The review commissioned by the Education Ministry has initially recommended an operational focus looking at the structure of the service but made no recommendations about extra funding. 

Frustrated front-line truancy officers have had no increase in their annual funding of $4.1 million for five years. The service’s 250 field officers are becoming so stretched that they are struggling to keep up with the workload. 

One officer predicts 25 per cent of truancy staff will leave if there is no more money. South Auckland officer Robert Taha, who said he was resigned to getting no more funding, has set up a lobby group to petition Education Minister Trevor Mallard for legislative changes and stiffer penalties for parents. 

“Somehow it has to be made easier for us,” Mr Taha said. “If there’s no more money or resources, then we need stronger legislation to put more responsibility on parents and schools.” 

Under the Education Act, parents can be fined between $15 and $150 for the first offence. Some parents have been charged and convicted. Mr. Taha described the law as a farce, saying many parents were laughing at the small fines. 

Dunedin-based researcher Michael Gaffney visited five district truancy services in August and September to compile the ministry report. Once finalised, it will be included in a wider review expected to be with Education Minister Trevor Mallard by the end of the year. 

 The last available survey, in 1998, had 5.6 per cent of secondary and 1.4 per cent of primary students truant. 

However, Auckland’s police chief last year provided anecdotal figures to the Law Society that in Manurewa about 1200 children a day were truant. In Glen Innes, Panmure and Mt Wellington, 1500 kids a day were believed to absent without reason from school. 

Officers in the central districts discussed elements of the report with ministry officials at a meeting in Levin last month. One attendant said any implementations would unlikely be seen in the field for two to three years. 

North Taranaki officer Ewai Waiaraki said the service “will lose a lot of good people” without more funding.“Three years ago we started dealing with primary school kids — 10 and 11-year-olds — and it’s not changing. I have a family of four living on $70 a week and they save money by not sending their kids to school because then they don’t have to buy lunch.” 

The lack of funding was so severe that some truancy services had made themselves incorporated societies to apply for community grants. In Patea, the five staff don’t draw a wage from the ministry’s funds to maximise resources. 

There is also some concern over how the Non Enrolment Truancy Service will fit into any system revamp. Some truancy officers believe they are already doing Nets’ job. There have been suggestions some were charging Nets when they help out. NETS denied it. 
 

The Education Act says that students under 16 must attend school unless they are sick or the circumstances are beyond their control. If a student is under 16 then I will take legal action against the parents for supporting their son’s unreasonable absence from school. Parents have an obligation, and If they are not meeting that obligation then we will remind them of it.” - Mr O’Connor said parents need to accept responsibility for getting their children to school.  
  
                                 —  NZPA  6 November 2002 
 
 

I have read with interest the seemingly endless stream of articles by Donna Awatere Huata regarding truancy. I would be quite keen to know: 

Where does her information on truancy stem from, and, 
What is her expertise in dealing with truants and their families? 
I have often said to my peers, "whenever people make comments about truancy, who defends our position?" Well here goes. 

My name is Chris Toa. 
I have been a truancy officer since 1996. 
I am from Porirua and these are my own personal comments. 
 
 
 
     A truancy/attendance officer is employed to:  
 
     Liaise between the school and the family, after a referral is made, to encourage dialogue that may possibly improve the attendance of the child. 
 
     Patrol the city area, with I.D., looking for children out of school, try to get their correct names and inform their school/s. 
 
     Keep good records.  
 
 
 
 

If the child's/family's issues have not been dealt with properly, then how can you expect the child to continue attending? Truancy is the least of his/her problems. 

What do we do now? 

Children with skin complaints hate going to school. 
Most truants already have a history with welfare and justice. 
Where is the support from the Ministries of Health, Social Welfare and Justice for truancy?  
Education is the only agency that has put money up to address the problem, although their systems definitely need an overhaul, because very little has been changed since 1997. 

Jail for truancy?  
Some parents have lost control of their children and don't know how to discipline them. They are told they cannot smack them, but no one has shown them an alternative that works. 

No discipline, no control. 
If the parent drops the child at school and the child leaves the school ground 10 minutes later, who's at fault? 
The parent, or the school? 
If this trend continues, who goes to jail? 

Are we advocating that people should lose their freedom, because of poor systems that don't work? 
Perhaps we would all be better served if the Government parties, focussed more on, "What is chasing, their future voters away from the classroom." 
 
I believe it has been left to the MoE, through schools and school communities, to tidy up the loose ends.  Is that fair?  
 
A child's time at school should be a happy one. 
A happy child does not truant. 
 
 
Chris Toa 
POBox 50-344 
Porirua 
04) 237-5424 ext 837 
025) 264-6398 
christ@mana.school.nz 

Truancy is the single most damaging threat to children’s achievement at school, says Freyberg High School principal Russell Trethewey. 

He was speaking in the wake of a successful prosecution last week of a Freyberg parent whose children continually failed to show up for school.  Mr Trethewey said he was feeling “reasonably positive” about the outcome of the prosecution. 

He said it would send a “clear message” to other parents whose children were missing too much school, without a satisfactory excuse. 
“Some parents just make it too easy for their kids to slip out and not attend school.” 

 Debbie Cameron appeared in Palmerston North District Court on Friday (Nov 15) charged with two breaches of the Education Act.  She was convicted and fined $75 on each count and ordered to pay court costs of $130.00.  The fines collected from Cameron, a solo mother of four, will go back into a government-administered account. 

Mr Trethewey said the school had been urged to prosecute Cameron by the Education Ministry.  “I guess they are looking for some test cases,” he said. 
The financial cost would be significant, and there would be “some financial hurt” for Cameron, but truancy was the “single most damaging” threat to a child’s achievement at school.” 

 Mr Trethewey also said that Freyberg was investigating more prosecutions