Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for 'Lalor' appreciates the call.

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

I beg your pardon. I don't know why I say that–every time!

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The advice I give the children in the electorate is that Peter Lalor had an Irish accent and therefore it is 'Lalor'.

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

Very good; happy to take the advice.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Education and Training Legislation Repeal Bill 2017 tidies up legislative instruments which are currently obsolete. The Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving Australia's Skills Needs) Act 2005 underpinned the Australian Technical Colleges Program. I was in schools when this program was rolled out under the Howard government. In fact, it was a moment in time that I will never forget when I first heard Prime Minister John Howard use his talent for harking back to better times when everything was simpler and easier, and 'If only we could turn back the clock, the world would be a better place.' He made the statement about technical skills not being appreciated in this country and used images of a time when we had tech schools across the country. He forgot to mention that it was also a time when we had very, very strong unions across the country, we had a public sector involved in railways and we had lots of workers, hundreds of workers, employed in one space with apprenticeships for many, many young people.

I will never forget that day when Prime Minister John Howard said that we needed to turn back the clock to those times—completely ignorant of the fact that the world had moved past those times. I remember it so clearly because I was teaching in Victoria, where we had set targets of 80 per cent retention to year 12, and I had to deal with parents across the next month telling me that it will be okay: 'Johnny can go and get one of John Howard's new apprenticeships. He can now leave school in year 10.' That was after years of work, talking to parents and talking to children about the fact that their life chances would be improved if they finished school. I was working in a school in Melbourne's west, where most children were from families whose parents had not finished year 10. Building aspiration into those cohorts of children was my day-to-day job. I did not thank John Howard for his words. I believe that now, if I went and had a beer with the students I was teaching at the time, those who chose to leave school after that great moment wouldn't thank him either. Nor do I thank him for the Australian technical colleges that he declared then that he would build, because what we ended up with was $500 million spent on 24 campuses that were to be the new wave of schools.

It was the first time in history that the federal government built a private school. It was meant to be a disruptor of state education and TAFEs. It failed dramatically. It failed to attract the students it needed. It failed to attract the teachers to this new system—this vision that John Howard had, which was really acting on a populist sentiment that was never going to deliver trade training in the way he suggested to the Australian public that it would. Twenty-four Australian technical colleges were to be set up at 24 different sites around Australia. Then another one was added and another three were added, so we ended up with a vision for 28 at a cost of $585 million—$473 million from the federal government, $20 million from the department and another $91 million from other sources which, of course, included state governments. In that $91 million there were fees that parents were going to pay to have their children attend these, because obviously they were going to be set up by consortia which could have include included not-for-profits, states and other sector schools.

I was on the ground in schools when the Australian Technical College opened in Sunshine, and I was working in the west when a second one was mooted for the western suburbs of Melbourne. So I can reflect thoroughly on what a waste it was for my part of the world. The announcement was that Sunshine would have it and that it would be great, it would be wonderful and it would fix all our issues, because all of the young people who thought they might want to do a trade would be magically subsumed into an Australian Technical College. Of course, what happened was that the students didn't go there and neither did the teachers. If you do the maths, it ended up to be $70,000 per student. Imagine what they could have done in a school with $70,000 per student! Imagine what they could have done in Yirrkala with $70,000 per student. It was an incredible waste of money. It never attracted the appropriate numbers of students.

One of the intentions of this, as it happened—because there were some things that were written about these—was that all the employees would have to be on an individual worker's contract. So every teacher that was going to be employed in them would be offered an AWA. I looked at the conditions that were set up around those AWAs. In schools, there were 40 weeks of curriculum and, in the ATCs, and they could give 47 weeks. I'm not saying that that's necessarily a bad thing, but then you get to the working conditions. At the time, 36 hours and 45 minutes was a week's work in a school, with 19 hours of tuition. In an ATC, it was to be 38 hours of week with 28 hours of tuition. So, in a school, that gave teachers 17 hours and 45 minutes for yard duty, planning, meetings and preparation. These were going to be technical colleges, teaching technical skills, using technical equipment, and they were going to have 10 hours for yard duty, planning, meetings and preparation. So the quality of the education was under pressure from the outset. And there is no getting around the fact that that was a deliberate attempt to undermine the teachers' unions at the time. It was a deliberate attempt to undermine teaching practice in every state in this country. It was meant to be a disruptor. It was a resounding failure.

The Australian Technical College in Sunshine is still operating as the Harvester Technical College as part of Sunshine College. So the site hasn't been wasted, because the Victorian state government stepped in and subsumed it into a new amalgamation of schools for Sunshine. So it's still operating on the ground, and the facility hasn't gone to waste. So that's a saving grace. But, ultimately, the program didn't bring about the change that it was intended to bring about.

That reminds us so clearly about this government's record around apprentices and vocational education and training. Of course, we don't have to go far to follow this great record from the Howard era. In Lalor, from 2013 to December 2016 there was a drop of 42 per cent in the number apprenticeships for young people in my electorate. And the record continues. We've got a billion dollars worth of cuts around vocational education and training. There are now only 265,000 apprentices in training in this country, compared to 413,000 when this government took office.

So I'm pleased that we're here to dispose of bills that we no longer need. But we should take the opportunity to learn from history. I think that's important this week. I've been thinking a lot about the teaching of history this week, in light of some of the events that happened in the US, and it’s important that we in this place look at our history too. It is important to look at our legislative history and our program history and, in this instance, we need to take a good hard look at the Auditor-General's report on the Australian Technical Colleges Program, which saw the waste and counted the waste. It's all in there in that document. It shows the absolute waste that this was. We can't forget that before the next election Prime Minister Howard promised to build 100 of these. So he was going to take the disruption right into the TAFE sector, build 100 of them and change the way we fund schools in this country. The federal government were not just going to fund private schools; they were going to found them. They were going to create them.

An opposition member: Pioneers!

They were going to pioneer private-sector, not-for-profit education facilities in vocational training and apprenticeships. So we shouldn't be surprised that we have continued attacks on TAFE. We shouldn't be surprised about anything that happens there.

I want to take this to what we're seeing happening at the moment. We've got cuts to schools across the country on what schools would have had if Labor were in government. And we're supposed to celebrate those cuts because they are more than what the former Prime Minister would have given, since we came back from the election. That's supposed to be a celebration for people in this place. Well, it's not a celebration for me because I know what's going on in schools and I know what schools need. They need the resources so that they can do their jobs.

In lieu of that, we've got a new review of regional education happening under this government. It's worth taking a look back, historically, at the Australian Technical Colleges to see what's being learnt or what's not being learnt. I'm very suspicious. The fact of the matter is that the discussion paper around the review into regional, rural and remote education states quite clearly where most kids are educated in rural and regional areas-and it's in public schools. Eighty per cent of them are educated in public schools.

I had a bit of a look at the discussion document. It cites that there will be $1.4 billion in location loading going to regional and remote schools under the government's new funding arrangements for schools. Well, of course, we would need a review, because we can't possibly be seeing $1.4 billion going into state schools in regional areas! So we're having a review. I had a bit of a look at the review, besides looking at the discussion paper. I also had a look at the terms of reference, and alarm bells started ringing loudly. One dot point is:

So aspiration and access issues? As far as I can see, there are no access issues in state education in rural and regional areas across this country. State schools are there; children have access. Another dot point is:

I've got alarm bells ringing. I'm worried about that $1.4 billion and where people might see that might be better spent than in state school classrooms in regional and remote communities. I'm very concerned about it.

I'm not concerned that there's going to be a review. Clearly, we know that kids in regional and remote areas are not doing as well as they could be. We know that. That's why they need more resources. We know that. That's why Labor had the plan that it had. But I'm worried that this discussion paper highlights that $1.4 billion and lists in here, in an idea in terms of regional and remote education, boarding. I'm worried that this review may actually be targeted to find new and exciting ways to use that $1.4 billion which don't include the funding of state schools in regional and remote communities—off the back of the Australian Technical College debacle that we're here today to bury.

I will take the time remaining to me to go from there and the notion around this government's failure in skills and training, this government's attacks on TAFEs and this government's failure to pull in and wind back the provisions that were allowing for shonky registered training organisations to continue to profit at the expense of students—and, in fact, were found to be exploitative in nature and to be using enrolments to fill their own coffers rather than organise for the education of young people in this country.

I am worried. I'm worried that, rather than making a commitment to invest in vocational education and training and apprenticeships, we're rolling out these PaTH internships that will see young people picking up glasses in nightclubs for $4 an hour while the Hotels Association reaps the benefit—a thousand dollars per internship, with more money coming down the line if they get a permanent job, and you've actually undermined casual workers and workers on penalty rates now.

The Australian public are not silly. They can see the landscape. They can see what's happening here. They can look back in history and see that a Liberal-National coalition government will always be looking to find a way to change the landscape that's going to undermine middle- and lower income people—and now we're undermining education as well. (Time expired)

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

Like the member for Lalor, I rise—

An opposition member: Lalor.

Sorry.

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

It's a common mistake. You're in good company.

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

Thank you. I do rise in support of the Education and Training Legislation Repeal Bill 2017, just like my parliamentary colleague has. I do agree with her that the bill does nothing but clean up some of the mess left by the Howard government. We know this is what happens when you have a Liberal-National government—mistakes are left behind that have to be fixed up. Let me tell you how I know this, and how I know this so well: it's because I come from Queensland, and people in Queensland remember very well the Newman-Nicholls government. Not only do they remember it; they're still feeling the wrath of that government. We know very, very well what happens when Liberal-National governments are elected. There are a lot of mistakes to fix up, and I just can't begin to imagine how long it is going to take to fix up the mistakes of this current government.

One of the acts the bill is set to repeal is the Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving Australia's Skills Needs) Act 2005. As the previous member stated, the colleges were a failure of a coalition government—a program that was created in a misguided attempt to undermine our TAFEs and our public schools. As was so rightly pointed out, the areas that were most affected were the regional parts of this country, where public schools are so crucial. Australians and Labor know that public education is incredibly important. But it's not just public education that's incredibly important; it's the quality of education as well. We believe in and really support our public schools, our TAFEs and vocational education.

It is not really a surprise that the technical colleges program was a failure. Much like the Howard government itself, it proved to be expensive and ineffectual—it really did. Let's be honest: if we look at the data, they had trouble sourcing staff and they had trouble sourcing students as well. The technical colleges contributed very little to filling the trade requirements, even though they had been funded to do that. This government wasted thousands and thousands of dollars on these poorly considered institutions.

Looking back, I spent a number of years in the education system. I have four sons, one of whom is a tradie, and we have some lived experience of this from their school years and those of their school mates who also followed a trade pathway. When I look back, nothing has changed. In 2005, the Howard government made sure that some of their policies were there just to undermine the future of Australia, and I'm very fearful—and a lot of people tell me that they're fearful—that Prime Minister Turnbull, 12 years later, is following in those same footsteps. It seems that the current government looks at the colour of someone's collar to determine if they get support, and I can tell you: they're not looking at the colour blue; the only collar colour that the current government wants to see is white.

Repealing the act is effectively an admission of coalition failure. As a result of successive coalition governments, there were only 148,000 apprentices and trainees across Australia. That was 47,000 fewer apprentices, a drop of 22 per cent in trades training. We're going backwards. We want to grow and progress as a country, but we have fewer apprentices. It just doesn't make sense. Looking through some of the figures—and I know we have all seen these figures; they come across our desks and offices all the time—the number of apprentices and trainees currently in training in each of our electorates is very startling. In my electorate we've dropped by 30 per cent since 2013. I want to reflect on this, because we are very close to the end of the school year and there's going to be a whole cohort of students across my electorate who will be looking for a pathway into training, university or work. If this is the trajectory we're on, and we're already at 30 per cent, then I'm quite fearful of what their future may look like.

I held a forum recently, and a representative from a local apprenticeship association told me that apprentices are being displaced by registered tradespeople. Carpenters was the example he gave me. They're forced into the position of working for apprenticeship wages. They're battling to make a liveable wage. They're taking work away from apprentices, but this shift in work is not being managed or scrutinised by this government. At another forum I held—clearly, jobs and employment are a huge issue in my electorate, which is not dissimilar to many other electorates—a man made a point about why apprentices aren't finishing their course. The evidence he gave was that it's because they're being exploited. This man was referring to his son, who was not being paid award rates or superannuation; he was being exploited. Let's be honest, award rates are barely enough to get by. It's the minimum you can pay someone in this country, but it's not great pay. Some of our students aren't even getting the award to live on. That aside, many apprentices aren't even getting placements that are worthwhile. This man's son was doing a carpentry apprenticeship, and guess what he was doing? He was sweeping floors. I question the skills a carpenter would learn from sweeping floors. My son is a fantastic carpenter—he builds great houses on the north side of Brisbane—but I'm sure he didn't learn those skills sweeping floors.

There has to be better protections for our apprentices—there has to be. We've got to do much better at investing in our young people. As I said, in a couple of short months time in every one of our electorates, we will have kids leaving school and looking for a pathway into a trade. What really baffles me is that, if this government is recognising that their policies haven't been successful and if they're conceding that they've fallen short, why aren't they doing something to fix it? If they can stand in this chamber and concede that their government and the coalition governments that came before them have failed to develop and implement a workable means of improving the provision and uptake of trades training then why won't they take positive steps towards it? Why do they insist on making things worse? It really goes against logic that the Prime Minister would use this 2017-18 budget to cut $637 million from TAFE. Why would they use a budget to cut TAFE? It just defies logic. Why would our Prime Minister not take the lead and invest in education, which means investing in the future for Australian workers? I have worked in schools for a number of years and our students really are both the social and the economic future of this country. Why wouldn't we invest in them? It's the future of our country.

Well, the good news is that Labor is looking at making sure that we are investing in the social and economic future of this country. Fortunately for the Australian people, a Shorten Labor government is just around the corner. A Shorten Labor government will deliver. We will deliver by reversing the $637 million TAFE cut that was handed down in the May budget. We will make sure that we deliver by guaranteeing at least two-thirds of public vocational education funding is for TAFE, that very institution of so many tradies. If you go and speak to a tradie in their 40s and 50s now, they will tell you about TAFE and reflect on the current system. Go and talk to them.

So we will deliver by ensuring that we guarantee at least two-thirds of the funding is for TAFE. Further to that there will be another $100 million in building the TAFE for the Future Fund. That fund would re-establish TAFE facilities in regional communities, like the member for Herbert's, to meet the local industry needs and support teaching in a digital economy. You don't have to travel very far around this country to get to a regional community. If you go for a drive and you speak to people, you will realise how important this would be and the difference it would make. In my 12 months of being here I have seen that our Prime Minister is a bit of a follower. So we encourage him to follow our lead and get some strong, positive policies that will guide this country forward.

I support this bill, but I won't support this government. Some days I think it might be a bit of a joke, but it's not, because these are real people and these are real people's lives. For our students finishing school, this is their future. I looked at the rabble that happened yesterday in the House and then looked at what happened in the other house earlier today. It's frustrating and it's upsetting. We really need to make sure that we pass—

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

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The speaker needs to be relevant. The topic is education and training, and I would appreciate her being called back to the topic.

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

I thank the member for McPherson. The member for Longman is reminded she should stick to the topic.

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

Sure. Like I said, we encourage the Prime Minister to follow us with a strong, positive education and training policy. That's what we are asking. Follow us on those policies. Maybe the member for McPherson didn't hear me when I talked about the policies which went to education—the $637 million cut to TAFE that Labor will reinstate. That goes to education. Maybe this is the part you don't get: TAFE is about education. That's what TAFE is; it's about education.

Mrs Andrews interjecting—

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

Order! The member for Longman has the call.

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

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I also spoke about education and about where that education is best provided. I have been speaking about education throughout this whole speech. The member may recall—but I will repeat it, because maybe she missed this part—that I talked about funding education in TAFE and I said that tradies in their 40s and 50s were educated in an educational facility called TAFE. That is why it's important to make sure that two-thirds of that funding goes to public vocational education in TAFE.

I reiterate that I'm happy to stand here and support this bill, but let's not pretend that this support is any more than just administrative support for the bill. It's just going through an administrative process. This bill is basically tying up redundant leftovers from a failed legislation. We can't pretend that these are sweeping reforms that will be remembered forever and make a difference. We cannot be confused that this bill is about some reforms that will go to education for the future. This will not do that. Like I said, I support the bill but stress that it's merely based on supporting an administration of some redundant leftovers that need to be tidied up.

Cathy O'Toole (Herbert, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support my Labor colleagues who have spoken before me. Let me tell you about the role TAFE has played in my life. I am a proud TAFE graduate. I have been a TAFE teacher, curriculum designer, competency-based training project manager and RPL assessor. My working life started with an apprenticeship in hairdressing and that gave me the opportunity to commence as a small-business owner in partnership with my mother at the age of 18. It is very likely that I would not be standing here today without my background in TAFE. My son, who struggled through school and actually left school at 15 years of age, is now the manager of food services for a large metropolitan hospital, and that would not have happened without his ability to access vocational education and training. I have a deep understanding from a personal and professional perspective of the importance of vocational education and training in the lives of many Australians. That is why I'm appalled by the Turnbull government's severe cuts to this sector. Not everybody wants to study law at the University of Sydney like our Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull. Not everyone wants to study law at the University of Adelaide like the Leader of the House, Christopher Pyne. Studying law might be the norm for those on the other side, but it is certainly not the norm for the wider Australian population.

Thousands and thousands of Australian people have studied with vocational education and training providers. Vocational education and training graduates include Australian icons and celebrities. Former Prime Minister, the Hon. Paul Keating, attended Belmore and Sydney technical colleges for a couple of years after leaving school at the age of 15. Supermodel Jennifer Hawkins, champion Rugby League player Kurt Gidley, Michelin-star chef Brett Graham and Screaming Jets guitarist Grant Walmsley are all proud graduates of the Hunter TAFE in New South Wales. Curtis Stone is a proud graduate of Melbourne's Box Hill Institute of TAFE, as is AFL player turned commentator Matthew Richardson. Australia's favourite backyard guru, Don Burke, from Burke's Backyard, studied horticulture at Ryde TAFE. Internationally renowned Australian designer Alex Perry studied at East Sydney Technical College. He even called his acceptance into the college as his big break, as did costume designer and four-time Oscar winner Catherine Martin, who studied at Sydney Technical College. Catherine, a vocational education and training graduate, has won two Academy Awards for Moulin Rouge in 2002 and another two for The Great Gatsby in 2014. Having won four Oscars, she is the most awarded Australian in Oscar history.

These Australian legends are just a few of the faces of the thousands of Australians who have graduated from vocational education and training. I say to the Turnbull government that vocational education and training might not be the same as a law degree, but it is just as prestigious. The government's lack of understanding of the critical need for excellence in trade and other vocational skills continues to amaze me, as does the continual attacks the Turnbull government are making on this sector. Their severe cuts and attacks will do nothing to prepare this country for the jobs of the future. It seems as though the Turnbull government are hell-bent on preventing vocational progress. As much as they don't seem to want the industries of the future, and try as they may to send this country back to the Dark Ages, change is inevitable. Maybe this government could focus on the needs of a changing world and what that means for skill development in this great nation, and stop the massive cuts to vocational education and training. Growth and progression are the future for this nation, but that also means that we will need new skilled workers and workers with updated skills not only here in Australia; there will also be a need for our neighbours in the Asian countries.

The Prime Minister says he is a good leader. I suggest that he starts acting like one and develop policies to fund and enact what will prepare our country for the jobs of the future. This would go a long way to addressing some of the highest unemployment rates across the country. Maybe my home town would never have been named the jobless capital of the nation and Townsville would not have one of the highest insolvency rates in the nation. The simple fact is that only a Labor government has what it takes to get the right policy enacted to get vocational education and training up and running again in this country. Australia needs a plan and investment in jobs for the future, and vocational education and training will play a pivotal role in achieving that plan. The jobs of the future will require quality vocational education and training—not necessarily a law degree, like those opposite, but we will need a wide range of vocational skills that will create employment, including apprenticeships and traineeships. We could and should be a manufacturing nation. We could and should be the nation that creates and builds on the industries of the future. North Australia could be the solar manufacturing capital that connects to Indonesia, India and Asia more broadly. North Queensland could export not only beef but also solar panels. A law degree cannot teach trade and vocational skills that are needed to build jobs in this great nation. A trade qualification must be studied with a quality vocational education and training provider.

I will always be the member who stands up and fights for jobs. Since being elected, jobs have been my primary focus: jobs for Townsville, jobs for veterans, jobs for our youth, jobs for our first nation people, jobs for our refugees and migrants. I have met with many national and international business leaders and CEOs. They have all complimented Townsville on our capacity and enormous opportunities, but all have said there is one thing holding them back. All have said that they are holding off any potential future investment because the Turnbull government has been unable to provide certainty regarding growing industries like energy. The Turnbull government is holding back jobs and growth in my electorate because there is no energy plan for our country. Certainty needs to be provided. Under the Turnbull government, we have seen no certainty for a plan to address our national energy crisis, we have no certainty regarding jobs, we have seen no certainty regarding training and education for the jobs of the future, and we have seen no certainty regarding the position of the Deputy Prime Minister. The only thing the country knows for certain is that the Turnbull government does not seem to have a clue about these issues. The jobs of the future will require vocational education and training. I keep reiterating that because it is a fact.

The Turnbull government's track record on apprenticeships and training is dismal. Since coming to government, the Abbott-Turnbull governments have cut over $3 billion in apprenticeship support and funding for TAFE, including a cut of $637 million in the last budget. With funding cuts comes the decline in apprenticeships and traineeships across the country. There are 148,000 fewer apprentices and trainees now than when the coalition government entered as the government of the country. There are now only 265,000 apprentices and trainees compared to 413,400 in September 2013. Latest figures from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research confirmed once again that apprenticeship and trainee numbers have fallen. There was a 4.5 per cent decline in the number of apprentices and trainees at 31 December 2016 compared to 31 December 2015. In 2016, compared with 2015, commencements continued the downward spiral since the government came to office, with a decrease of 2.9 per cent following drops of close to 10 per cent to 20 per cent, respectively, over the preceding two years. Trade commencements decreased by 12.4 per cent. Apprenticeship and traineeship completions decreased by 16.1 per cent to 99,000. Trade completions decreased by 13.6 per cent and non-trade completions decreased by 18 per cent. The training rate—the percentage of workers employed as an apprentice or trainee—is down again from 2.3 per cent to 2.2 per cent. The training rate for trade apprentices and trainees fell below 10 per cent for the first time in over a decade to 9.9 per cent, meaning less than 10 per cent of trade workers are currently apprentices.

The Turnbull government cannot be trusted with jobs and apprenticeship and traineeship numbers. The Turnbull government cannot be trusted with training and apprenticeships, and the Turnbull government cannot be trusted to assist North Queensland. If you are an unemployed youth, if you are an unemployed apprentice, if you are one of the nearly 10 per cent of unemployed people in the Herbert electorate, then it is the Turnbull government that needs to hear your anger. Know that Labor has your back.

Labor has a real plan and a real direction for jobs, training and apprenticeships. Since the beginning of the year, Labor has made numerous announcements for our plan for skills and apprenticeships, which include: investing an additional $637.6 million in TAFE and vocational education—reversing the Turnbull government's 2017 budget cuts in full; guaranteeing at least two-thirds of public funding for vocational education will go to TAFE; investing in a new Building TAFE for the Future Fund to revitalise TAFE campuses and facilities in regional and other metropolitan areas; and setting a target of one in 10 jobs for apprentices on Commonwealth priority projects, including major government business enterprise projects.

Labor's Apprentice Ready plan will expand pre-apprenticeship programs for young jobseekers. This program will smooth the transition of 10,000 young jobseekers into workplaces by providing them with nationally recognised, industry endorsed training and preparation for an apprenticeship. Training will be delivered through TAFEs in areas where job demand is demonstrated and local employers are onboard. Labor's plan for advanced-entry adult apprenticeships will invest in workers who are making decisions. This program will fast-track quality apprenticeships for up to 20,000 adults who are facing redundancies or who are already displaced in their jobs. Workers will be given advanced standing for their existing skills and provided with gap training at TAFE in shorter-duration apprenticeships to fill skilled jobs in areas of demand.

Labor knows that you cannot have a plan for Australian jobs without a plan for Australian apprentices and trainees. Labor's announcements and commitments, as mentioned above, will do just that. With the destruction of our vocational education and training sector by the Abbott-Turnbull governments, there will be a lot more tidying up to do into the future. Labor will deliver because Labor is ready to do so.

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

There are some comments that I'd actually like to respond to before I actually move to the legislation that's currently before the House, the Education and Training Legislation Repeal Bill 2017. I want to set the record straight, because it is actually really important. I would like to say at the outset that I don't believe that there's another person in this House that is more committed to raising the status of vocational education and making sure that it is rightfully placed as part of the education agenda for this government than me. I have been in this role for 12 months and I'm absolutely committed to making sure that we are addressing the skills shortages that we have now and the skills shortages that are projected into the future.

By way of background, let me talk about the funding through the national partnership agreement, which is the funding agreement that was negotiated between the states and the territories, and the Commonwealth government. There was an agreement negotiated back in 2012. It was a five-year agreement that provided for $1.75 billion of funding to the states. $1.15 billion of the national partnership agreement was dedicated to structural reforms. That left $600 million over five years for direct training outcomes. The agreement that the coalition government has put in place—it was announced in the budget—is for $1.5 billion over four years. So that compares, as a direct training outcome, to $600 million over five years. When matched by the states, that will provide a total of $3 billion. The fund is targeted towards addressing the decline that there has been in apprentices and trainees in training across this country over, probably, the last five years. But, let me say, the biggest decline in numbers in apprentices and trainees in training was in 2012. That came on the back of nine successive cuts of $1.2 billion in total to employer incentives. In that one-year period, the 2012-13 period, we lost 110,000 apprentices and trainees in training from the system, which was about a 22 per cent drop in that one year.

So the coalition government have looked at what we can possibly do to address the serious skills shortages that we have. When the $1.5 billion fund was constructed, we looked at where our target areas were going to be, and that was clearly in the very much-needed area of apprentices and trainees and increasing the number that we had in training. We've identified where the demand areas are going to be in the future by looking at employment data and projections through to November 2020. So over a five-year period, from November 2015 to November 2020, we looked at where some of those demand areas are going to be. Clearly, health and ageing is a priority area, as is disability, an area that we have to start looking at. We've also identified tourism and hospitality, and advanced manufacturing as some clear areas we need to look at. When I've been talking to the states, I've put those on the table as the priority areas that we are looking at, but I've made it very clear that that's not an exclusive list and that I'm happy to work with every state and every territory to make sure that we actually meet the demands of the individual states and territories. If I use Western Australia as an example, the skill demands in Perth are quite different to the skill demands in the Kimberley. I'm more than happy to be working with the states to identify where we need to target those areas.

The national partnership agreement that was negotiated under Labor back in 2012 and that ran for five years—when our apprenticeship numbers declined dramatically—introduced contestability into the market. As a direct result of that, the market share of TAFE dropped from about 60 per cent to a percentage in the high 40s. So the significant drop really came about because of contestability in the market. Those opposite would know that states have responsibility for funding TAFEs and they would also know—or they should know—that the national partnership agreement, which was negotiated when they were in government, did not provide one cent directly for TAFE funding. It provided for training outcomes, but it was up to the states and territories to negotiate how that was to be spent. There is a special purpose payment which goes to each of the states and territories—and again those opposite should be very much aware of the special purpose payment—and under that it's up to the states to determine whether or not they wish to make allocations to any particular training body. So I think it's important, when we actually look at training and education, and particularly vocational education and training, that we look holistically at what has happened over the past five years and look at what we can do collectively into the future.

I'm not a particularly partisan person in my approach, and I've indicated a willingness to work with anyone and everyone to address the skill shortages needs we have, because they're serious. They are really serious, and some of those projections indicate that we will have a shortfall of about 290,000 in 2020, if we do not do anything about it. That's why the coalition government put in place a $1.5 billion fund, aimed specifically at increasing the number of apprentices and trainees in training over a four-year period.

In respect of the legislation that is before the Chamber, the Education and Training Legislation Repeal Bill 2017 continues the government's efforts to tidy up the Commonwealth statute book with the repeal of four spent and redundant Commonwealth acts within the Education and Training portfolio. The four acts being repealed are: the Australian Research Council (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Act 2001; the Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving Australia's Skills Needs) Act 2005; the Skilling Australia's Workforce Act 2005; and the Skilling Australia's Workforce (Repeal and Transitional Provisions) Act 2005. Proper housekeeping is part of every government's responsibility to ensure that the legislation on the statute book continues to remain fit for purpose. Bills like this demonstrate this government's continuing commitment to make steady and consistent progress to reduce red tape by repealing redundant and unnecessary legislation that has outlived its purpose. I thank the members and commend the bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.