A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses concerns that Lockridge Senior High School pressured parents to pay school fees for their children to attend the school ball, despite serving a socioeconomically disadvantaged area. The Minister's response indicates that no student was denied access based on non-payment and no refunds will be issued.

AnsweredQoN 939Legislative Council
Asked
14 May 2003
Portfolio
Education and Training

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Is the minister aware that Lockridge Senior High School required the parents of children who wished to attend the school ball to pay the school fees of their children? (2) Is the minister aware that Lockridge Senior High School serves an area of significant socioeconomic disadvantage? (3) Does the minister agree with this pressure being applied; and, if not, what action does the minister intend to take? (4) Will the minister ensure that the school is not financially disadvantaged if the fees are repaid to those parents? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(2) Is the minister aware that Lockridge Senior High School serves an area of significant socioeconomic disadvantage? (3) Does the minister agree with this pressure being applied; and, if not, what action does the minister intend to take? (4) Will the minister ensure that the school is not financially disadvantaged if the fees are repaid to those parents? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(3) Does the minister agree with this pressure being applied; and, if not, what action does the minister intend to take? (4) Will the minister ensure that the school is not financially disadvantaged if the fees are repaid to those parents? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(4) Will the minister ensure that the school is not financially disadvantaged if the fees are repaid to those parents? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister has provided the following answer - (1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(1) No student was denied access to the school ball held on 17 April 2003 on the basis of non-payment of compulsory school charges. (2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(2) Yes. (3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(3) As no student was refused attendance at the 2003 school ball on the basis of whether his or her parents paid those charges, no further action is warranted. (4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.
(4) No refund policy applies to compulsory school charges.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more