Susan Lamb (Longman, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Without doubt, reform of the sector is essential. Labor understands this and this is why the government has essentially copied Labor's policies. If only it had acted so much sooner, billions could have been invested in apprenticeships and TAFEs, instead of being wasted on dodgy private providers. If this government had acted sooner, thousands of students would not have paid tens of thousands of dollars for a meaningless qualification. Many private providers have acted unconscionably in pursuing greater profits without regard to the massive debts incurred by each student.

Evocca College is just one example of a private institution that has demonstrated appalling behaviour and a complete lack of responsibility towards its students. Figures obtained in 2015 through an ABC report showed the college had a graduation rate of just 10 per cent despite claiming more than $290 million in government funding via the VET FEE-HELP student loan scheme. Even more concerning are the allegations that came to light after the report was aired. More than 20 former employees reported that the college enrolled students ill-equipped for diploma level courses without enough support, that it enrolled students who did not pass the required literacy test and that it backdated tutor qualification forms to pass federal government audits. Former staff claimed the college actively sought to hamper students who wanted to leave the college and cease adding to their government training debt. Now while I do not seek to traverse the appalling behaviour of many providers, the behaviour of Evocca College is symptomatic of the government's inaction and cuts to funding. In essence, they sat on their hands while dodgy private providers ran rampant and students were ripped off, and left them saddled with massive debts. The fact remains that, just like the rest of this government's policies, its response to problems in the VET sector has been shambolic and lacking leadership. In fact, it has had five ministers covering this portfolio in three years.

There is nothing in this bill to restore the $2.75 billion the Liberals have ripped out TAFE, skills and apprenticeships. There is nothing to protect TAFE, nothing to boost apprenticeships. The government has failed to consult properly on these changes. Labor supports them in-principle but looks forward to the Senate inquiry into the bills and will work with stakeholders to identify any issues through that process. As I mentioned previously, Labor proposed a comprehensive suite of VET reforms at the last election. Labor did this because we know there are issues and we had a plan to address these problems.

They say imitation is the strongest form of flattery so, on face value, Labor might be a little flattered that the Turnbull government has copied our package. I will not go through every amendment but particular important features of our response to problems in the VET sector include: the capping student loans to stop rip-offs—copied; cracking down on brokers—copied; linking publically funded courses to industry need and skills shortages—copied; requiring providers to re-apply under new standards so only high quality providers could access the loan system—tick, copied; linking funding to student progress and completion—copied; and of course, a VET loans ombudsman—guess what, copied. Yet again, this is another case of Labor leading the debate while the minister sat on his hands for two years with rorts going on under his nose. I find this lack of imagination and indeed, leadership, extremely disturbing because it was the Liberals who were falling over themselves to criticise Labor's policy proposals and today they are trying to take credit for them.

When Labor announced a policy of capping student loans, Scott Morrison said it would 'pull the rug out from under the private education industry'. Then Minister Scott Ryan called it a 'classist policy' and a 'thought bubble' that 'will lead to up-front fees for VET students'. Scott Ryan also called it 'impulsive, ill thought through, ill-considered' and a 'sound bite'.    Simon Birmingham said it was an 'ill-considered flat pack'. Before the election, Simon Birmingham said a price cap 'would simply, in effect, establish a government sanctioned price'. He said: 'When you set a price cap, everybody simply shifts to the price cap.' Guess what? He is now proposing three different price caps—$5,000, $10,000 and $15,000—and this is deeply concerning.

The current national partnership, put in by Labor, expires in the middle of next year. Over $500 million a year in Commonwealth support for TAFE and skills is on the line. And the minister does not even seem to know whether a new agreement is needed to keep supporting TAFE. Labor has been absolutely clear—we back public TAFE. That is why we took a TAFE funding agreement to the last election. TAFE is where people like my constituents in Longman get the technical and semi-professional skills they need for growing industries, the skills that are being demanded by industry and the skills Australia needs to be competitive with other countries. TAFE is the backbone of our apprenticeship system. Generations of Australians know just how important TAFE is for our economy. They know the first-class skills and opportunities that going to TAFE can provide.

But the Liberals just don't get it. At a state and federal level, the Liberals have an ideological problem with TAFE. Apprentice numbers are in freefall under the Liberals. They are down 30 per cent since they came to government—that is 130,000 fewer under the Liberals. They have copied Labor's VET FEE-HELP reforms, and if they would join us in backing TAFE they would copy our TAFE policies too.

We welcome the government's commitment, made in the second reading speech on this bill, that they will establish a VET loans ombudsman. Labor moved in the Senate almost a year ago to establish such an ombudsman. We look forward to seeing how the government plans to make good on their commitment, because it is not yet in the bills before the House. It is absolutely crucial that the ombudsman has the resources and the powers it needs to seek redress for students and to protect their interests.

Labor has concerns also about the implementation of these changes. These are concerns that are shared by the sector. We will be keeping up the pressure on the government to make sure students are treated fairly in the transition process; hold dodgy providers to account where they have ripped off students, and get loans refunded; make sure the government gets right the assessment of providers and the approved courses list; and improve governance, accountability and transparency in the sector. We understand the urgency of these bills; it is an urgency the government has brought on itself.

We hope the Senate inquiry into the bill will give stakeholders a chance to examine these issues properly, because the government did not consult properly with students or the sector on the details of these changes. It should not have come to this, of course, but now, after a billion-dollar blow-out, the government seems to have woken up to itself.

VET, TAFE and apprenticeships are crucial to jobs and our economy. We genuinely hope that the government has turned a corner and that from here on it will do what is best for students and for employers. We on this side of the House genuinely hope it works to get right the implementation of these changes.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last year Michael Douglas, the esteemed actor, 70 years old, made a comment about the fact that there were too many Australian actors taking key roles in American movies. The comment was made in response to an article that appeared in The Atlantic entitled 'The decline of the American actor'. The article asked why so many good roles have been going to actors from Australia, England and Canada. The Daily Telegraph said:

Of the top five TV series set to air on NBC this year—

that is last year—

three are headlined by Aussie actors, while no fewer than 15 different series — across both commercial and cable networks — also star actors from Down Under.

They talked about Melissa George, Damon Herriman, Matt Passmore, Clare Bowen, Luke Mitchell, Dichen Lachman, Caitlin Stasey and Adelaide Kane. They talked about a whole range of others in addition to the ones we already know, such as Cate Blanchett, Hugh Jackman, Nicole Kidman, Geoffrey Rush, Chris Hemsworth, Mel Gibson and Anthony LaPaglia. So many Australian actors are making their name overseas and taking roles from American actors, as lamented by Michael Douglas.

These actors have been dubbed the Gumleaf Mafia, because they are taking all of these key roles that have traditionally gone to American actors. Why is that happening? Why are these plumb roles going to Australian actors rather than to American actors? A number of reasons have been cited, particularly about the men, but one of the key reasons that were cited by both Michael Douglas and the Daily Telegraph article is that most of the Australian actors are trained. They have honed their art. Although in Los Angeles there are lots of models who think that they can jump into acting roles just because they are good looking, Australian actors get roles because they have been trained. They have been trained through NIDA, the National Institute of Dramatic Art; through WAAPA, the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts; and through the performing arts school in Victoria.

They have also been trained through a number of vocational education institutions right throughout this country. One of those institutions is the Canberra Academy of Dramatic Art, with whom I met this morning. It was a very interesting meeting, hearing about the impact that the government's views on VET are having on this fantastic institution that has been going for years and years and about the impact that the government's changes, including the delisting of the performing arts courses, could have on the future careers of a number of Canberrans.

Before going into the discussion I had today with the CADA people and some of its students, I will mention the impact that the creative industries have not just on the Australian economy but also on the Canberra economy. The figures I have for the Canberra economy are quite outdated—they are from 2012-13—and have been boosted by a number of events that have taken place as a result of the significant investment and effort by ScreenACT in recent years. I will quote from a document that was sent to me by CADA. It mentions the fact that creative industries contribute $90 billion per year to the Australian economy and that 5.3 per cent of Australia's workforce work in the creative industries. It is one of the fastest growing sectors in the Australian economy. Here in Canberra, for 2012-13:

… the direct output of the arts and the cultural sector in the ACT was estimated to be $974 million, of which arts was responsible for $361 million.

As I said, these figures are really outdated, because there has been so much activity here in the ACT in recent years. We have had The Code. There have now been two series of The Code that have been filmed here in the ACT. Another miniseries—and one of my colleagues is now smiling at me!—that has been filmed here in Canberra—

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A very good one.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, it is a very good miniseries that has been filmed here in Canberra. I have quite intimate knowledge of the provenance of this miniseries. This other miniseries that hopefully will see a second series created is Secret City, which showcased our beautiful national capital and also created a degree of intrigue and excitement around the ACT and Canberra.

Those two miniseries are in addition to the fact that there are countless documentaries that have been filmed here. There have been countless short films filmed here, a number of them award-winning. It is a growth industry for the ACT. I understand from conversations with the ACT government and also CADA today that there are many more documentaries and short films booked for the near future—for the next 12 months to two years. So our nation's capital is becoming a bit of a film hub. It has fantastic scenery, of course, and it has some really interesting buildings. There is a lot of local homegrown talent here that can take part in those films, documentaries and short films.

Canberra is reaching a critical mass of creativity and innovation and we now have this homegrown talent being produced, and I am concerned that as a result of the government not including a number of the creative industries in the VET list it could potentially spike the careers of these young people, and it could potentially spike our creative industries here in the ACT.

People tend to think that vocational education is just purely about addressing the skills shortage in trades. Yes, we need more electricians. Yes, we need more carpenters. Yes, we need more plumbers. Yes, we need more motor mechanics. We need more skills in this country, particularly in the trades. If you try to find a plumber here in the ACT on the weekend it can be a very difficult exercise. I speak from experience here. When my dear husband put a hole in one of the pipes in our front yard when he was doing a bit of gardening, we had to get a plumber on a Sunday and it cost quite a sum of money. That is because we have a significant skills shortage here in the ACT. It also exists nationally. I have both praised my husband and also shared his ability with a pick. We are keeping him away from that as well as gardening generally because it always ends up in 'armagarden'!

We have a significant skills shortage here in the ACT, which is why we need to be investing in skills in the trades, particularly for electricians, plumbers, mechanics and others. That said, we should not ignore the need to develop skills in the creative industries. As I said when I mentioned those figures before, creative industries contribute $90 billion per year to the Australian economy and make up 5.3 per cent of Australia's workforce. We are looking at about $1 billion here in the ACT, and that is an old figure. That is from two or three years ago. So this is a significant growth industry and we need to develop our creative skills as well as those trade skills. It is vitally important for us as a nation. It is vitally important to our economy.

It is not just important to the economy. It is also important because of the fact that these vocational education creative industry courses create a pathway for many young Canberrans. I have a friend whose daughter has been having some mental health issues. She was in and out of year 12. She has had some real challenges. She decided to enrol in CIT to do a pathway course. She finished that pathway course and is now studying law at ANU. So vocational education provides a pathway—an opportunity for people to work out what they want to do with their lives and the direction they want to pursue and then possibly go into higher education.

Vocational education provides skills in trades so that people can get employed, but it also develops their self-esteem. Again, I know from the conversations I had with these young people today—and I will explore those in more detail shortly—who have had these challenges and have used CIT or vocational education as a pathway that vocational education has boosted their self-esteem. It has boosted their confidence. It has boosted their sense of self and their ability to go on and pursue new directions in higher education or go off and get a job. It provides a range of skills, and they are not just all about trade skills or job related skills. It also provides a great deal of interpersonal development. That is why it is so important.

As I said, this morning I met with Elizabeth Scott from CADA, as well as two young Canberrans—Becky and Rod. It was fascinating talking to them and listening to them about the changes that have taken place as a result of their CADA courses. They are planning to do the Advanced Diploma of Performance out at CADA. Becky is 18 years of age and she comes from a family with a single mum. Her mum works full time and will do any overtime she can to help Becky get through. Becky works 38 hours to 48 hours a week in her job to put herself through, and she is also studying full time. She said that she gets a great deal of support not just from her mother but also from CADA. She said of CADA and the experience of getting involved in the cert IV in performing arts—and her intention is to do the advanced diploma—that, 'It makes me want to get somewhere in my life.' That is what this course has done for her. She said, 'It gives me the skills so I don't feel bad about myself. It gives me more confidence.'

I also met Rod, who is 20 years of age. He has done a Diploma of Musical Theatre and he is planning to do an Advanced Diploma of Performance. He is an exceptional young man. Again, he has three jobs to work his way through this degree. He does parties and events for kids and teaches kids at CADA. He said that he is not involved in the performing arts to get famous. He does it because it is what he loves. He does not see it as a lifestyle choice, which is what those opposite have said so often about these creative industry courses that are being deregistered or taken off the list. He does not see it as a lifestyle choice; it is what he loves to do. It is like Becky said: 'It gives me a sense of purpose. It makes me want to get somewhere in my life. It gives me the skills so I don't feel bad about myself.'

These courses are vital, as vital for self-esteem and job opportunities as the courses taken by those who are studying a trade, studying to be a plumber, an electrician or a carpenter. They are as vital for these young individuals like Becky and Rod as they are for those studying other courses down at Fyshwick here, doing trades. I am looking at the list of courses that have been deemed ineligible for funding. It includes the Diploma of Musical Theatre which is taught at CADA, as well as the Advanced Diploma of Performance. I am very concerned about the fact that these courses will not be deemed eligible for funding. I am concerned about the impact it is going to have on those students who are already going through the system. I understand, from the conversations with Elizabeth today, that students who are in the system now can go right through to the end of 2017, but her view is that, if they are just at the early stage of their course, they should be given the opportunity to be taught out for their degree or their diploma, that we should not just leave these young people hanging there with half a diploma or half an advanced diploma finished.

So I am calling on the minister to review the list of creative industries that are deemed ineligible. I am calling on the minister to consider their value not just to the economy—as I mentioned before, they are worth $90 billion to the Australian economy and employ 5.3 per cent of the workforce. I am calling on the minister not just to look at the economic benefit of the creative industries but also to look at the personal benefit that they deliver for the young Australians who are studying these courses, in terms of boosting their self-esteem, boosting their ability to feel confident in speaking, boosting their love and understanding of literature and the arts, boosting their confidence. I am calling on the minister to revisit the list of ineligible courses and to consider the important contribution that the creative industries make to our economy and to Australia's future.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation, the VET Student Loans Bill 2016, confirms once again the financial and administrative mismanagement and incompetence of the Turnbull government. This legislation seeks to rectify widespread rorting and unethical practices within the vocational education and training sector and the VET student loans program. Responsibility for the mess rests fairly and squarely with the government. This government has been in office for three years. Claims by members opposite that they are simply fixing up Labor's mess do not stand up to scrutiny. This government has been in office for over three years now, and it is because of this government's mismanagement that we are dealing with this legislation. The VET framework was poorly administered, poorly audited and left unregulated by this government. The government had the ability to deal with it properly. It had the tools to do so but it was asleep at the wheel. The alarm bells should have sounded much, much earlier. They should have sounded when enrolment numbers in certain courses skyrocketed, when hundreds of VET providers appeared out of nowhere, when payments to private registered training organisations, particularly new registered training organisations, also reached ridiculous levels. It is beyond comprehension that the system failed so badly.

Australian Careers Network is one particular case. Its 30 June financial report boasted that its student numbers had increased by 417 per cent, from 4,990 students in 2014 to 25,784 students in 2015. In just one year they went up fivefold. The organisation also boasted about having an average revenue yield per student of $3,303. Careers Australia had payments increase from $3.5 million in 2011 to $108 million in 2014. Evocca College, trading as ACTE Pty Ltd, grew from $24.9 million in 2012 to $131 million in 2014. The number of students accessing VET FEE-HELP loans was projected to increase from 100,000 in 2013 to 225,000 students in 2014-15 by the Department of Education and Training.

Those figures alone should have set the alarm bells ringing, and yet they did not. It took a Senate inquiry to expose the rorting and for the government to in turn act. Indeed, one has only to ask: given the multitude of shonky practices since exposed, just what advice did the government receive about the rorting from its own departments or any other sources? When did it receive such information, if any, and what was the government's response to those warnings? Indeed, why did it take the government so long to act? Nobody will believe that the warning signs and the incidents of rorting were not being reported to the government or to government members, as they were to so many members on this side of the House.

I have listened to government members who have spoken in this debate, and they are clearly in denial about their government's incompetence. Perhaps members opposite were also in denial about the failure of their free market ideology—an ideology that not only failed this government but also failed the students and failed the community. Members opposite are also in denial that the state-run TAFEs and the longstanding industry training organisations are the most trusted and most reliable to deliver vocational education and training. Perhaps members opposite were hoping to see the demise of the TAFE sector. Unlike the Turnbull government, Labor will always back TAFE.

Regrettably, ethical registered training organisations have had to suffer the upheavals caused. Thousands of VET students have been left with VET FEE-HELP debts of thousands of dollars that they were, in many cases, totally unaware of and that they are unlikely to ever repay. I understand that it is estimated that some 40 per cent of the VET debts will never be repaid. The country has been left with billions of dollars of lost revenue that could have gone to much, much more needy causes. This money could have been used to support our health and education services in this country. We have also seen money wasted on courses and degrees that were not fit for purpose, leaving graduates underqualified and with absolutely no job prospects. And, of course, the costs of many of these course were, in many cases, well over market rates. Worst of all, thousands and thousands of students have been left in limbo.

The government is in denial about all of this and is also in denial about the fact that it took a Senate inquiry to publicly expose the rorts. The government's dissenting Senate report—a dissenting report; not the majority report—attempted to lay the blame on the previous Labor government, again trying to point the finger at the Labor government that set up the process many years ago. It was not that the process was at fault; it was the oversight of it. This legislation is now attempting to ensure that there will be proper oversight in the future.

Labor put forward an election policy—a policy which underpins this whole legislation—articulating the way forward by capping student loans; cracking down on brokers; linking publicly funded courses to industry need and skills shortages; linking funding to student progress and completion; and requiring VET providers to re-apply under new standards, so that only high-quality providers could access the loan systems. Government ministers and government MPs ridiculed Labor's proposals and now they find themselves adopting the Labor way forward. Again, it is Labor leading the policy in this area and the government is following—again, another backflip by a government that, if nothing else, has excelled at backflips. Given that this legislation is largely based on Labor proposals, Labor has indicated some support for it—albeit that we have also moved an amendment, which I will be supporting, for a change to some of the wording. Whilst we support the legislation in principle, we are also very critical of the government's management of this whole process to date. I also understand that there may be another Senate inquiry into the legislation, and it will be interesting to see what comes out of that.

Vocational education and training is essential to Australia's economic future. We need skills and trades; nor does every person want a university degree. Indeed, in today's labour market, it is often easier to get employment with a trade or a skill than with a university degree. But the skills training paid for must be affordable and must properly qualify the person for the work they are employed to do. Over the years, no providers have done that better than the nation's TAFE, other public education institutions and the many industry-led not-for-profit training organisations. They know the needs of the industry, know what the skills shortages are and understand the skills required by the various industry sectors. Their futures are now also uncertain. All of those credible and reputable training organisations that have been doing the training for years and years have been caught up in this mess and, for many of them, their futures are uncertain, as the member for Canberra outlined just a moment ago.

I have a TAFE in my electorate. Only last week I was speaking to an employee of that TAFE. The employee asked me, 'Do you know what my future is and what the future is of the TAFE in our region?' This is a TAFE that has served the region well for decades; a TAFE that provides training opportunities to thousands of young people in my state and, in particular, in my area; a TAFE that has provided career pathways to people who did not want to go to university. They no longer know what the future holds for them, because of the undermining of the TAFE system by this government.

I said a moment ago that this legislation essentially picks up on proposals put forward by Labor, and for that reason we will be supporting it in principle. As I also said, I understand that there might be a Senate inquiry. It will be interesting to see what comes out of that Senate inquiry if it proceeds. I have no doubt that, if we consult further on this matter, there will be other issues and other matters that are specifically related to this legislation that might arise and may need to be addressed. One of those matters is the appointment of an ombudsman.

I note that in this legislation there is no provision for the appointment of an ombudsman in this sector. Perhaps some of the problems that we have had to date might not have occurred an ombudsman had been appointed. More importantly, if an ombudsman were appointed, it would provide an office for young people to go to if they run into difficulties with respect to their course. But, of course, that all depends on what powers and what authority the ombudsman has. It would be of little purpose to appoint someone you could take your concerns to if that person had no ability to do anything about those concerns other than perhaps to provide an annual report. So, if an ombudsman is to be appointed to oversee this sector, let us ensure that that person at least has the appropriate powers to deal with the problems that have arisen—the problems that have been exposed over the last three years—which government did nothing about.

It is time we put back on track the skills training authorities of this country, because they are important to the country's future. They provide career paths for many people and they are essential to ensuring that we are a country that is still able to make things, do things and fix things.

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Vocational Education and Skills) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I start by thanking the honourable members who have contributed to the debate on these very important VET student loans bills. Before I turn to some of the specific issues raised, I want to remind the House of the purpose of these bills. They are to establish a strong, robust and sustainable program that provides important financial support to students to enable them to get the skills that they need for a job or to get a better job. They set the bar higher for training providers to be able to offer courses covered by the loans. They align loans to skills needs in the economy, so students and taxpayers are not left with debts for courses that have no prospect of being paid off. They require students to actually progress in a course before they have further debt levied. Under Labor's arrangements providers were enrolling a student on the same day as they applied for a loan and tried to claim the whole tuition fee in one hit, regardless of whether the student ever attended a class or logged into an online course.

The VET student loans bills introduce loan caps that send a strong signal to students about the amount it costs to deliver a course and limit what the Commonwealth is willing to pay, to stop the exorbitant fee increases we have seen under Labor's scheme. They ban brokers from engaging with or recruiting students in relation to VET student loans. They require training that is being paid for by a VET student loan to be delivered by a provider who has met the high bar set by either this new program or the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. Under Labor's scheme providers could sign up students for VET FEE-HELP loans for thousands of dollars but deliver little, if any, of it, thereby selling access to VET FEE-HELP and its inflated prices to training organisations who would not otherwise qualify.

These new bills strengthen compliance and ensure that, where a student has been wrongly signed up for a loan, the government can remit that debt and recoup the costs from the provider. Under Labor's scheme students were signed up for thousands of dollars in loans for courses they did not need or could never complete or which had no link to employer or skills needs in the economy. We have heard examples from the members for Hinkler, Berowra, Durack, Forrest, Dunkley and Gippsland of how their constituents had, unfortunately, been targeted by these unscrupulous providers or brokers and why action was needed.

The member for Cowper, the former Minister for Vocational Education and Skills, outlined the strong actions he and the government have taken to date to stop these rorts and to stop the growth in the scheme while the government consulted on a complete redesign for VET FEE-HELP. He outlined some of the 20 measures the government has already introduced, which have already had an impact on improving Labor's failed scheme. The Department of Education and Training has advised that student enrolment numbers and loan amounts for 2016 will be significantly lower than in 2015 as a result of the changes the government has already made. This is already saving students and taxpayers millions of dollars in debt that would otherwise have gone out the door under Labor's arrangements.

These bills establish a program that will restore integrity to Australia's vocational education system and confidence in Australia's high-quality training organisations. This is what Labor should have done when it established VET FEE-HELP and this is what Labor should have done before it opened up access to the rorters and the shonks. Those opposite want to shirk responsibility for their failed schemes, but Australians know that while Labor creates problems, like the failed home insulation scheme and school hall blowouts, it is the coalition that actually steps in to fix things. That is why, in providing support for these bills, the government is investing a further $45 million over the forward estimates to boost the department's capacity to manage the new program, including to monitor, investigate and take action against providers found to be doing the wrong thing. The department has been given the resources it needs to deal with the tight transition period and with the establishment and ongoing administration of the new scheme.

Members have raised issues about the courses that will be eligible for a VET student loan. These bills provide the power for the minister to approve a course list. That list is not part of this bill; it will be a separate disallowable instrument. As announced by the Minister for Education and Training last week, the proposed list has been released for public feedback, with submissions invited by 23 October. The list assesses courses on the basis that they are included on at least two state or territory skills needs lists or are a national priority in terms of science, technology, engineering, maths and agriculture. The courses included on the list include around 95 per cent of students who are currently enrolled in VET FEE-HELP courses.

I encourage stakeholders with concerns to have their say during this feedback period, but I would like to address some specific concerns raised in this place. Some members and stakeholders have raised concerns about arts courses. The proposed eligible course list includes 13 arts related courses: the Diploma of Graphic Design, the Advanced Diploma of Graphic Design, the Diploma of Screen and Media, the Advanced Diploma of Screen and Media, the Diploma of Visual Arts, the Advanced Diploma of Visual Arts, the Diploma of Live Production and Technical Services, the Advanced Diploma of Live Production and Management Services, the Advanced Diploma of Creative Product Development, the Diploma of Furniture Design and Technology, the Diploma of Photography and Photo Imaging, the Diploma of Music Industry and the Advanced Diploma of Music Industry.

The member for Mayo raised a number of courses which are not on the proposed eligibility list, including courses relating to community health, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education, oral medicine, home economics education, building design, building surveying and dementia care. I can confirm that not a single one of these courses is subsidised by more than one state or territory and, of the eight, six had no enrolments in 2015. The government is unapologetic about aligning loans for VET, which is after all about vocational training, with workplace requirements. If there is a course that is not covered, members and other stakeholders should be asking the states and territories why it is not considered a high enough priority to be on their skills needs list. They can also provide their feedback through the consultation that is currently open. There will also be opportunities each year for stakeholders to provide their views on the eligible course list, which can then be adjusted to meet emerging and changing workplace and economic needs.

As members have highlighted, the VET Student Loans (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill provides for current VET FEE-HELP students to opt in to be grandfathered under their current arrangements, with their current provider, until the end of 2017. The Department of Education and Training will seek to contact all students with a VET FEE-HELP loan who have not completed their course to advise them on the changes and invite them to opt in, should they wish to do so. Students will have until early next year to do so, after which time the department will have more accurate information about which students are genuine and when they are likely to finish. It is expected most students will have completed their studies before the end of 2017. Where courses have been included on the course list, continuing students will be able to continue their studies using a VET student loan. Their previous access to VET FEE-HELP will not preclude their access to a loan under the new program. It is not the government's intention to penalise genuine students who, as a result of unforeseen circumstances or illness, will not be able to complete by the end of 2017. However, VET FEE-HELP needs to close and, as the minister has stated publicly, the department will help students who have not completed by the end of 2017 to make the transition to the new program and is taking those situations on a case-by-case basis.

On the issue of trusts, the government changed the VET FEE-HELP legislation last year to require all new approved providers to not be a trust. This was to reduce financial risk to the Commonwealth and increase financial transparency. Although this requirement was not applied to existing VET FEE-HELP providers that had already been approved, some have already sought information on how to address this requirement, no doubt expecting the change in the redesigned program. Where it is clear that the same entity continues but no longer acts in the trustee capacity, it will not change the department's ability to assess the entity's track record as a training provider. The department has briefed the stakeholder bodies TAFE Directors Australia and the Australian Council for Private Education and Training on this issue and will provide this advice to any organisation requesting information. I encourage any concerned provider to contact ACPET, TDA or the department to discuss their individual situation.

The opposition has raised questions about banning brokers and what this means for the broader sector. Labor allowed brokers into the scheme in the first place by opening it up in 2012 without putting in place any dedicated compliance arrangements and with insufficient oversight or regulation. This government has taken all the steps to tighten arrangements for brokers, first by making training providers responsible for the actions of their brokers through the VET FEE-HELP scheme, and also by strengthening the Standards for Registered Training Organisations, and now by banning brokers relating to VET student loans. Labor did nothing in its years in government to address the issue of broker behaviour other than incentivise them to get into the VET FEE-HELP scheme in the first place.

The member for Bruce mentioned agents in other parts of the VET sector, including international education. The member has previously served as an official in the Victorian department responsible for international education and I acknowledge his strong support for Australia's reputation for high-quality international education. So I remind him that it was the coalition government again, under the Leader of the House when he had the education portfolio, which provided funding to enable the International Education Association of Australia to develop an industry led quality assurance framework to help institutions manage their international education agents. Labor did nothing for Australia's reputation in international education except smash $3 billion from the value of Australia's largest services export.

It is clear that doing nothing is precisely what those opposite have in mind across the board for VET. During the high and mighty rhetoric from those opposite, the Labor Party did not provide a cent in their so-called fiscal plan for a new national partnership agreement on skills. It is quite interesting to look at a document, the Labor Party's pre-election fiscal plan, and what they actually promised on the matter of TAFE. We have heard those members opposite talk for a very long time about their guarantees and their support for TAFE, but I had a look at Labor's fiscal plan, which was released before the election. On page 22, headed 'Education and skills', dealing with costing issues, we see the point 'Provide guaranteed TAFE funding'. That is the first column. The second column gives the 2016-17 figure, and that figure is zero. I looked at 2017-18, and that figure is zero. I looked at 2018-19, and that figure is zero. I looked at 2019-20, and that figure is zero. So there were four years, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, with no money under 'Provide guaranteed TAFE funding'—absolutely zero. Labor do not have a plan for apprenticeships. They do not have a plan for TAFE. They have no plan for the future of work. They have no plan for meeting the skills shortages of this country. Instead, they want a review.

Those opposite also have an appalling record on apprenticeships. When the member for Blaxland addressed this House in 2009, he talked of the 35 per cent drop in apprenticeships on Labor's watch during the 'recession we had to have', which most people remember vividly. It was left to the Howard government to rebuild apprenticeships, as the member acknowledged in his speech. When back in government in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, Labor cut employer incentives nine times between 2011 and 2013, a total cut of $1.2 billion. Due to Labor's cuts, 25 per cent fewer apprentices took up training between 2012 and 2013. This huge drop continues to affect the numbers of apprentices in training today.

The coalition government, by contrast, has a proud record on vocational education and training. We understand it and, as this bill demonstrates, we intend to back our beliefs with action. I commend the bill to the House.

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

The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

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

The question now is that this bill be read a second time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.