Introduction by Croakey: Parents in the Northern Territory will face fines of up to $370, compulsory case conferences and potentially also prosecution if their children do not attend school and do not have “a valid reason” for being absent.
The Northern Territory Government announced these penalties today as part of its move to reintroduce truancy officers, now known as ‘School Attendance Officers’.
Minister for Education and Training Jo Hersey said in a statement that the NT Government would also work with the Commonwealth “on referring families who continue to deprive their children of an education for income management for neglecting their children”.
School Attendance Offices would patrol areas where school aged children are known to frequent during school hours, including shopping precincts, retail outlets, public housing complexes and public spaces, the Minister said.
This harmful approach will increase incarceration and inequalities, and fails to address the root causes of school disengagement, say Tabitha Lean and Debbie Kilroy, founding members of the National Network of Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls.
Kilroy also shares her own experience of being taken to a children’s prison at age 13 for “wagging” school, in a sobering reminder of the harms of such punitive policies.
Tabitha Lean and Debbie Kilroy write:
The recent announcement by the Northern Territory Country Liberal Government of its move to reinstate truancy officers – now rebranded as School Attendance Officers – is deeply troubling, especially for those concerned with the criminalisation of poverty and the racialised harm perpetuated by punitive state policies.
Under the guise of “school attendance enforcement,” this policy mandates fines and even prosecution for parents who “fail to send their children to school,” effectively criminalising parents – predominantly Aboriginal and low-income families – who may lack the financial means to pay these hefty penalties.
As a result, we fear that we will see more Aboriginal families and low-income communities bearing the brunt of these policies, amplifying the mass representation of these groups in the prison system.
While the Government claims that these truancy fines will hold parents accountable for not sending their children to school, the reality is that they will only push more people into the criminal punishment system.
For parents who can’t afford a $370 fine – an amount that, for many, would compromise basic needs – the risk of unpaid fines turning into more severe legal consequences is real. Thus, we are looking at a policy that disproportionately harms poor and Aboriginal families, already among the most targeted by the legal system.
This cycle will, predictably, lead to increased incarceration rates among people who, instead of being supported, are penalised for conditions rooted in socioeconomic hardship.
Lived experience
Exactly 50 years ago, Debbie Kilroy, now a prominent advocate for abolition of the criminal punishment system, experienced firsthand the dangers of this very approach.
As a young girl, she was locked up in the Lesley Wilson Youth Hospital for ‘wagging’ school, or what the system frames as ‘truancy.’
Deb recalls that day vividly: “So, this day, I’m dressed in my uniform to go to school, and the police come up the back stairs, and appear at the door and say, ‘You’ve got to come with us,’ and I’m like, ‘No, I’m going to school,’ and they say, ‘No, you come with us, you’re not going to school today.’
“I just thought, ‘Oh my god, you adults make no sense, like, one day you’re telling me to go to school now you say you’re not going to school.’ So, the cops took me to prison in my school uniform. I landed at the children’s prison as a 13-year-old for truanting school, and it was just one big, massive, slippery slope from there, as Debbie was pipelined into the prison system.”
Debbie’s story is a sobering reminder of where punitive policies like these can lead.
Root causes of school disengagement – like poverty, racism, lack of local employment, inadequate healthcare, and limited educational resources – are entirely sidestepped by the CLP’s policy.
The Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework argues that “while research has highlighted that school attendance and retention are important, it also highlights that improving school attendance in Indigenous communities requires concerted action between well-resourced schools and communities to create local strategies that are context sensitive, culturally appropriate, collaborative, and foster lifelong learning.”
Rather than investing in programs that address these root causes, the NT Government has chosen to invest in surveillance and punishment instead.
Punishment, rather than support
The ‘School Attendance Officers’ are positioned more like law enforcement than community advocates, tasked with patrolling shopping centres, housing complexes, and public spaces to round up children as if they are cattle.
There is no denying that this policy is fundamentally carceral in nature, and it is even revealed in its language: terms like ‘patrols’, ‘compliance’, ‘enforce’, and ‘fail to send their kids to school’ reflect a disciplinary approach that views families as suspects rather than partners, ignoring the fundamental role of trust in any educational engagement.
By framing school attendance as a matter of law enforcement rather than support, the state seeks to monitor, punish, and penalise those already at the margins, rather than offering support to families facing systemic barriers to consistent school attendance.
How can we expect children and families to trust an education system that polices them?
Reintroducing truancy officers with the power to fine and prosecute is not about improving attendance or investing in children’s futures – it’s about enforcing control.
Policies like this perpetuate a cycle of punishment and surveillance that is damaging, particularly in Indigenous communities where relationships with state authorities are already fraught with mistrust and trauma. This policy mirrors the failed, punitive logics of the past that saw Debbie locked up fifty years ago.
Glaring hypocrisy
What’s more, the hypocrisy of this policy is glaring. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, the number of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care has been rising steadily.
Despite comprising only six percent of the child population, Aboriginal children account for around 40 percent of children in out-of-home care; therefore, a significant portion of children facing truancy issues are under the so-called “care” of the state itself.
Will the state fine itself for failing these children?
For many Aboriginal children, foster care has become a pipeline to the criminal punishment system and disengagement from school, a reality that is not addressed in this punitive policy.
The Government’s failure to provide adequate resources and culturally appropriate support for these children speaks volumes. Why isn’t the state holding itself accountable for its own failings in the care and education of these young people?
Punishing parents with fines they likely can’t afford does nothing to address the structural issues driving school absenteeism. Rather than drawing on a model of punishment that has harmed people time and time again, we need to focus on providing holistic, community-centred support to families and children.
Policies like these turn poverty into a crime and deepen existing inequalities, repeating the same cycle of harm experienced by countless Aboriginal families over the past five decades.
Solutions focus
It’s time we stop returning to outdated, punitive measures and instead work toward genuine, compassionate solutions that address the root causes of educational disengagement.
Real solutions to school disengagement must involve culturally appropriate education, community-led support systems, and resources that address the material conditions leading to truancy – not surveillance and punishment.
If the CLP Government truly wanted to improve school attendance, it would focus on building relationships and providing resources, not imposing penalties and further criminalising already vulnerable communities.
Instead of taking an adversarial stance, the Government could consult with community-led organisations, particularly those that have a track record of working effectively with Aboriginal and other marginalised communities.
In the end, this policy does not address why children are disengaging from school; it merely punishes their families for it. As long as the Government treats education as a criminal matter, it will fail to create the safe, inclusive, and supportive learning environment that all children deserve.
Rather than perpetuating the cycle of poverty and criminalisation, the CLP should commit to genuine support and empowerment for families and communities. The future of our children should not be left in the hands of punitive patrols, but in the embrace of supportive, community-led resources.
See Croakey’s articles on the 2024 NT election and health
