Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment Bill 2015 and the related bills. I note the comments of the member for Perth and also the previous speaker on the other side, the member for Cunningham, in respect of the fees, the cost and the impediments to young people to go on to vocational training in this instance. That is right and that is proper. I draw their attention not specifically to this bill but more broadly to the discussion of the bill that was passed recently in this House a second time and is now again before the Senate—the higher education bill—and the needed reform bills. I make the point of what will be forgone. Let us make no mistake: if this legislation does not pass the Senate, the abolition of all FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP loan fees, which are currently imposed on some students undertaking higher education and vocational education and training, saving those students money and putting all students and institutions on a level playing field—and they love a level playing field on the other side—simply will not happen. So I ask those on the other side, who I have no doubt are supportive, as we all are, of seeing better opportunities and more opportunities in education for our young people, particularly in my state of Tasmania, to consider that.

We have failed our young people for too long by the participation rate that we have either at university or in other vocational education and training courses. Part of that goes back to the structure that we have in years 11 and 12, or the lack of structure. I commend the Minister for Education and Training in the state of Tasmania, Minister Rockliff, for the major reforms that he is undertaking in expanding the number of high schools that are able to offer year 11 and year 12 courses in my state. It is a staged process. Some schools have put up their hands to say they want to be part of this process and have not been successful in the first round, but the state government is doing really good work. This is so critical, particularly critical for the students who come from the remote and regional areas within my electorate of Lyons.

I also remind those opposite that funding to the Tasmanian state government from the Commonwealth, remembering that only 15 per cent of the funding for government schools comes from the Commonwealth, has increased over the forward estimates by 34 per cent. This is a good thing. This demonstrates how committed this government is to improving the opportunities not only for students going onto higher education but also for students going into vocational training—and also, in the case of Tasmania, there are opportunities to go on and complete years 11 and 12, which is required, obviously, to go into many of these other courses.

The purpose of this bill is to allow the government to create a new quality standard to enable problems with the VET providers or VET courses to be quickly addressed; to require anyone who is marketing a VET course to clearly identify who is providing the qualification; to extend the registration period for registered training organisations from five to seven years so that the national training regulator can absolutely focus on investigating and acting on high-risk and poor-quality providers—I think that makes a lot of sense—and to allow technical amendments to improve the administration of the act. The bill contains an amendment to improve transparency in the marketing of training—and a number of speakers have referred to this. This measure has come about in direct response to the negative impact of marketing by third parties, often referred to as brokers, in the training sector and, in particular, the VET FEE-HELP market. Potential vocational students must be able to clearly see what they are signing up for and who is the registered training organisation.

In my home state of Tasmania, Australia's smallest state in terms of geography and population, there are more than 100 Skills Tasmania endorsed RTOs. They range across a huge part of the employment and training sector, from child care and retail training to nursing and primary industries such as the timber industry. The providers are not just locally based companies; many are part of nationally accredited organisations. I do appreciate that it is a daunting experience for a young person and their family to find the right course and the right opportunity for their education needs. So it is imperative that the information that they receive is accurate and the RTOs and the organisations are, indeed, operating legitimately and responsibly.

As we try to improve employment opportunities, particularly for our young people in Tasmania—I know that we are not the only jurisdiction that has challenges, but we do have a real challenge with youth unemployment—the number of training courses to upskill those looking for jobs has grown. You can study for a certificate in sport turf management, shearing, or beekeeping.

In terms of the shearing industry, I think of people like Jack Monks, who is doing a wonderful job working with Australian Wool Innovation, and getting young people involved in an industry which requires a lot of skill and a lot of fitness to be able to make a good career. I think of people like Evelyn Archer, who has made a career out of wool classing, and is now the training provider for those people who want to go on from being shed hands and different things, to undertaking a career in wool classing. They are doing good work.

You can undertake business administration training, training in aged care or early childhood education, or you can get a certificate IV which will equip you with the skills to be involved in youth justice.

In my own office, NDA is a local training provider that undertakes a lot of the training that my staff have the opportunity to participate in. Recently, in correspondence sent to my office, their newsletter said:

RTOs have been in the news recently for all the wrong reasons: think ripping off clients and delivering meaningless 'instant' qualifications to name just a couple. I mention this because the Skills Fund is about to open a new round of funding and NDA would like partner with your organisation in a tender. You can do this with some confidence because:

Indeed, there are good RTOs. It is those RTOs that we want to see supported.

This bill ensures that registered training providers are ultimately responsible for services delivered by brokers on their behalf. And all parties involved, including the brokers, are required to clearly identify which RTOs will be responsible for the qualifications that students sign up to receive. In fact, under the proposed amendment, the Australian Skills Quality Authority will have the power to take action against those who do not make it clear who is responsible for the quality of the training. Our young people, in particular, deserve training of the highest standard and consistency. The federal government has committed $68 million over four years to the Australian Skills Quality Authority to enforce the tough new standards.

In terms of research, in The contribution of education to economic growth in Australia, 1997-2009 Tom Karmel estimated the impact of increasing education levels on economic growth and found that raised education levels contributed to improved productivity in the order of nearly 0.2 per cent per annum in the years of his research. He also found that this change in education levels led to an increase of about three per cent over the eight years in the average hours worked in the 15- to 64-year-old population. This was almost entirely due to increases in the number of women with degrees and post-graduate qualifications.

I look forward to the Treasurer's release of the Intergenerational report tomorrow. It is something that, I think, every Australian should contemplate. Opportunities arise because we have with a nation that is living longer. That is something that we should all celebrate.

I also noted some data in the Karmel paper about a comparative country, Canada. Interestingly, if in this country we had the same level of female work place participation as in Canada—and I think most Australian's would understand it to be a comparative jurisdiction with many similarities, such as being a big country with a small population—the Australian economy would be, every year, $25 billion larger. I think that is something to contemplate. It is a challenge for all of us. It starts with the sort of reforms that we are trying to make in terms of the legislation before us today.

It is agreed that productivity —innovation, if you like— is enhanced by workers who possess the skills and knowledge required to undertake the occupations for which they have been trained . The role of Australia's VET system, supported by the g overnment, is to provide students with the skills needed for work in various occupations and trades.

This g overnment has already done much in this field to provide top quality vocational training and make students feel secure in the training that they are receiving. It has l aunched the Nation al Training Complaints Hotline, a joint initiative with the states and territories to provide a single point for complaints to be heard and actioned. It will also crack down on inducements like free i Pads or cash rebates , and enhance duty of care for training providers to abide by the date they sign a student up to a student loan.

These reforms have come about partly because o f the rapid expansion of VET FEE -HELP and its misuse by some providers . It was a direct result of Labor's failure to properly administer and implement the program —isn't that a story we have heard before?— and failure to protect vulnerable students and taxpayers from unscrupulous training providers. The Australian Skills Quality Authority will undertake 23 audits of RTOs who have been identified trying to exploit the VET FEE-HELP program.

The f ederal g overnment will provide nearly $ 6 billion this year to support vocational education and training courses through direct funding for programs, support to the states and territories , and student loans. In particular, we have replaced the grants that were previously given to those people undertaking apprenticeships, because the problem was that half of them did not complete the courses—yet, we were giving them a grant up front. The system has been changed and the new trade support loans are something that I am particularly excited about. I can see just how helpful they will be in my home state of Tasmania. I have spoken to a number of employers and a number of apprentices about these, and they all welcome them. We are trying to boost the number of skilled tradesmen and tradeswomen.

Trade s upport l oans will provide support of up to $8 , 000 in the critical first year of an apprenticeship and up to $20,000 over four years. If you complete your apprenticeship, we will knock 20 per cent off. It is the best deal these young people will ever get in their life. It is a system that is accountable not only to the people that it is supporting but also to the taxpayers of Australia. These loans have proved so successful in the six months since the scheme was introduced that 16,000 people across Australia have already taken them up. The loans are to help apprentices with the costs of living and learning, particularly in the early years of their apprenticeship, when wages are low, to try to stem the flow of young people dropping out of training because they do not believe they can afford it. Those who take out a loan will not be charged interest or fees on the loan and are not required to start paying back their loan until their income is above $53,345, in 2014-15.

Research last year proved that the VET system offers a cheaper and less stressful entry point to the education sector for people who have experienced some social disadvantage in their lives. Tabatha Griffin found that financial stress was one of the biggest barriers to students moving from lower level qualifications to higher level VET and higher education. So we are moving to alleviate that. Other research last year by academic Sonia White found that the inherent differences in the two sectors mean that transitioning students have to adjust to two different learning cultures, expectations and models of assessment.

Our higher education reforms introduced by Minister Pyne last year recognise the potential of a collaborative framework between VET providers and universities for facilitating the smooth transition from the VET sector, which is critical in my state, through those pathway courses to university. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context