Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think we need to be really clear about what happens in the Northern Territory in schools. The concern about school attendance kicks in if there have been five days of nonattendance without any notable absence. But let me be really clear about this: a notable absence can include, and does include, cultural reasons, either for initiation purposes or for funeral purposes, and it is quite well accepted that children will and must attend those ceremonies because of their culture and that some children will be more involved than others. Cultural reasons are acceptable for not attending school, so let us be really clear about that.

The second thing I know applies in most schools. There may well be a funeral ceremony happening and, as we know—well, as we ought to know—with Indigenous people a funeral ceremony can take six to eight weeks to occur and it is pretty common for schools to say, where kids are involved in ceremony for the first couple of weeks when it is not the important end of the funeral process: 'Get them to come to school for the morning at least. Let's try getting them to come to school for half a day.' I know there are schools in Arnhem Land that are trying that strategy. Then the kids can be away for the whole day in the last couple of weeks in the important part of the funeral ceremony. So in the Northern Territory there are many different things happening and many different trials and different variations happening that absolutely capture the child's cultural requirements, and being away for cultural purposes is one reason. In fact, I think such a reason is even on the attendance sheets that are notified weekly and monthly to the head office in Darwin, so you can actually be away for ceremonial purposes and you get the big tick.

The other thing that I want to say, while I am standing on my feet, is to get this absolutely and perfectly clear—and I see that Senator Milne is not here but I hope she is listening: the federal government had absolutely nothing to do with the abolition and the change to bilingual education in the Northern Territory. It was not driven by this government. It was a policy decision of the Northern Territory government, and implemented by the Northern Territory government, that schools should have at least four hours of English a day and they should be in the morning. We have talk about concerned Australians and people being against the intervention and about people lobbying us. People talk about Stronger Futures seeing the end of bilingual education, so the intervention saw the end of bilingual education. It did not. Neither federal government had anything to do with the abolition or the change to bilingual education in the Northern Territory, and I want to get that absolutely clear and absolutely on the record. That was absolutely a decision of the Northern Territory government implemented by the Northern Territory government. From memory, I think when Minister Gillard was the minister for education she was at Batchelor college one day and she was asked whether or not she supported that policy decision. This was her response: 'What we want to see is children finish year 12 competent in English literacy and numeracy. The path they take is up to the state and territory governments to determine.' So let us be really clear about this: Stronger Futures and this legislation have nothing to do with the change in bilingual education in the Northern Territory.

Question negatived.