Mr GREG WARREN (Campbelltown) (10:33): I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution to debate on the Education Amendment (School Community Safety) Bill 2026 and acknowledge the Deputy Premier, and Minister for Education and Early Learning, who is in the Chamber for this debate. I thank her and her team for their diligence and hard work on what I see is a step forward in the protection of the most important people of our society—our children. Schools need to be safe. They must be structured both from a behavioural perspective and through legislation. It is our role to ensure that we do everything to protect them. That is why I am delighted that the bill is before the House. In a perfect world, the bill would not be necessary, but the reality is that we do not live in a perfect world.

The legislation aims to give New South Wales schools practical tools to prevent and respond to harmful conduct by a very small minority of parents, carers and other adult community members. I reiterate that it is a minority of parents, carers and other adult community members. The majority are good people who love and care for our children. The purpose is prevention—to act early, de-escalate risk and avoid conduct reaching the point where police or the criminal justice system must be engaged. The bill protects students, teachers, principals and frontline staff—including Aboriginal education officers, community liaison officers, anti-racism contact officers and school learning support officers. It protects respectful and legitimate advocacy, or complaints or disagreement.

Parents and carers can continue to raise concerns and advocate for their children, as they currently do. The scheme is graduated and proportionate, starting with immediate orders, then ongoing orders and, only as a last resort, Local Court protection orders. No teacher or school employee should have to accept threats, harassment or abuse as part of their job, and no child should have to learn in an environment that is disrupted by that behaviour. We must consider why the bill is needed. Most families have constructive relationships with schools. However, a very small number of adults engage in threatening, intimidating and abusive and persistent harmful conduct in person and online. While that is deeply disappointing, it is also against the law, so we find ourselves in a situation where we must respond.

The 2025 Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey found that 53.7 per cent of participating school leaders had experienced threats of violence, 47.8 per cent had experienced physical violence, 35.7 per cent had experienced bullying and 35.4 per cent had experienced cyberbullying. Among affected respondents, parents or carers were identified as responsible for 66.1 per cent of threats and 89.8 per cent of cyberbullying incidents. The Australian Teacher Workforce Survey indicates that 43 per cent of New South Wales teachers cite parent behaviour as a reason for leaving the profession. One of the most important reasons for these legislative reforms is to fill current gaps. The Inclosed Lands Protection Act is focused on bounded land and does not adequately deal with conduct outside the school gates, in pick-up areas, at other school-related sites such as camps or sport carnivals, or online.

Criminal laws apply only when criminal thresholds are met and can require individual staff to enter stressful proceedings. Unreasonable behaviour includes behaviour that is disorderly, offensive, intimidating or threatening. Unreasonable communication includes approaching, phoning, emailing, texting or otherwise contacting a person or school; creating audio or visual representations; or publishing or disseminating material in a way that may cause harm. Orders can apply at a school, within 25 metres of a school or school-related place, at camps, excursions, sport and other school events, in school vehicles, at onsite education and care services, at parent association meetings, in online meetings and on school communication platforms. Orders apply to adults aged 18 years or over and may restrict entry, proximity, contact, online attendance or the use of a school communication platform.

An immediate order for an urgent response is a strong area that is focused in this legislation, used only if unreasonable behaviour creates an unacceptable and imminent risk requiring immediate action. It may be issued by an authorised school leader or delegate, including a principal, in the public school system under proposed delegations. It may be given verbally, must be confirmed in writing, and last no longer than 14 days. It must be necessary and the least restrictive means available. An ongoing order for sustained risk will be used if unreasonable behaviour or communication creates an ongoing risk of harm in person or online. It must be in writing and may last up to 12 months, with one extension of up to a further 12 months if the risk continues. Before it is made, the person must receive written notice, details of the proposed order and an opportunity to make a submission. For New South Wales public schools, the intended decision-maker is a director of educational leadership or another appropriately senior delegate, rather than the principal.

A protection order is a last resort. The Minister or delegate may apply to the Local Court only after an ongoing order is breached, repeated attempts to address the conduct have failed or there is no other reasonable step available, and vulnerabilities and support needs have been considered. A breach carries a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units, currently $5,500. The making of a protection order does not appear on a criminal history or a criminal record check. The police do not issue or monitor school community safety orders or prosecute breaches of protection orders. The police retain their existing role in responding to criminal conduct.

This legislation puts in place procedural fairness measures and safeguards. Many of those were proposed by stakeholders during consultation. It requires, in law, that a person's vulnerabilities must be considered. It mandates that communication and access plans be in place for parents and carers who may be subject to an order. It legally states that children must continue to have full access to their usual schooling and learning opportunities. School leaders, in making an order, must consider whether the order could affect a student's wellbeing, attendance and participation in school. There are rigorous review processes, including internal reviews and cost-free access to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal review.

In conclusion, when it comes to protecting our students and family engagement, a child's must education come first. Before an order is made, the decision-maker must consider its effect on the student's wellbeing, attendance, safety and participation. If a parent or carer is subject to an order, the school must establish a plan so that the student can continue to attend, participate in activities, and safely manage drop-off and pick-up. I end where I began, by saying that the protection of our students and our children must be of the highest priority. That is why I commend this bill to the House.