Patrick Secker (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is certainly a pleasure to follow the member for Batman and other members of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in discussing the committee’s report entitled Skills: rural Australia’s need. It is one of the truly bipartisan committees of the parliament, with members working together for the betterment of agricultural, fisheries and forestry industries all around Australia. Whether Labor, Liberal or Independent—and I see the member for New England is in the chamber—all members of the committee have worked well together to try and come up with recommendations that will help agricultural communities.

I am a beneficiary of agricultural training. I went to Urrbrae Agricultural High School in South Australia. I did a two-year agricultural course, so I have firsthand knowledge of how it works. I am very thankful I did that course because it taught me many things that I perhaps would not have learnt on the farm or through reading and so on. I recognise the importance of training, not only for agriculture but for all areas of skills shortages in rural areas.

It is interesting to note that in my electorate of Barker we have had outstanding changes—almost a quiet revolution—in training. When I was first elected, a little over 200 children were in VET—vocational education and training—in schools. There are now over 2,000. That is a pretty astonishing change to the way we think about training, certainly in my electorate, and I am sure that is followed quite closely by other electorates around Australia. At the same time, when I was first elected, there were 363 apprentices in training. There are now over 3,000—another astonishing change. So things are happening, but this report quite rightly shows that we do have some weaknesses.

I would like to make some comments about those weaknesses and some of the recommendations we made. It was my feeling—and I do not say this for any particular reason, such as one state verses another—that New South Wales needed the greatest changes and emphasis in training in agricultural areas of any of the states that we visited. I do not want to put blame on New South Wales but that was certainly the feeling I got from speaking to people there.

I would like to focus on the rural skills and education recommendations that have been identified throughout this report. Before I do that, I acknowledge the chair, the member for Hume, for his able chairmanship of that committee, and the secretariat, which, as usual, did a wonderful job in helping us come to our decisions.

This country has an Australian apprentices program which provides a valuable mechanism for structuring and funding training in rural skills. We know, through the evidence obtained, that this scheme is not as effective as it should be in providing training to rural trainees and apprentices. I clearly support the overhauling of the administration of this system to ensure that funds and places are directed where they are needed to provide the best outcome for those undertaking the training and, ultimately, improving the skills base of our country. We need to have the appropriate people teaching these skills and we need to have the training conducted in the most appropriate manner. That is pretty easy to say, but we got some very clear evidence that that is not happening.

I should also acknowledge the work that this government has done in setting up Australian technical colleges across Australia and the difference that will make to our future as a nation. By setting up more ATCs, we are increasing the training opportunities in traditional trades skills provided to regional areas. I would, however, like to see one established in my electorate of Barker to allow us to increase the skills my people can provide to our rural areas—even though we are kicking lots of goals. There is a perfect model for an Australian technical college in the electorate of Barker, which would be based on a multicampus facility rather than on the one- or two-campus facilities that we have.

See this speech in context