Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Thank you, honourable Speaker, and I rise to talk to the Teachers Registration Bill 2026. I indicate upfront that we Greens recognise a whole raft of really important changes have been made in this bill and intend to support it, notwithstanding some significant questions we have of the minister in terms of some of the language in the bill and some stakeholder feedback. I want to acknowledge the work of my colleague the honourable Cassy O’Connor MLC, she carries the education portfolio for us and she will be having a very close look at this as well in the Legislative Council. Subject to the conversation we have here we reserve our right obviously to potentially move some amendments on behalf of stakeholders up there.
I want to thank everyone involved in this process, the act review steering committee – obviously the review was stood up in 2024 and there has been a power of work undertaken since then, both by the steering committee, obviously departmental officials, ministerial officials, and of course stakeholders who have engaged in really good faith in this process and come back numerous times with feedback and the like. I acknowledge a few of those, the Commissioner for Children and Young People; the Independent Education Union; Laurel House, as the Leader of the Opposition mentioned, has been back in touch again with some feedback that I’ll go into as well; The Office of the Independent Regulator; SASS; the Tasmanian Principals Association; UTAS; Working It Out; the Australian Education Union; and the Child Safety Reform Implementation Monitor.
It’s had really good engagement, and I think it’s been worked into a really good place, because the purposes of the review were identified and established upfront and they were really welcome and obviously really supportable. The objective of the review was really clearly to make recommendations to improve things, so that one, children are safe when they learn, two, teachers, including those in early childhood, are high quality are meet professional stands, and three, the legislative framework reflects modern regulatory practise and it’s fit for purpose. It’s really welcome that this has been done.
I too want to pay a tribute to our educators, support staff, and professionals in our schools. I trained as a teacher, I worked for a few years, and I have to say it is a tough profession, it is a very tough profession. It is a very tough, under-loved and under-acknowledged profession and teachers wear their hearts on their sleeves and give it all in the interests of their students and young people. And it’s not always returned. The favour and the appreciation and the respect is not always returned. Turns out I couldn’t work in the institution of the school, but I have immense respect and appreciation and offer my thanks to all teachers because they do such a fabulous job and our future prosperity as a community, as a caring, as a prosperous, as a wealthy community really is underpinned by our education system and our educators. I want to pay tribute to our teachers and a registration board is a foundational principle of the integrity of those teachers. The integrity of the teachers, the professionalism, their legal status and the like. So getting this kind of information right is critically important and, as a result, the bill is really welcome. There’s been some positive changes also between the draft bill and the tabled bill. I think that is welcome and it reflects the fact that the government has been listening on this one.
To the bill itself, obviously this Teachers Registration Bill 2026 repeals the Teachers Registration Act 2000 and replaces it with a new act. Importantly, the new act addresses the commission of inquiry recommendations 6.1, 6.11, 6.12, 6.13, 6.14 and 6.15. Obviously, the commission of inquiry was a profound process that shocked and really sobered us all in terms of our responsibilities as administrators and as lawmakers here, and our responsibility to our children to keep them safe, to make sure that their interests are protected, and when it comes to schools and institutions, make sure that those institutions foster the kind of environment that allows our kids to flourish, to be their best, and to learn to their highest degree.
Other key changes include the regulation of early childhood learning, requiring 100 hours of professional development every five years, requiring those with provisional registration to acquire full registration within five years, and providing a non‑practising category of registration. We also accept and, I guess, look at this act and see that it’s way more logical, it’s better structured, it’s neatly structured, so it’s a welcome improvement on the Teachers Registration Act 2000.
The Leader of the Opposition has flagged some feedback from Laurel House. I was going to read them in again, but I’ll save time. There’s five specific areas that Laurel House has flagged. They’d like some more enquiry, and I’ll listen with care what the minister comes back to in terms of those issues. I know the officials would have this communication but I want to flag as well: I do intend to go into committee so that we can look at some of the specific clauses where they have identified issues and ask for language to be clarified. I ask for the minister to sort of read in the intent of some of them and actually ask questions and flag some of the concerns that Laurel House has put on the record. I’ll just highlight that for the committee stage.
Honourable Speaker, to go through the bill, Teachers Registration Bill 2026. Part 1 obviously provides for definitions and objects, etcetera. Clause 3 provides for objects, including the provision for registration, upholding standards and confidence and protecting learners and education participants, and the current act obviously doesn’t have objects, so that’s a welcome change to upgrade it to include those objects. I’ll put on the record now, seeing as I’ve got it here, obviously, Laurel House, and many of us, would like to see a specific object about keeping children safe in there. There’s a real question as to why that hasn’t been adopted, so I look forward to a response on that. The new act provides much more of a focus on children and learners. The current act makes some sparse references to students, whereas the new act makes references to both children and all learners. Clause 6 provides a definition of to teach, and to clarify when a person is taken to teach in an educational setting. The new act also provides matters to be considered in good character assessment. This includes past convictions and charges, refusal, suspension or cancellation of a working with vulnerable people registration and general behaviour matters from the current act. It also adds an assessment of any past teaching registration or equivalent being cancelled or suspended. Provisions are also included for assessment of fitness to be a teacher. These provisions are reflective of the current ones, with the exception that they outline a requirement for the teacher to pay the costs of any medical assessment required.
The current act does not have its own principles and instead applies principles from the Education Act. The proposed new act has its own principles. The principles focus on the rights of learners in respects to teachers and expectations on teachers, whereas the Education Act is more focused on the education system as a whole.
In Part 2, the functions, powers and reporting structures of the board remain largely unchanged: Promotion of the teaching profession is removed as a function, additional provisions are inserted providing that the board is not subject to direction from the minister or secretary in response to individual matters and that they must establish review processes. The assumption around this is for internal review and that external review functions must remain and so, minister, you could perhaps confirm this assumption that the additional provisions are provided that the board is not subject to direction by the minister or secretary in respect to individual matters and that they establish a review process.
So, just to confirm whether that’s for internal review and external review functions remain. The provision for keeping of registers are also expanded, adding the requirement to keep information on previously held registrations and refusal of registrations. The personal details that must be kept on the register have been drastically scaled back to simply include name, address, qualifications and place of employment. The requirements to keep former names, date of birth, teaching experience, registration number, registration type and other information have all been removed.
It appears this removal has occurred on the basis that the act should only require the bare minimum and that regulators should provide more detailed specifics if needed. Other governance, administrative and structural matters remain similar or the same as in the previous act, the act we’re appealing. Part 3 of the new act extends the purview of the framework. Currently, it focuses on registered teachers, holders of limited authorities and those supervised by registered teachers. The new act covers full registration, provisional registration, specialised VET registration, AATs, (alternative authorisation to teach) early childhood teachers authorised under the Australian Qualifications Framework who are obtaining qualifications required for registration under the act, as well as other categories that may be prescribed.
The part also extends the criteria on which a registration can be immediately suspended or cancelled to include to include a failure to pay a fee or a levy. The part also requires that registered teachers and AAT holders must prescribe a complete prescribed child safety and safeguarding training, prescribed professional learning and professional learning required by the board.
The board may also issue certifications for child safety, highly accomplished or lead teachers, and any other matters prescribed or considered appropriate by the board. The police check provisions are also made explicit in terms of the information that can be obtained. Part 4 deals with complaints, inquiries and disciplinary matters. The new act clarifies that complaints can only be made on the basis that a person’s conduct demonstrates that person is no longer of good character or fit to be a teacher. The new provisions also outline that, in addition to the details of the complaint being provided to the subject, their current employer and employer at the time of the complaint, the board must provide the complaint to relevant authorities if appropriate in the circumstances.
The new provisions also stipulate that the board does not have to provide these details to the above persons if it would hinder, delay or prejudice justice matters, if it would be likely to result in injury or damage to property or persons, or if it would identify a child who is a victim or witness. It also stipulates that the name of the complainant does not have to be made available if the complainant is a child or has requested their name not to be provided.
I want to just pause here and welcome this provision. It is something that stakeholders had identified needed to be incorporated into this bill, and it’s really welcome to see that it has been picked up. The provisions for giving notice of an inquiry are extended, from giving notice to just the subject of the inquiry and the complainant, to any other persons the board considers appropriate. The general provisions in respect to the conduct of an inquiry are changed to include that it is, as far as possible, to keep the best interests of the child paramount and to allow inquiries to occur remotely or in person. It is also amended to allow evidence gathered under other legislation that is provided to the inquiry to be used.
Provisions are introduced dealing with interviewing children as part of an inquiry. The provisions require, for a child 16 years or older, to obtain consent from the child; and otherwise to gain consent from a guardian unless the child’s only guardian is the subject of the inquiry. These provisions also require a person to be engaged with appropriate qualifications, skills or experience in interviewing children. Any negative effect the interview may have on the child must be considered, as well as whether it is appropriate for a guardian to attend. Steps must be taken to mitigate any negative effects on the child, and they must be allowed to have a support person present. For an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child, the opportunity for that support person to be from a recognised Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander organisation must be given. This is welcome in terms of trauma‑informed practice and the interests of the child.
The provisions require that a hearing be private; that it only be in public if it is considered to be in the public interest after considering the impact of a public hearing on any person appearing at the hearing. After a decision has been made by the board, it’s a new requirement that they must notify the person, their employer, the complainant and each registration authority unless that would hinder prejudice or delay justice matters.
In Part 5, broad powers are introduced to allow the board to acquire information from persons they reasonably believe may hold information that is relevant to the board’s functions and powers. They can only request information from a government entity based outside of Tasmania or an entity established under a law of a jurisdiction other than Tasmania. The current act only requires an employer to provide information to the board in circumstances where they have taken disciplinary action or the employee has retired before they could take disciplinary action. The new framework revolves more around the conduct of the employee than the response of the employer. These circumstances include the commission of an offence against, with, or in the presence of a child, sexual misconduct, physical violence against a child, grooming, or causing significant emotional or psychological harm to a child, as well as any other reportable behaviour, including if they do not ‘meet the standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher’.
Further provisions require a State Service entity, Tasmania Police, an employer or other prescribed persons to notify the board if they are aware of an allegation from a person registered under the act. Provisions also allow the board to provide information to relevant Tasmanian and interjurisdictional entities. The board must also notify employees if it becomes aware of charges and convictions. Information obtained by the board is exempt from the Right to Information and Personal Information Protection acts.
In Part 6, the offences remain largely the same as in the original act, with the exception of the ability to prescribe infringement offences and allowing the board to serve infringement notices for these offences.
Finally, Part 7. Provisions are introduced allowing the minister to issue ministerial instructions. Additional provisions are added to allow the board to require employers to provide an annual return of teachers working for them, as well as allowing the board to provide employers with details of their teachers whose registration is due to expire or who have not paid their fees.
There are some comprehensive changes between these two acts. The Greens welcome the fact that this is a repeal bill that then introduces a new bill. I think it’s a much better approach than trying to amend the Teachers Registration Act 2000. It responds quite comprehensively to the recommendations of the commission of inquiry and also the input of a range of stakeholders.
