Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pursuant to order and at the request of the Chair of the Education and Employment References Committee, I present the report on the technical and further education system, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the deputy chair of the committee. I wish to advise the chamber that the coalition senators have dissented from elements of the TAFE funding inquiry and express my appreciation to all those who were involved, including the secretariat and my colleague Senator McKenzie who so ably worked with us on this.

There is no doubt at all that there needs to be an improvement in the overall recognition of standards in the technical and further education of vocational education sector across Australia. I think there would be general acceptance of a move towards standards that are accepted and equivalent across state and territory boundaries. They would be beneficial to employers, employees and, of course, the students, because we have such a freedom of movement now and we are going to see that far more into the future as we try to bring this economy back to a level of acceptability to the Australian and wider community.

That will definitely require a circumstance in the vocational education and training area where we are going to ensure that standards remain high, from a student's point of view, including—but not exclusively—international students, who increasingly see value in coming to our country.

Where the coalition senators dissent from the majority report is in a number of sectors, and I wish to highlight them. The first is that whilst the Commonwealth government does provide and has a great interest in the vocational education sector, it is a fact and will remain the fact that the actual delivery of VET-type training is and should remain the province of the states and the territories.

We actually saw evidence of that in our hearings in the different areas of Australia. In Victoria we saw a heavy emphasis in the manufacturing sector because it is heavily a manufacturing state. In Western Australia we saw emphasis reflecting the industries which are active in that state. In Wollongong we saw a slight change of emphasis to students with disabilities. How interesting that particular hearing was to all of us.

The coalition senators, in presenting our dissenting report, wish to make very clear the fact that TAFE delivery, vocational education and training, is a state and territory responsibility. There should not be a role for the federal government to want to take control over that. Those states who wish to participate more fully should be encouraged to do so. But at the same time we do believe there needs to be a consistency of standards and transferability of qualifications across state and territory boundaries.

Vocational education is education with the purpose of equipping a person with the necessary skills to do a job. Coalition senators—and I have said this in the report—support a strong, vibrant, dynamic, financially sustainable vocational education system. Again, this is where the coalition senators dissent from the majority report. The majority report tends to emphasise that those most capable and most competent to deliver vocational education and training are exclusively in the TAFE sector, the government controlled sector. It is the case that it was the decision of the states to move well beyond the TAFE system of delivery towards a competitive system involving the private sector. That has achieved enormous gains for students, particularly, and into the future it will for employers. So that is an area of difference between the majority report and the dissenting report as delivered by Senator McKenzie and me.

We were disappointed the majority report did not give adequate air time or space to the essential role of industry. It is industry, in the main, that will provide the career opportunities for VET students on completion of their training. I believe Senator McKenzie will want to expand further on that involvement by industry in the provision of services. If industry, having the role that it does, wants that choice of a private sector service provider as well as a TAFE based service provider, all to the good. We heard some very interesting evidence around Australia on the need for liaison with industry in that context.

The issue of who drives skills development is crucial to the future role of TAFE, and we recognise it as the pre-eminent provider of vocational education and training in this country. Employers have told us that, as we all know, they rely on TAFE to provide consistent high-quality training and to ensure that trainees enter the workplace—particularly importantly—work ready. There are three areas that we identified in this report for this to happen, the first being skills development driven by employers and industries that will employee the graduates at the end of their training. The second is that TAFEs must respond to and liaise with employers and industry to ensure that the training provided is of the type and standard required by employers. Third, and most importantly, TAFEs have to be financially viable and sustainable in that competitive environment. We must never lose sight of the fact that each of those three criteria are driving towards one objective: the competence and capacity of students to come into the workplace work ready, safety ready, and willing and competent to go to the next stage of their careers.

The majority report concentrated on funding being reduced to TAFEs or making public funding for the VET sector contestable. The coalition senators are of the view that the system needs to involve a mix of contributors, including government, industry and students. That was certainly highlighted by the Victorian government's Vocational education and training market 2013 highlights report. To quote:

Over the past year, we’ve seen 10,000 more enrolments in construction, nearly 10,000 more people training in healthcare and 8,000 more in transport—all critical areas to the Victorian economy.

I wish to emphasise that point again. In the few moments left to me I make reference to the recommendation by the coalition senators that the states and territories take steps to each ensure their TAFEs are given the capacity to negotiate industrial agreements, to ensure that TAFEs operate on an equal footing with other vocational education providers. They must not be left behind. They must not be shackled in this new world of vocational education and training.

We amend a recommendation from the majority report that the Commonwealth work through its COAG partners on the National Partnership Agreement on Skills Reform to ensure that all states and territories do provide clear statements of policy direction on the role of TAFE in their jurisdiction, in consultation with effective industries to ensure a quality education for students—coming back to that point of emphasis. Again, we recommend the amendment of a majority report recommendation that the committee recommends that COAG work collaboratively to develop a national workforce strategy for TAFE that addresses the level and quality of the teaching qualifications, an area that certainly was the subject of abundant discussion. We reject the recommendations that point to TAFE, pretty well exclusively, returning to being the only provider, and we certainly recommend that for quality vocational education outcomes a mix of contributors is required, that being government, industry and students.

Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This was a most important inquiry with significant findings. I would like to thank the chair of the Education and Employment References Committee, all the senators who worked on this inquiry and certainly all the staff that did such outstanding work in organising our many visits across the country and assisting with the report in all its detail. I also want to thank all colleagues in the Senate, because there was unanimous agreement when I put this up last November that this inquiry should go ahead.

I remember at the time, because we were coming into the end of the year, meeting and talking with a number of young people who are thinking about their future and their plans for 2014. Many of them were looking towards courses at TAFE. But equally they spoke of their concerns and their uncertainty because of what they could see was happening to TAFE in many jurisdictions. It certainly underlined again the need for this inquiry.

It is clear from the evidence presented to the committee that the TAFE sector has been under enormous pressure following decisions to open up government funding to competition from private providers. This was certainly a theme that came through in so many of the hearings. These themes of concern were around continuing cuts in government funding to the TAFE sector, and that has occurred both under successive Labor and coalition governments. Unfortunately, the contestability model that Labor pushed through in those COAG reforms has really allowed so many of the destructive developments that we are seeing play out at a state level.

Other concerns were to do with the diversion of substantial public funding from TAFE to private for-profit RTOs under the contestability model. This has resulted in underfunding TAFE institute in many states, with major losses of staff, resources and infrastructure. The issue of casualisation was something that I found very disturbing in terms of the impact it has on the individuals, because of their uncertainty in terms of their future employment and their workplace conditions but also the quality of the education. I am in no way reflecting on the teachers there, but when you have a highly casualised workforce the quality of the work that comes through is certainly under a cloud.

But what we saw in so much of the evidence with the funding cuts was the enormous impact it is having on the lives of individuals, whether they be staff or students or people who really hope that they could go to TAFE but now often find that that is not possible. The funding cuts are also affecting, as I mentioned, the education standards and also the very fabric of our society. I do not say that lightly. I really learned so much of this inquiry in terms of the huge contribution that TAFE makes to our society in helping bring people back into having confidence to be part of society, gaining training and in many cases then going on to employment. I did find it a great irony, because we are hearing so much from the coalition government about people getting back into the workforce and at the same time they are undermining to such a huge degree an organisation—our TAFE system—which has this myriad of pathways bringing people literally back into society. We heard examples, met and heard evidence from people who were feeling so insecure that in some cases had not left their homes for years and years because of disabilities suffered at work and because of various circumstances that had arisen with their own wellbeing. But through either being introduced to TAFE or meeting TAFE teachers accidentally they were brought back. In one case a man met a TAFE staff person through his disabled child and that person recognised that this man could benefit enormously from TAFE. He went on to not only gain an education but to become a TAFE teacher in graphic design. The stories were just so impressive. That is what I mean when I talk about the damage that is being done to the very fabric of our society.

We heard a great deal of evidence that the affordable, quality vocational training and further education to individuals, communities and industries across Australia is being compromised or even, in many cases, made not possible. Serious concerns were raised about these accessible pathways. Again I really want to emphasise how impressive the evidence was on this issue from both staff and students. This came from so many of the sites that we visited—from Perth to Wollongong. It was very comprehensive inquiry and the evidence from so many people was so beneficial to our considerations.

Other issues that came up strongly were the increase in student fees and the imposition of limited once-only publicly funded training entitlements for each student and how that has put qualifications out of the reach of many students. Then, as I said, there was the evidence about people who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, people with disabilities and how they had benefited so much. So many of the staff who teach these people with disabilities, teach these people with special needs, set out the difficulties under the changes that are coming through at a state level—again, allowed because of the contestability model and the weakness of the regime that we have federally.

I take the example of my home state, New South Wales, the so-called 'smart and skilled' approach to vocational education and training—certainly those words are far from an accurate representation. But what a number of staff explained was that under 'smart and skilled' the money allocated for the assistance many people need will not cover the notetakers, will not cover the translators for people who need an Auslan interpreter if they are deaf. While that does sound costly—it often runs to about $80,000 over four years—when you consider that out of the training so many of those people go on to full employment, paying their taxes, not being on benefits for the rest of their lives, that $80,000 is in fact a most important and worthwhile contribution. That will not be available under the new way that vocational education and training is being rolled out by conservative governments. It was quite moving to hear the stories of some of the deaf students and people with disabilities. The current conditions made a difference to their lives but, they said, if they had enrolled next year it would not have been able to happen.

This was an incredibly worthwhile inquiry. The Greens were pleased to support the report; however, we were disappointed that some important recommendations that came through from a lot of the evidence were not adopted. I would like to thank the many teachers, the staff, the Australian Education Union and many other organisations that gave evidence.

Some of the recommendations that the Greens put forward which we think should have been included in the report are: an end to the current model of competitive tendering of government vocational education and training and a comprehensive public examination and review of the consequences of full competition on TAFE, including the impact on the quality of vocational education, levels of student support and teaching infrastructure, and a reassessment of the case and justification for a competitive training market.

We also put forward a further recommendation for a complete and rigorous examination of the real costs of the provision of high quality vocational and further education, including technical skills for work, adult literacy and numeracy and a number of other key factors. A third recommendation that we included in our part of the report was for guaranteed funding for the public TAFE system based on the actual costs of providing education and on a funding model that supports a strong and increased base for capital works, maintenance, infrastructure and equipment, and which properly recognises the important role of TAFE in providing vocational and technical education in areas of high and low demand, in rural and remote areas and improved access and participation for disadvantaged learners.

We cannot afford to lose TAFE. TAFE is an integral part of how our society works—not just in terms of education but in bringing dignity and respect for people across the board who have had varying opportunities. (Time expired)

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to rise very briefly; I will not be using all the time available to me today. Senator Back, the magnificent deputy chair of this committee, has fully traversed all the issues that I was hoping to raise today, except for one.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Magnificent!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cameron, I am glad you're in the chamber. Page 1 of our dissenting report goes to the fact that vocational training is incredibly important, and we all know that in this place. It is incredibly important that it meets the needs of students and of industry so that our young people are appropriately trained, with important skills that our nation and our industries need, to go on to full careers within their chosen industry.

What was so disappointing and so typical is that this inquiry is about an issue that concerns state government jurisdiction. It is epidemic within the Greens political party that we are continually conducting inquiries into issues that quite properly belong within area of control of the state governments simply so that Senator Rhiannon or Senator Di Natale can get their press releases out into the media—even though they are issues that, as a federal parliamentary body, we cannot do anything about. At the moment we have got several inquiries going on, and the first page of our dissenting report goes to the fact that the integrity of the Senate committee process is fabulous. We are very lucky in this nation to have a committee system that is the envy of other chambers throughout the world. I want the reports that we produce in this place, from both references and legislation committees, to be well-researched reports that can be cited by other bodies that contribute to the public debate—rather than just a replication of evidence provided because the staff within the Senate are overworked, as are the senators. Our committee report says it beautifully:

Senate committees are not political footballs. They have scarce resources that should be employed to produce substantial, high quality reports based on extensive and comprehensive evidence gathering. Senate reports should be reputable, with high quality reference material that everyone in the policy arena can access with confidence.

Unfortunately, this particular inquiry was conducted in such a way that we were running around the country, hearing similar evidence time and time again. I think those of us on the committee can agree that we got a certain amount of evidence quite quickly and then it was simply repetitive so that certain media opportunities could be obtained by certain senators. I think that is a great disappointment, because the education and employment references and legislation committees have an important role to play in policy discussion and debate within the wider population.

One of the recommendations of the majority report goes to the quality of teaching and support for teachers within the TAFE system to participate in the Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group and perhaps make a submission around that. I particularly enjoyed some of Senator Rhiannon's commentary around increasing support for pathways into higher education, and I look forward to her support for some of our budget measures in that light.

A lot of the critique of the majority report goes to issues concerning state governments—particularly coalition governments but not all; South Australia followed Victoria's lead in terms of restructuring and refocusing their vocational education sector so that TAFE remains a very key part of the mix but not the only part in delivering vocational education in this country. I commend the report and the dissenting report to the Senate.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have been reminded to make sure that senators know that the time for the debate on this particular item finishes at 6.13 and, on the whole segment, at 6.43.

Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a few short statements given the time constraints of the report. Unfortunately, I did not hear all of Senator McKenzie's speech so I cannot really make any comment about what was said.

It is true to say that across the country we heard from a range of witnesses—teachers, academics, TAFE directors, parents, students, the Australian Education Union, the Australian Human Rights Commission and business groups. So it is fair to say that TAFE is an important provider of vocational education and training. Indeed, it is the most significant provider of vocational education and training in the country. Its role is critical.

But what was very clear to us was that, right across the country, the role of TAFE is under threat. It is being undermined. All the people who gave evidence—they were experts in their fields, whether they were teachers, people in the business community who rely on TAFE, students, academics or TAFE directors—put significant expert evidence before us.

The contestability market is clearly not working for TAFE. Certainly a number of independent witnesses suggested that there be more of a controlled market, and that there are some areas that TAFE should not be competing in. One of the areas of excellence that TAFE provides is in the absolutely solid support for students with disability. We heard from an amazing young man in Sydney, who was representing the Deaf Society. He was incredibly articulate. Help with the cost of Auslan interpreters and note-takers and all the other services and supporters that, in particular, deaf students need is under threat. In Wollongong a young man gave us evidence. He had completed a whole range of diplomas but he physically needed quite a lot of support. That is at threat, too.

Clearly, TAFE is a provider of excellence in terms of supporting students with disability. It is clearly a leader in second-chance education. It is a leader in terms of providing younger students who have dropped out of school with the opportunity to come back. We heard evidence from a young woman in Perth who told us that TAFE was the difference between life and death for her. It was that serious. Her life was so far off the rail but through doing a youth diploma in TAFE she is now working in that field and her whole life has changed.

I am sure that those opposite—in particular, Senator McKenzie—would appreciate that education can turn people's lives around. Clearly TAFE is expert in that.

TAFE sits within a political space. There were very disappointing issues that arose in Perth and Wollongong. In Perth particularly, the state government threatened the employment of witnesses who were giving evidence. The committee had to send a very strong letter to the WA government outlining the fact that parliamentary privilege extended to witnesses. There was a similar issue in Wollongong. So this is obviously getting to be political.

I hope that COAG takes our recommendations seriously. We need to ensure that TAFE survives. It is not just another registered training organisation. It is clearly much, much more than that. At risk right now is the further education of students with disability and second-chance education, of which TAFE is such a strong providers, particularly in relation to mature-age people who have become redundant and need to change their skills.

We heard a lot of evidence like that and it was rather surprising that only two state governments have a clear definition of the sorts of roles that TAFEs play. We heard evidence of where TAFE was expanding. There were partnerships with universities. One TAFE in particular is looking at working with a big private health provider to look at how they can do courses of mutual benefit. Those are all positive outcomes, but clearly both the federal and state governments, through the COAG process, need to be very clear about TAFE. It does need to remain a provider of excellence and a benchmark against which we hold all others accountable.

This competitive market it sits in now needs to be looked at as a matter of urgency, because TAFE is a great provider of vocational education and training in our country. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted.