chief executive about
the way principals of state schools control and regulate student discipline are taken to be
policy or procedure made by the chief executive under new section 276.
New section 518 ensures that the pre-amended EGPA continues to apply to decisions about
suspensions made prior to commencement.
New section 519 ensures that the pre-amended EGPA continues to apply to students given a
notice proposing exclusion and suspended prior to commencement.
New section 520 provides that if a student was excluded by a principal under the pre-
amended EGPA (section 288F) the student is taken to be excluded under new section 295.
This ensures student review rights are not affected by allowing reviews to take place under
the amending Act.
New section 521 ensures that the pre-amended EGPA applies to recommendations for
exclusion and suspension made by a principal to the principal's supervisor prior to
commencement.
New section 522 provides that if a student was excluded by a principal's supervisor under the
pre-amended EGPA (section 293), the student is taken to be excluded under new section
295(3). This ensures student review rights are not affected by allowing reviews to take place
under the amending Act.
New section 523 ensures that the pre-amended EGPA continues to apply to students given a
notice by the chief executive proposing exclusion and suspended prior to commencement.
New section 524 provides that if a student was excluded by a chief executive under the pre-
amended EGPA (section 302), the student is taken to be excluded under new section 302.
This ensures student review rights are not affected by allowing reviews to take place under
the amending Act.
New section 525 ensures that the pre-amended EGPA applies to a show cause notice given to
a student under section 317 prior to commencement.
Page 18
Education (Strengthening Discipline in State Schools) Amendment Bill 2013
New section 526 provides that if a student's enrolment was cancelled under the pre-amended
EGPA (section 320) the student's enrolment is taken to be cancelled under new section
316(1). The notice given to the student under the pre-amendment EGPA (section 320(4)) is
taken to state the matters mentioned in new section 318(2). This ensures student review
rights are not affected by allowing reviews to take place under the amending Act.
Clause 29 makes consequential amendments to the schedule 4 Dictionary of the EGPA to
omit and insert certain definitions as a result of the Bill.
ŠThe State of Queensland 2013
Page 19