The Claim
“Scrapped the 'Safe Schools' anti-bullying program, on the National Day of Action Against Bullying.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim contains significant factual inaccuracies and omissions that require clarification.
The program was NOT "scrapped" on the claimed date. On March 18, 2016 (the National Day of Action Against Bullying and Violence), Education Minister Simon Birmingham announced changes to the Safe Schools Coalition program following a review by Professor Bill Louden from the University of Western Sydney [1][2]. The changes included:
- Amending three lesson plans in the All Of Us teaching guide
- Restricting certain resources to one-on-one counselling sessions between students and qualified staff
- Requiring parental consent for student participation
- Limiting external organisation references to government-funded mental health services
- Restricting all resources to secondary schools only
Importantly, the review itself found all Safe Schools Coalition resources were consistent with the program's aims of reducing prejudice and increasing support for LGBTI students [1][2]. The resources were deemed "appropriate for use in schools" by the independent reviewer [1].
The government did announce that federal funding would not continue beyond the existing contract period ending in 2017 [1][2]. However, the program resources would remain available on the Safe Schools hub website for schools to use [1]. This represents a funding cessation, not a scrapping of the program itself.
Missing Context
The claim omits several critical pieces of context:
Program Origin: The Safe Schools Coalition was originally "kickstarted by the former Labor government in 2013 and formally introduced by the Abbott government a year later" [3]. By 2016, approximately 490 schools across Australia had adopted the program [3]. This was a bipartisan-supported initiative that originated under Labor and was implemented under the Coalition.
Political Pressure: The announcement came amid significant pressure from conservative Coalition MPs, particularly senator Cory Bernardi who compiled a petition calling the program "social engineering agenda" [3][2]. The Australian Christian Lobby had been campaigning against the program, with spokesperson Wendy Francis warning of "indoctrinating children with homosexual propaganda" [3].
Review Findings: The independent review by Professor Louden found the program's official resources were "consistent with the intent and objectives of the program and are appropriate for use in schools" [1]. Despite this finding, the government proceeded with substantial restrictions.
National Day Timing: The changes were announced on March 18, 2016, which was indeed the National Day of Action Against Bullying and Violence - an annual event where schools across Australia promote anti-bullying messages [4]. The timing was criticised as inappropriate given the program's anti-bullying purpose.
Source Credibility Assessment
BuzzFeed News Australia is the original source provided with the claim. BuzzFeed News operates as a legitimate news organisation with professional journalists, separate from BuzzFeed's entertainment content. However, several credibility considerations apply:
- Editorial stance: BuzzFeed News has a documented progressive editorial stance on social issues, particularly LGBTI rights [5]. The article's framing reflects this perspective.
- Reporter credibility: Lane Sainty was a BuzzFeed News Australia reporter covering LGBTI issues and politics. The reporting appears factually accurate regarding the changes announced.
- Partisan framing: The article's headline and content emphasise the negative aspects of the changes, quoting Shadow Education Minister Kate Ellis calling the plan "sneaky and deceptive" and highlighting LGBTI advocacy group concerns [1].
- Factual accuracy: The core facts reported (changes announced, review findings, funding timeline) are consistent across multiple news sources including The Australian, ABC News, and The Sydney Morning Herald [2][3].
The source is factually accurate on the events but presents a partisan perspective favouring the program and criticising the government's actions.
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Search conducted: "Labor government anti-bullying program changes cuts" and analysis of program history.
Finding: Labor created the program; no equivalent "scrapping" action exists.
The Safe Schools Coalition Australia was established in 2010 as a Victorian state-based initiative before receiving federal funding under the Gillard Labor government in 2013 [3]. It was then formally introduced nationwide under the Abbott Coalition government in 2014 [3].
Labor's record on LGBTI school programs:
- The Gillard Labor government provided initial federal funding for Safe Schools in 2013 [3]
- Labor maintained support for the program throughout their tenure
- Shadow Education Minister Kate Ellis strongly opposed the 2016 changes, calling them "sneaky and deceptive" [1]
- Labor's position remained supportive of the program in its original form
Key distinction: While Labor governments have faced criticism on various education policies, there is no equivalent instance of Labor significantly restricting or defunding an established anti-bullying program targeting LGBTI students. The action taken in 2016 was unique to the Coalition government under pressure from conservative MPs.
Balanced Perspective
The Safe Schools controversy represents a genuine policy conflict between competing values: protecting LGBTI students from bullying versus parental rights and age-appropriate content concerns.
Legitimate criticisms of the government's actions:
- The timing on the National Day of Action Against Bullying was widely seen as insensitive and contradictory [1][4]
- The changes went beyond the review's recommendations (the review found resources appropriate) [1]
- The funding cessation announcement effectively guaranteed the program's decline despite claimed support for its continuation [1]
- Parental consent requirements could potentially "out" LGBTI students to unsupportive families
- The changes appeared politically motivated to appease conservative MPs rather than evidence-based [3]
Government's stated rationale:
- Education Minister Birmingham stated students "should not be confronted with, nor be at greater risk of, accessing information or material that is inappropriate for their age or cultural background" [1]
- The government emphasised parental rights: "Parents should have confidence in what is taught in a school and receive clear information, especially about potentially contentious issues" [1]
- The review was commissioned in response to "concerns over the program" raised by MPs and media [1]
- Resources would remain available online for schools choosing to use them [1]
Context on political dynamics:
The controversy highlighted ongoing tensions within the Coalition between moderate and conservative factions on social issues. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who had historically supported progressive positions on LGBTI issues, faced criticism for "caving" to conservatives [3]. This was part of a broader pattern where Turnbull's government made concessions to conservative MPs on social policy to maintain party unity.
Expert assessment:
The independent review's finding that resources were appropriate and consistent with program aims suggests the government's changes were more politically driven than evidence-based. However, the government's concerns about parental involvement and age-appropriateness represent legitimate values held by many Australian families.
MISLEADING
4.0
out of 10
The claim is misleading on multiple fronts. First, the program was not "scrapped" on the National Day of Action Against Bullying - substantial changes were announced, but the program continued in modified form with resources remaining available. Second, the announcement was made on March 18, 2016, not on a subsequent National Day of Action in 2017 as the claim's wording suggests [1][2]. Third, the claim omits that the program was originally created by the Labor government and had operated successfully for several years before these restrictions. The framing implies a complete termination that did not occur, while ignoring the independent review's finding that the program's resources were appropriate. The timing was indeed controversial and insensitive, but the claim's characterization of "scrapping" overstates what actually occurred.
Final Score
4.0
OUT OF 10
MISLEADING
The claim is misleading on multiple fronts. First, the program was not "scrapped" on the National Day of Action Against Bullying - substantial changes were announced, but the program continued in modified form with resources remaining available. Second, the announcement was made on March 18, 2016, not on a subsequent National Day of Action in 2017 as the claim's wording suggests [1][2]. Third, the claim omits that the program was originally created by the Labor government and had operated successfully for several years before these restrictions. The framing implies a complete termination that did not occur, while ignoring the independent review's finding that the program's resources were appropriate. The timing was indeed controversial and insensitive, but the claim's characterization of "scrapping" overstates what actually occurred.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (5)
-
1
On The National Day Of Action Against Bullying, The Government Has Wound Back Safe Schools
Several changes introduced to the Safe Schools Coalition anti-bullying program.
BuzzFeed -
2
Safe Schools sex diversity program: Turnbull orders review
News Com
-
3
Malcolm Turnbull Caves To Cory Bernardi, Plans Inquiry Into Anti-Homophobia School Program
Putting the feelings of conservatives ahead of the mental health of LGBTI kids? Gross, Malcolm.
Junkee -
4
National Day of Action Against Bullying & Violence 2017
On Friday 17th March, Brainstorm Productions will be working with schools across the nation to encourage all students to ‘take a stand together' against
Brainstorm Productions -
5PDF
Louden Review - Review of Appropriateness and Efficacy of the Safe Schools Coalition Australia Program Resources
Docs Education Gov • PDF Document
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.