New expulsion powers for principals – PV media comment

Today’s Herald-Sun reports on new powers that will soon be available to school principals to suspend or expel students for misconduct outside of school.

According to the article:

…school leaders will soon have the authority to discipline pupils whose actions – both in person and online – outside school grounds risk the welfare of their peers and teachers.
This power is currently limited to incidents occurring within the school gates, restricting principals’ abilities to discipline students for bullying, threatening or assaulting peers after school.

Media comment

• Parents Victoria CEO Gail McHardy was interviewed by Raf Epstein on ABC Radio Melbourne this morning. (Skip to 55 min 30 sec to hear Gail’s interview.)
• Gail was also interviewed by Steve Martin on ABC Ballarat’s Breakfast program. (Skip to 2hr 22min 22 sec to hear Gail’s interview.)
• ABC News also covered the issue, including comments from Gail McHardy. (ABC News reports that PV “cautiously welcomed” the new powers for principals. In fact Gail’s comments focused on our concerns with the new powers, and she did not welcome them.)

Our view

Here’s a summary of the main points Gail made in these media interviews:

1. Acknowledge strong community expectations
   • The broader community, including families and government, expects a strong response when students cause harm.
   • However, punitive responses alone won’t resolve deeper behavioural or systemic issues.
2. Behaviour change starts with education
   • Behaviour change in the community must begin with education—not just discipline.
   • Current approaches often focus too late, responding only after harm has occurred.
3. Complexity requires caution
   • This is a highly complex issue. Simplifying it risks ignoring critical nuances faced by schools, students, and families.
   • No one stakeholder—be it school, system, or parent group—can resolve it alone.
4. Schools need time, space & support
   • Schools need capacity to manage these incidents, not just mandates.
   • Collaboration with police, child protection, and justice authorities is essential but burdensome without adequate support.
5. Protective separation for victims
   • PV supports protective separation as an educational safety measure, not a punishment. (Schools currently utilise Student Safety Plans.)
   • Victims of school-based harm must not be forced to share physical or virtual spaces with perpetrators. This protects their psychological safety and right to a fear-free education.
6. Re-education for the offender is crucial
   • Offenders must be re-educated on appropriate behaviour.
   • Their actions—whether intentional or not—have life-changing impacts on others and themselves.
7. Specialist response teams are needed
   • PV recommends a dedicated school-based rapid response team to assist principals.
   • This team would provide:
     • Intensive case management
     • Continuity of education for both victim and offender
     • Coordination with justice and welfare services
     • Support until investigations and any judicial processes conclude
8. Expanded powers must be balanced with support
   • Giving schools more disciplinary powers comes with risks.
   • These powers must be matched with resources, training, and accountability mechanisms to avoid unintended harm. For example, if a student is expelled from school, there is a risk they become more disengaged and more likely to re-offend.