Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Cunningham proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government failing students in vocational education.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has been a very interesting 24 hours for the vocational education and training sector, and I anticipate a very interesting debate in the chamber today. We have seen in Fairfax media the release of a draft document about the potential for a federal takeover of the vocational education and training sector. This is, I would argue, a critically important question for the future of Australia, directly relevant to issues that all of us in this chamber have on numerous occasions said we were engaged with—that is: jobs; innovation; growing new industries; transforming existing industries to make them sustainable into the future; making sure that Australians, as the world of work changes as it is disrupted by technology, are capable, with the skills and knowledge needed, to take up the opportunities that are offered. These are real, direct, economic and social questions that go to the heart of some of the major debates we are having in this country about what policies will actually deliver for the future.

Once again, today we have seen that, while the Prime Minister likes to talk about being innovative, he is certainly very agile in the way that he interprets that. There is absolutely no doubt from worldwide evidence over decades that, if you want to drive innovation, if you want to drive jobs growth and if you want to have sustainable transformation in your industries and your economy, the critical factor underpinning that is the quality and reach of your education sector at all levels.

This government has gone out of its way to fail at all levels. We have seen in particular the school sector being gravely disappointed by this government. The Prime Minister got up in question time today, faced with this particularly important question, and gave us another Turnbull lecture on teacher quality.

You do not have to tell us how important teacher quality is. In fact, I am an ex-teacher. I know very well what teacher quality is and how significant it is in the classroom. But I can also tell you: cutting to the bone the funding that you provide to our schools is going to have a pretty dramatic and devastating effect as well. And that is what this government has done: made $30 billion in cuts to schools and abandoned the final two years of Gonski funding, despite their promises before the election.

My colleagues the members for Adelaide and Kingston, in their portfolio areas, and each and every one of us in this room will continue to make the government face up to the fact that they need to deal with the funding issue in the education sector. I will say that, no matter what they do say, we will probably be pretty sceptical about it, given what they said before the last election and what they have actually delivered. But we will not absolve them from addressing the issue of funding in our schools.

What is happening in the post-secondary sector? Is there any good news there?

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No!

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, not at all. In the university sector, where we need to ensure that we are engaged with making university education accessible and affordable for Australians who are motivated and able to undertake that study, all we have seen is a program from this government that will push university education out of the reach of many ordinary Australians, the potential for $100,000 degrees and the gutting of funding to the university sector. Has this gone away?

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No!

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No!

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think they hope it has. I think they hope that people will stop talking about it. The reality is: it is still squarely on the Prime Minister's agenda. It is another one of those things. As he said to us the other day, it is one hundred and however many days since he became Prime Minister—

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One hundred and forty-two.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One hundred and forty-two.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One hundred and forty-two days—thank you to my colleagues on both sides of the House, eager to make sure I know it is 142 days. And what did he say, 'Well, nothing has changed.' Too right nothing has changed. That university agenda is still on the table, and, again, we will pursue them right up to the election on what that means.

But there has been something new in the last 24 hours. We have now discovered that they want to take on the vocational sector as well. It does not exactly inspire much confidence on this side of the House. But let us be clear, given our assessment of their appalling track record in schools and universities, you would not be surprised if we were pretty critical of this proposition. I am sure the government minister sitting at the table talks quite regularly with his National Party colleagues in New South Wales.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What did the New South Wales minister say?

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Jagajaga asked me, 'What did the New South Wales Minister for Skills say?' Well, he was very interesting on this matter. Yesterday, before we found out, courtesy of Fairfax Media, that there was this draft proposal for a takeover wandering around through COAG processes, the Minister for Skills in New South Wales very helpfully came out and told us in the media that he thought his federal colleagues were hopeless at running the VET sector and had made an absolute dog's breakfast of getting the VET FEE-HELP issue under control.

The Prime Minister, who wanted to make much of this in his answer in question time today, just skipped a small period of time—two years. Actually, it is a bit over two years now, where we have seen, under their watch, VET FEE-HELP grow from around $700 million in 2013 to around $1.7 billion. We have had three ministers grappling with this issue over that time and failing to actually rein in the problem. This performance, if you like, across three ministers—and I think the whole government needs to take responsibility for it—is not marked down as a fail by us alone. It has also been marked down as a fail by their state colleagues. I cannot imagine anything clearer or more damning. Not only the Minister for Skills in New South Wales but also Tasmanian government basically said, 'Over our dead body. We are not going to let that lot get hold of our TAFE system.' So the reality for this federal conservative government is that they cannot find a friend anywhere for their own performance, let alone expanding that performance to a complete federal takeover of the sector.

Labor is absolutely determined that TAFE will have a strong future in this country. The Prime Minister, being asked directly by the Leader of the Opposition about TAFE and the implications for TAFE in their proposed takeover, did not mention the word 'TAFE' once. That is the track record of this government. They very rarely talk about TAFE as the public provider in the sector.

It is our view that a balanced VET sector is built on the back of a strong and dominant public provider, through TAFE. To deliver that you need to ensure that they are not treated just like any other training provider, because they are not. They have a far greater responsibility in having a direct capacity to deliver government priorities and directions for ensuring that regional and rural Australia have access to quality, affordable vocational training and education. I think the minister at the table particularly, but also other members opposite, would well understand how important TAFE is in their communities. But they never talk about how they are going to make it sustainable into the future.

In fact, this proposition in this leaked document would be devastating for TAFE. I am not just saying that as an assessment or from an analytical approach. I would invite the minister to look at what happened in Victoria under the conservative government, which completely deregulated the system and took away the base community funding that TAFE used to ensure it could deliver in rural and regional Australia, and TAFE was decimated. The Andrews government is working hard to rebuild it. But I will tell you what: when you destroy it—and you can do that quickly—it takes a hell of a long time to build it up again. (Time expired)

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this matter of public importance. At the outset I remind members opposite that it was the Labor Party that put in place a policy without the necessary safeguards to protect taxpayers and students.

I will give them a little bit of a history lesson. In 2009 Labor introduced the VET FEE-HELP program so that students undertaking a diploma or an advanced diploma could access a loan to help with their course fees. On the surface, that seems to be a reasonable proposition. But, unfortunately, when they did that Labor failed to put in place sufficient controls and safeguards to protect students and to protect taxpayers. In typical Labor fashion, when they set up the scheme they did not have an eye to the implementation risks, which is a very important fact.

In 2012 they again failed to think about the risks when they expanded access to the VET FEE-HELP program by removing the credit transfer arrangements between VET providers, and VET providers and universities. Unfortunately, the changes introduced by the former Labor government have undermined confidence in VET and created a situation whereby unscrupulous VET FEE-HELP providers have flourished at the expense of students and taxpayers. As a result of Labor's failure to think ahead, there was a huge surge in enrolments arranged by unscrupulous VET FEE-HELP providers, from 2012 onwards. They preyed on vulnerable people, putting them into courses of dubious quality that they had little prospect of completing. They lured people into courses with offers of laptops, cash payments and shopping vouchers, and tried to claim that the courses were free, or government funded, when we all know that they are not. Labor had the opportunity to fix this mess when complaints started coming into the Australian Skills Quality Authority, but they failed to do so.

Labor have acknowledged it was their failure. Let me remind the House of the mea culpa statement by the shadow minister for higher education, research, innovation and industry from September last year. Senator Carr is quoted in The Age of 18 September. The article states:

Labor Senator Kim Carr said Labor introduced VET FEE-HELP with good intentions but the scheme contains 'fundamental weaknesses' that need to be fixed.

He went on to say that the regulators 'were not given enough power to crack down on rogue operators'—well, that was right. The article continued:

Senator Carr said the Gillard government's removal of a requirement for providers to have credit transfer arrangements in place with higher education providers was a mistake.

In typical Labor fashion, Senator Carr then washed his hands of the problem and is reported as saying:

Although Labor introduced VET FEE-HELP, it is the government's responsibility to restore confidence in the scheme.

We are all too used to cleaning up Labor's mess, and we are doing it.

For the education of those members opposite, I want to run through some of the 23 measures the coalition has put in place to clean up Labor's failures from 2012. Firstly, we acted to enhance consumer protections to lift the standard of behaviour of providers by banning inducements. No longer can providers or their agents offer laptops, gift vouchers, phones and other sweeteners to sign students up to loans. We acted to tighten up the rules around marketing so that students could not be told that the courses they were signing up for were free or government funded. We strengthened the rules around enrolment so that providers have to give students accurate information about the course and their rights and obligations. We banned withdrawal fees so that students could withdraw from a course without being compelled to continue a course of poor quality and without being charged a fee. We introduced tougher rules around the use of agents and brokers so that training providers are accountable for the actions of their agents. Providers must have a written agreement with any agent they use to market VET courses where VET FEE-HELP is available. We banned providers from being able to use VET FEE-HELP as a hook to get people's attention when cold-calling. Providers must require their agents to identify the VET FEE-HELP provider that a prospective student will be referred to, and the name of the course, and disclose that the agent will receive a commission if the person enrols in the course.

The government acted swiftly to stamp out the behaviours that flourished because of Labor's failure in 2012. Unlike Labor, we do not want people being hassled in shopping centres, outside Centrelink or in the privacy of their homes by unscrupulous providers and their agents. We made providers more accountable for ensuring that students have the capacity to undertake a particular course. We do not want to see people signed up for courses that they have no capacity to complete and then be left with a massive debt. We changed the rules around invoicing so that providers must issue a student with a VET FEE-HELP invoice notice at least 14 days before each census date for a unit of VET study. The census date is the date upon which their debt becomes payable .We put rules in place to ensure students cannot be hit with the entire cost of a course up-front. A provider must determine at least three fee periods for charging purposes for each course to ensure that the student's debt is incurred as they progress through the course. We have included strengthened protections for young people so that a person under the age of 18 must have the documentation signed by a parent or guardian. For all students, we have put in place rules so that a provider must not accept a request for a VET FEE-HELP loan from a student until two days has elapsed since their enrolment. Should a provider not abide by these rules, then a person may apply to the department for the remission of their VET FEE-HELP debt, and, from 1 January 2016, any person who was subject to unacceptable behaviour by a provider will be able to have their loan cancelled. We have sought to address the unsustainable growth in the scheme that was the result of aggressive strategies that were put in place, particularly by agents but by unscrupulous providers in general. Senator Carr himself has acknowledged the rapid growth in the scheme. In addition to these reforms, we have frozen the scheme at 2015 levels, awaiting a fundamental redesign of VET FEE-HELP, and we will put in place a new system in 2017.

And there is more, I say to the member for Cunningham. We have put in place changes to the legislation to allow payment in arrears on a quarterly basis for certain providers instead of payment in advance. Where there are concerns about the performance of certain providers, payments may be paused for new enrolments. We have also introduced infringement notices and civil penalties for provider breaches of certain requirements. We have introduced new financial and trading history requirements so that only established providers with a genuine track record can enter the scheme.

These are huge changes that we have put in place to address the failures of Labor. They were the ones who failed to put in place the safeguards, but we are fixing this. The coalition is committed to a strong VET sector and to deliver quality training for Australian students that meets the needs of employers. We are investing $6 billion a year—including $1.8 billion through payments to the states and $1.4 billion for our own direct programs—to assist with vocational training. The Commonwealth is investing $831 million to support apprentices though the Australian Apprenticeship Support Network. We are providing incentives to assist people to get into apprenticeships.

We are about supporting the VET sector. We understand the importance of having a high-quality VET sector that meets the needs of students and prepares those students not only for the jobs of today but also for the jobs of tomorrow—a system that can meet the needs of older workers who are seeking to transition from one career into another or perhaps to update their skills so that they can stay in the workforce for longer.

Labor have no funded plans for VET. We heard their excuse for a policy on education this week. It is nothing more than a $37 billion unfunded thought bubble which was put in place to protect the Leader of the Opposition's hide. We are about supporting VET. We are about cleaning up Labor's mess. It is a shame Labor took so long to realise that their own policies were a total failure.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The only explanation I can give for the minister's speech is that he slept through the last 2½ years. He has been in government for 2½ years. When they came to government, the figure for VET FEE-HELP for 2013, which was our last year—a partial year—of government, was around $700 million. The next year, in 2014, it was $1.6 billion. It grew from $800 million to $1.6 billion and they slept through it. It was estimated to reach $4 billion in 2015 and they still slept. They slept through those years, and now the minister gets up—2½ years into government; 2½ years after whatever it was that Labor caused. They let this grow and it is our fault somehow. It grew from $800 million to an estimated $4 billion on their 2½ year watch and they slept through it. That is the only explanation I can give for that.

Now they are about to drag TAFE, one of our finest institutions, into the mess that they have presided over in the last 2½ years. They have presided over the growth of an extraordinarily shonky system in VET education and now they are going to drag TAFE into it as well. If there is anything you can say about today it is that we have seen proof, yet again, of the ocean of difference between Labor in education and the Liberal Party in education. We have seen the Liberal Party, when they were elected, walk away from their commitment to schools and cut $30 billion from our children's future. They reconfirmed over Christmas that that remains. Then there were the $100,000 degrees—they are still on the table. Now we learn that the one remaining element, TAFE, one of our great institutions—even though it has come under extraordinary pressure in the last few years, because of Liberal cuts—is coming under attack again. It is the envy of our neighbours to the north; they look to TAFE as an example of how to train for vocational education.

We have a Prime Minister who talks about jobs. He talks a lot about jobs, yet he decimates the very infrastructure that this country needs to make it possible for our people to participate in the modern workforce. He rips away at our schools. He rips away at our universities. He rips away at the capacity of people to participate in the workforce by engaging in the development of their skills. What are they actually going to do? According to the secret plans that were leaked this morning—there are a lot of secrets out of there after 2½ years, and we are finally hearing of some of their plans—their plan is to move TAFE out of the states and into the federal system, and then open it up to the same kind of competitive process that we see in the VET system. We are seeing absolute disregard for one of our great institutions. Having watched this government preside over the extraordinary rise in appalling behaviour in the VET scheme, this is not a government that you would trust with something as extraordinary as our TAFE. This is a Prime Minister who says one thing when it comes to jobs, but, when it comes to the reality of improving people's capacity to get jobs, he does something completely different.

They have been in government for 2½ years, and in that time I have seen some extraordinarily appalling examples of exploitation of the VET system in Parramatta. We have a company in Parramatta known as Unique International College—it is a couple of rooms upstairs of the Silly Willys $2 Man shop in Granville—which finally came under scrutiny late last year. Their registration was cancelled in October after they received $42 million in Commonwealth funding, despite only 2.4 per cent of its 800 students actually graduating. This was another of those colleges on this government's watch, while they slept through the whole VET debacle, that went out into the streets and enrolled people who could not speak English, went to places where people who could not speak English gathered—people who could not even fill in the forms and did not know what they were signing up for—and signed them up to $20,000 diplomas which did not exist. This is what we have had in this VET system. This is why we have had VET FEE-HELP ballooning from $800 million under us to somewhere between $1.8 billion and $4 billion over the last year. This is extraordinary incompetence. You would not let this lot near TAFE in a fit.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What an afternoon it is going to be. A conga line of tired voices, a bucketful of crocodile tears—here we go again. A long line-up of people who step up to the plate with no idea of the condition that they have left this country in. They have just wiped it from their memories like some sort of formatting of a disk. They have formatted the disk and there is nothing left. Well, in the words of Labor senator, Kim Carr, 'Labor introduced VET FEE-HELP with good intentions, but the scheme contains fundamental weaknesses.' He says they need to be fixed. He says they had good intentions, but that it needs to be fixed—and that is what we are doing, because it is an absolute mess.

The reality here is that this government is about outcomes. Outcomes are important to us, and, to get the best outcomes, all options to deliver those outcomes must be on the table for discussion. As the minister has said, that is what he is doing. We have identified the problem. We have identified that the Labor government set up a system that left the door open to dodgy dealers, to easy money and to operators who are freeloaders sponging off the taxes of hardworking Australians, and we are about fixing it. The minister is about consultation. He is out and about consulting. As far as anyone being asleep over the last 2½ years, can I just say that it is fairly difficult to stay asleep when you are living through a nightmare. That is what we inherited from the Labor government.

There are lots of issues in amongst the problems of the VET sector. It will take time to fix them, but we have gone about that already. We have tightened the rules around marketing and enrolment practices that the previous speaker mentioned. They are the very enrolment and marketing practices that were put in and permitted through legislation initiated by the previous Labor government. We have made providers more accountable for the actions of their agents and put limits on cold canvassing, which has been spoken of, so that people cannot be hassled in their home, at shopping centres, or outside Centrelink.

The Labor Party come to the microphone, or the podium, very regularly with the whole—what shall I say—premise of their debate that this is all of our doing. It is not. The cleaning up of the mess will be of our doing, but this started through legislation that was put in place by the Labor government. We are funding over $6 billion in the VET sector, that is $6,000 million every year. That is a lot of money. It is a lot of taxpayers' money going to a good cause, but the government does not have an infinite bucket of money. There are changes going on around this sector, there is no question about that. We are investing more than $6 billion in it.

I cannot leave this debate without taking up some of the other matters that were raised by the previous two speakers from the opposition. They took this debate outside the VET sector and talked about university cuts. Let's just, for everybody, again put the record straight. As we entered office in 2013 we had to pick up the mess from the Labor government's cut of billions of dollars from higher education funding. We had to fix school funding for the states because at least three states had been gutted by the last-minute cosy deal that the Labor Party tried to get across the line.

Mr Husic interjecting—

Yes, that is true, and we had to clean up that mess. You go and ask the education ministers in those three states. The fact of the matter is, there are no cuts, there are only increases from this government when it comes to the public funding of schools. You cannot cut funding that was never there. You continue to deceive the Australian people.

Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The abysmal approach of the Abbott-Turnbull governments to vocational education and training is summed up by two statistics. Last year, in September, the National Centre for Vocational Education Research published their annual report on the number of people commencing apprenticeships and completing training in Australia. The report demonstrates that, compared with the previous 12-month period, apprenticeship and traineeship commencements between March 2014 and March 2015 decreased by 19.8 per cent in Australia. That is almost a 20 per cent reduction in the number of people commencing apprenticeships in Australia on this government's watch. Over the same period apprenticeship and traineeship completions also dropped by an alarming 19.4 per cent. The most damaging aspect of this report is the fact that the National Centre for Vocational Education Research predict that this decline will go even further into the future because of this government's approach to vocational education and training.

This government is presiding over an economy that is in decline, with lower growth, worsening terms of trade and higher unemployment than when it came to office. High-skill jobs are diminishing, particularly in manufacturing, and we have skills shortages in a number of important sectors throughout the country. There is also a lack of domestic workers to fill important trades in our community. What is the response of this government to that crisis in our vocational education and training sector? Its approach is just to import foreign workers on 457 visas. Instead of investing in training our domestic workers the government will just import them all on 457 visas. It is hell-bent on deregulating the vocational education and training system in Australia to let the market determine who gets apprenticeships and traineeships and whether or not people can afford to complete them. It is hell-bent on removing vocational education and apprenticeship opportunities for kids by cancelling the Trade Training Centres program that was so successful in Australia.

I want to concentrate on that particular program because I think it perfectly sums up this government's approach to vocational education and training. The Trade Training Centres program was, of course, an initiative of the former Labor government. Through this initiative high school students got the opportunity to begin a trade whilst still at school. They could finish year 12, having completed the first year of their apprenticeship, on a pathway to completing their trade by the time they turned 19 or 20 years old. I am fortunate to have one of these Trade Training Centres in my electorate at Champagnat Catholic College. It offers students the opportunity to begin an automotive, a hospitality or a construction trade while they are still at school. Since the Trade Training Centre has been operating—guess what?—enrolments in the school have gone through the roof, to the point that the school is now knocking back applications. Parents want their kids to get a good opportunity, a decent vocational education and a decent job.

Investing in apprenticeships pays dividends. The Australian Jobs report of 2015 shows that 85½ per cent of apprenticeships and trainees are employed six months after they complete their apprenticeship. That compares with 77.6 per cent of VET graduates generally and 68.1 per cent of bachelor degree graduates. So by investing in apprenticeships you improve the skills base of the country, you improve productivity and you invest in growth in our economy. What is the approach of the government? They are going to remove those opportunities for kids to start an apprenticeship at school. Can you believe it? They have cancelled the Trade Training Centres program. There are no more Trade Training Centres at any schools throughout the country under this government because they do not want to invest in vocational education and provide those opportunities for our kids. They are also hell-bent on deregulating the system. This week we have seen the approach of the government in trying to take over vocational education and training and completely deregulate it. And this is what John Barilaro, the New South Wales Minister for Skills, had to say about that: 'I have little confidence that they could run a national vocational education and training sector that actually meets the needs of students and industries and delivers in a way that makes sure that it is driven on quality, not price.' I could not have said it better myself. This mob are about price, deregulation and making students pay more; they are not about quality in vocational education at all. (Time expired)

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting that the member for Kingsford Smith decided to pull out the stats book, because he did not turn the page and reflect on Labor's six years and what happened to completion rates. He is welcome to come back to the chamber and show us some decent statistics that give the full picture, because we all know that completion rates have been a challenge and we are trying to address that.

Let's have a look at what TAFE SA have achieved in South Australia as one example. I want to quote Tony Sutherland, who is the South Australian member of the National TAFE Council Executive, on completion rates. Before I do that, let's remember that TAFE is controlled at a state level, and the member for Wakefield knows this. In South Australia, it is the Labor state government and, in Victoria, it is the Victorian Labor government that is in control of TAFE in that jurisdiction.

What they say about South Australia is that, in reality, it is not a success story. The dismal 37 per cent completion rate in South Australia and the last changes to their policy have seen a downturn in student enrolments that has led to TAFE SA undertaking major business reviews and a likely loss of another 50 FTE teaching staff. These are your colleagues, Member for Kingsford Smith, in South Australia and Victoria. You should not be coming into the chamber and lecturing us. Speak to your own people. Speak to your own ministers in those jurisdictions and get them—

Mr Thistlethwaite interjecting—

Again, that is only half of the story. We do not read half the book, Member for Kingsford Smith. Read the whole book today! In terms of—

Mr Champion interjecting—

I do take your advice, Member for Wakefield, but let's try and talk about TAFE as a system. The member for Cunningham will recognise that TAFE is a valuable asset, because she was on an employment and education committee with me last year that reported on TAFE. Let me quote from that summary report, which said Australia's TAFE system:

… is a unique Australian asset and one which should be protected.

We value TAFE and the important role it has in the community, and that is why we will continue to support TAFE in whatever way we can.

We also said in that report that we should address loopholes which allow unscrupulous business practices in the competitive training market. We have already heard from the assistant minister in this space about addressing the unscrupulous practices of private training providers who have been ripping off students and not delivering outcomes—not making sure that there are sufficient completion rates.

In terms of what the government is doing, I want to jump to the Industry Skills Fund, because this is a valuable initiative that assists companies in upgrading the skills of their employees. Again, the member for Wakefield will be most interested in what is happening in South Australia in particular. Let me go through a few examples: MIMP computer cable enrichment—$20,000; Torque Control Specialists in Edwardstown—$12,000; and Zonge Engineering and Normet, which both received substantial sums. These companies are involved in the mining sector, they are suppliers and they are well positioned to take advantage of the ups and downs there may be in resources, but there is also going to be demand for the resources sector. With the training, which is supported by the government, they will be in a good place to go forward and take advantage of that opportunity in the future.

For future opportunities, we would all—or those who saw the media today—have seen the AFR's report on the results for education in terms of exports. Again the figures were impressive: a 13 per cent increase, making education a $20 billion export industry. We all know it has been improving and is our third-largest export provider. TAFE and the vocational education system are important parts of that. I know there are some great things being done by TAFE around Australia, whether it be at Box Hill or in Asia and at other TAFEs, and I think this is where the future lies for opportunities to sell our services to Asia in the best way possible.

On the role of industry, we know that in South Australia companies like Redarc or ASC have been very engaged with TAFE in getting some great results, so TAFE are on the right track. The government is supporting TAFE where they need to. We just wish our Labor colleagues in some jurisdictions could be more diligent and effective in what they do with running programs that produce better outcomes than what they are doing. But that is up to our local members, like the member for Wakefield, to take control of and get some outcomes for once in his life.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, every word from the current member for Hindmarsh is precious, because he will not be here for long. He will not be long in this place—Steve Georganas is out there doorknocking as we speak, waiting to return to his rightful place in this chamber as the member for Hindmarsh. So every word we hear from the current member for Hindmarsh, however ill-informed, is precious.

Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have seen many come and go. Don't get too overconfident!

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am being warned by the Father of the House. As he says, many come and go. I am well aware of that, but I think this government of bed-wetters will see more go than most, with all due respect to the Father of the House—I wish him luck in his preselection; I have been reading about it in the paper. I hope Julian Lesser is listening to this. I am sure he is an avid listener to the goings on in this House and has been for many years, as I understand. He has had many years of waiting there in the Liberal Party branches. But I am not talking about education, which I should be. I do not really want to talk about the preselection or the election chances of those opposite.

If you cut $30 billion out of education and try and foist $100,000 degrees on people, if you cut $2 billion out of skills and if you cut a billion dollars out of apprenticeships, do you know what happens? People do not like it. What we have had in education is ignorance by Mr Abbott, ignorance by the member for—what is he the member for? I cannot remember. He is staying in parliament to improve the bus routes of Manly or something, apparently. We have had ignorance from Mr Abbott followed by neglect by Mr Turnbull, who has been in power for 142 days and has come out with one policy—one policy!

And we have got two of the plotters here, sitting with rather smug smiles on their faces. They are the winners out of all of this, of course. They were plotting out there in Queanbeyan or somewhere. I cannot quite remember where. Some of them were promoted—not all of them. We have replaced a prime minister, a treasurer, a defence minister, an industry minister and a communications minister—the majority of the National Security Committee of cabinet—and we have had one policy! On everything else, we have had just inaction. There is nothing going on.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It must be very frustrating for you.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The assistant minister says it must be very frustrating. It is frustrating for me but it is more frustrating for our teachers, students and apprentices.

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Did you get rid of Gail Gago? It was a good move!

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is the strangest interjection yet, but I will take it. I am not responsible for the goings-on in the South Australian government. I would have thought I had made that clear. Those opposite talk about government policy and the VET sector. What has happened with debt in the VET sector? It started at $699 million, it has got to $1.7 billion and it is now projected to rise to $4 billion. Bizarrely, this government—

Government members interjecting—

Well, student loans through debt. We know that there have been private providers out there treating this like it is a blank cheque for people to rack up huge debts to the Commonwealth. This is the greatest fraud on the Commonwealth in a very long time. And what are we seeing from those opposite? Inaction—because they are so obscenely interested in their own internal affairs. So rather than meeting out in Queanbeyan about VET education, rather than talking about any public policy matter out there in Queanbeyan, what they were talking about was themselves, their own arrangements. And we know now that their latest idea is to go after TAFE. So to deal with private providers they have, bizarrely, gone after the state TAFEs. It is bizarre. It is what we have come to expect from those opposite. When they were in opposition they lectured us about many things. But what we have had from them in government is ignorance under Abbott, followed by neglect under Turnbull. That is the reality. One should understand this: this government of bed wetters, of plotters, of inaction should not be trusted with public policy and should not be trusted with the treasury bench of this country.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is a very interesting comment coming from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd crew! Talk about plotters—you take the cake!

The provision of vocational education and training is a key issue in Western Australia as we transition from the mining construction boom to a more diversified economy over time. In fact, given the financial turnaround we have experienced in Western Australia, it is in my view probably more important in the west than anywhere else in the nation at this time. It is only by diversifying that Western Australia will once again flourish. That is not to suggest that mining does not and will not play an enormous and vital role. It does, and it will continue to do so. It is the bedrock of Western Australia. But we certainly need future growth that will deliver the jobs of tomorrow, and it will come from other sectors as well.

I heard an interesting comment this morning that in 2016 the value of agricultural exports was greater than the value of coal exports. That is why the coalition's National Science and Innovation Program is so vital—and the Prime Minister and the minister should be congratulated. Delivering the jobs of tomorrow requires a vision for tomorrow, and it is a vision that the country is getting from the government today.

However, this vision has to be matched by fiscal responsibility. A responsible government cannot throw money away or send the country into multigenerational debt to buy election lollies. A responsible government would, as this government is doing, invest more than $6 billion every year in the VET sector through funding and concessional loans, including $1.8 billion in payments to the states and territories and $1.4 billion on programs to support apprentices, literacy, numeracy and the VET sector more broadly. And a responsible coalition government is doing exactly that.

In relation to TAFE administration in Western Australia, it is the Western Australian government that manages TAFE, not the Commonwealth. In Western Australia, the state government is currently reviewing TAFE administrative arrangements, as is right and proper. I will be very interested to see the outcome, particularly in relation to my good and high-performing South West Institute of Technology in Bunbury.

It is also essential to comment on the explosion of vocational education providers in Australia resulting from the changes introduced by Labor. We should not forget that the changes were introduced by Labor. Members will no doubt remember the explosion in the number of pink batt installers when Labor announced their ill-fated program. Well, Labor's redesign of VET FEE-HELP opened a similar floodgate and has experienced the same quality control disaster.

We the coalition government had to move to correct this. We have taken many steps to stop the dodgy behaviour allowed and facilitated by Labor's poor design of the VET FEE-HELP system. We have tightened the rules around marketing and enrolment practices so that providers cannot pass off VFH loans as 'free', when clearly they are not. We have made providers more accountable for the actions of their agents and put limits on cold canvassing so that people cannot be hassled in their home, at shopping centres or outside Centrelink. We toughened the rules around enrolments so that students cannot be pressured to sign up for course they cannot complete or actually do not want to do at all. And we made it easier for a person who has been subjected to unacceptable behaviour by a provider to have their student debt cancelled and to have the provider pay the cost. For students under 18 years of age it means that a provider can no longer accept a VFH loan request form unless a parent or guardian has co-signed the form. We have introduced new rules to deal with poor performance by providers, including moving providers to payment in arrears and/or pausing payments for new enrolments.

A healthy, vibrant VET sector is essential to the development of the state of Western Australia and the nation. It is far too important to allow the Labor Party to mess it up even further or turn it into just another of their political tools.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not one person opposite has dared to even address the issue that we have raised here on this side, and that is the leaked COAG document exposing the fact that this government wants to take over TAFE. They keep talking about the great things they think they have done, and we will get to that in a moment. But not one speaker has actually commented on the fact that one of their own mates from New South Wales, a Lib, has leaked and gone public with the fact that this government wants to take over TAFE. And why do they want to take over TAFE? They are trying to cover up the fact that under their watch there has been an explosion in the shonky sharks and dodgy operators in TAFE. Under their watch, VET FEE-HELP has gone from having about $700 million in debt to having $1.7 billion in debt—in 12 months.

Rather than getting real on cleaning up the sector, this government has said: 'Fine; we'll take it over. That way we can bury what's actually going on. Because we have a track record in doing that, we won't have to confront the states and talk about TAFE. We won't have to talk about funding.' They are also not talking about the billions of dollars of cuts—$2 billion worth of cuts from the skills portfolio and $1 billion cut from apprenticeship support. That is one way to silence the states: take it completely off them. Well, the states are not buying it and the Australian people are not buying it, because if there is one thing the Australian people really do care about—and the Victorian Liberals learnt it the hard way—it is their TAFEs.

In Bendigo, in regional areas, when the former Liberal government in Victoria took the axe to TAFE and cut funding, they said, 'We're all going to be equal.' Vocational providers, whether public or private, were to be treated equally and funded equally. But what we saw was a collapse of the Victorian TAFE system, because the only providers that will deliver the skills needed in the regions are the public providers. But under the former, Liberal, government's model, you had to have X number of students and the course had to break even for the TAFE to be able to afford it. So, in Victoria we saw course fees going up, students dropping out, people being sacked and TAFEs closing. That is what happens under the private model that this government is proposing that the states adopt.

Learn from Victoria's mistake; learn from the Victorian Liberals: it does not work. We need a public education system in this country, a public TAFE system, to ensure that we have the skills we need today and in the future. When we are delivering TAFE in this country we are saying to young people, when we fund it properly, 'There will be an apprenticeship program for you, if you want to work in the trades; there will be a decent hairdressing apprenticeship for you, if you want to have a career in that field.' But currently our students do not know whether they are signing up for a course that is legit. This government has confused that by cutting so much funding from the sector. And rather than getting serious about restoring funding to the public sector, they are saying, 'We'll just take it over and leave it up to the market.' That is so classic of the Liberals: 'leave it up to the market'.

We know what happens when you leave it up to the market, because of what happened in Victoria when their mates were in charge there. Since the Labor government got elected they have stepped in and actually saved the Bendigo TAFE. They have handed them a lifeline. They advanced public funding to help save that public institution. There is a long way to go for the Bendigo TAFE. They were forced to merge with Kangan Batman to try to keep some of their campuses and courses open—$320 million in an advance payment to try to save Bendigo TAFE. And they are not the only one. TAFE after TAFE in Victoria has been saved, because the Victorian people said, 'We do not like the Liberals' plan when it comes to vocational education, when it comes to higher education.' The same will happen at the federal level.

This government, if it is serious about vocational education, will put the money back. They will not leave it up to the market. They will not continue to encourage private enterprise to get involved in TAFE. The fact is that people expect a strong, robust, vibrant TAFE sector that partners with industry. Our young people today deserve an opportunity to have a good career, good skills and an education that can deliver them. The apprenticeship system today is not even a shadow of what it used to be. Young people today do not have access to the apprenticeship opportunities of the past. This government needs to drop this plan, come clean and tell the truth about its agenda for vocational education.

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the Prime Minister said today during question time and many times before, there has never been a more exciting time to be an Australian. Conversely, there has never been a duller time to be a member of the Australian Labor Party. I had hoped that as you emerged from the Shorten wasteland of 2015, completely bereft of ideas, you would front up with something other than what you have offered us today. What is your policy?

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've announced the policy.

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do you have one? I do not think so, and I am sure that if you did it would not be worth reading for either pleasure or instruction. Instead, it seems that you guys are trapped in your own version of Groundhog Day, except, unlike the film, in which Bill Murray adapts and grows better each day, you guys seem to be travelling along the same plane of mediocrity.

So, today, when this question was posed—how is the government failing in vocational education?—I honestly thought you were being ironic, reflecting on the previous six years under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments. But I will reframe it for the purposes of this MPI, and I will ask the question: how has the government been helping students in vocational education? This question is quite important to me in Canning, as I have the second-highest number of male tradesmen in the country. I also have the third-highest number of cert III and IV holders in Australia. I have a lot of industry. I have agriculture. I have mining. I have fruit growing, among other industries. So vocational training is an important part of Canning.

My predecessor Don Randall was very proud back in February 2014—I have the local news article here, from Fairfax, in fact, the Mandurah Mailwhen he talked about funding for the Coodanup Community College. It has been built. It is situated in the heart of Mandurah, which is in the heart of Canning. The centre caters for students from Coodanup, Halls Head Community College, John Tonkin College, Mandurah Catholic College and others. What we are seeing here is coalition policy. Back then $209 million in funding was promised, and we have seen that come to fruition in the Coodanup Community College.

Those opposite asked about the government and what we are doing in vocational education. The facts speak for themselves. The government has invested more than $6 billion in the vocational education training sector through funding and concessional loans. This includes $1.8 billion in payments to the states and territories and $1.4 billion that we spend on programs to support apprentices, language, literacy and numeracy and the VET sector more broadly. Importantly, we have the Australian Apprenticeship Support Network in which the electorate of Canning has two associations. We have contributed $831 million to that program. We have also given $433 million to help people build language and literacy through AMEP and the SEE program and, more recently, the Industry Skills Fund, where we have given $80 million to help industry with training, which is a very important part of our VET program.

When you have sound policy the incentives embedded in those policies drive behaviour. So what we have seen is 3.9 million people participate in the VET sector in Australia last year. People are voting with their feet. People are enrolling in a broad range of VET courses at various stages of their lives. The project that this government has inherited has been one of reform, after the six years of waste that we experienced under the Labor government—and that really goes to the heart of the question. We saw a lot of bad policy over the Labor years—my colleague the member for Forrest mentioned the pink batts program. The VET FEE-HELP program is just one permutation of the pink batts program. It has the same DNA: bad spending, which encourages bad behaviour. So we have introduced a range of the reforms to stamp out unscrupulous behaviour and enhance protections for students and taxpayers. This year we are helping to put the VET FEE-HELP scheme onto a more sustainable footing for the future, with reasonable, sensible funding that will grow the economy, protect Australians and look after Australians into the future, without saddling them with a huge debt.