Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

(1)

That the Senate notes that:

(a)

the Industry Skills Councils (ISCs) are independent, not for profit companies funded by the Federal Government to fulfil various skills and training-related policy and program responsibilities;

(b)

the Rudd Government has boosted public funding and scope for those ISCs significantly, including a:

(i)

$83.2 million funding boost in 2008-09 increasing operational funding for ISCs under the 2008-2011 funding agreement to $118.9 million,

(ii)

allocation of several hundred thousands of dollars in 2009 to the Construction and Property Services Industry Skills Council to develop the home insulation training package,

(iii)

$40 million funding allocation in 2010-11 for the Enterprise Based Productivity Places Program,

(iv)

$19.9 million funding allocation in 2010-11 for the Smarter Apprenticeships Program, and

(v)

$2.3 million funding allocation in 2010-11 to revise and rewrite training packages as part of the National Green Skills Agreement;

(c)

none of the funding is allocated by open competitive tender, with any competition limited to ISCs between each other for some of the government funding;

(d)

it is unclear whether those ISCs are sufficiently representative of respective sectors of Australian industry; and

(e)

nearly all the funding for ISCs is provided by the Federal Government, yet as ‘private companies’ they are not subject to the scrutiny of Senate estimates committees.

(2)

That the following matters be referred to the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee for inquiry and report by 30 September 2010:

(a)

the role and effectiveness of Industry Skills Councils (ISCs) in the operation of the national training system particularly as it relates to states and territories and rural and regional Australia;

(b)

accountability mechanisms in relation to Commonwealth funding for the general operation and specific projects and programs of each ISC;

(c)

corporate governance arrangements of ISCs;

(d)

Commonwealth Government processes to prioritise funding allocations across all ISCs;

(e)

ISC network arrangements and co-operative mechanisms implemented between relevant boards;

(f)

the accrual of accumulated surpluses from public funding over the life of each ISC’s operation and its use and purpose;

(g)

the effectiveness of each ISC in implementing specific training initiatives, for example the Skills for Sustainability initiative under the National Green Skills Agreement; and

(h)

any related matters.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The ISCs were established by the previous government, who determined the number, industry coverage and other governance arrangements. Ten ISCs were originally created to cover all industry sectors. They are part of industry advisory arrangements that are independent of the government. They were established as private companies to ensure that they were at arm’s length from the government. This government continues to support this approach, as it sees the value in advice that is independent of government.

ISCs are subject to the same scrutiny as other organisations that are contracted to the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The government has expanded the number of ISCs to 11 to improve the industry coverage, expanded their role to include workforce development to support higher levels of direct engagement with industry and increased the scrutiny of ISCs through reporting arrangements to the department. Forty million dollars in EBPPP is not going to make ISCs; this is funding to upskill existing workers. ISCs are administering the program and receiving only a small facilitation fee. Arrangements for the Smarter Apprenticeships initiative are yet to be determined. ISCs are one of a number of organisations that may be eligible to access funding out of this program—$2.3 million from the National Green Skills Agreement must of course go to ISCs. This is to fund additional training package development, which is the core function of the ISCs. There is no evidence of the need for an inquiry of this nature.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a brief statement.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the minister said, the Rudd government has significantly expanded the role and funding for these industry skills councils. They are private companies, and as such they are not directly subject to the scrutiny of the Senate—for example, through Senate estimates. As an example, there has been an $83.2 million funding boost in direct operational funding for industry skills councils as well as funding which may be administered and not totally be for industry skills councils, such as the $40 million funding allocation for the Enterprise Based Productivity Places Program; however, it is industry skills councils as private companies that are administering that funding on behalf of the Commonwealth. That is an allocation that is made outside any open, competitive tender, where all that is available by way of competitive attention is competition by several industry skills councils themselves.

Not wanting to pre-empt the finding of this inquiry, and given the lack of ability of Senate estimates to properly scrutinise the performance of these industry skills councils in the very important area of vocational education and training, we think that it is justified for the Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee to properly scrutinise the role and effectiveness of these industry skills councils, the accountability mechanisms that are in place and, of course, the corporate governance arrangements of ISCs. There are a lot of union officials on these industry skills councils and a lot of public funding accumulated by some of these industry skills councils. I think there is a need for some proper scrutiny to be applied by a Senate committee to ensure that the taxpayer is indeed getting proper value for money from the limited training dollars that are being invested by this government in those industry skills councils.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a very brief statement.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government opposes this motion. We recognise that a majority in the chamber supports the motion and we will not be calling a division.

Question agreed to.