Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (5 May) . . Page.. 1398 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

Comments received on the discussion paper and further consultations indicated that there were marked differences of views within the industry. Can I have a little bit of shush, Mr Speaker? There are about 16 different conversations going on here. I will wait until everyone is finished. Keep it down to a dull roar, if you would not mind.

Mr Moore: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to Mr Hird and standing order 41.

MR STEFANIAK: Thank you members. As I said, Mr Speaker, comments received on the discussion paper and further consultations indicated that there were marked differences of view within the industry and there was not clear support for a training levy. In fact, Mr Speaker, there is still a distinct difference of opinion between major stakeholders, including the Chamber of Commerce and the Housing Industry Association, which oppose the levy, and the Master Builders Association which supports it.

Mr Speaker, this has been around for some time. In 1994, when it was last raised, I understand the MBA changed its submission and did not support it. The then Opposition and the Assembly defeated a Bill which was introduced by the previous Government. In 1996 it looked like we were very close to industry consensus on this. However, that seemed to dissipate. I think that was very much borne out after we put out three distinct options in 1997. The Chamber of Commerce, the Housing Industry Association and the building owners management group opposed the levy, and still do, and the Master Builders Association and CITEA supported it.

The Government decided subsequently not to proceed with a training levy and existing arrangements for training under the Long Service Leave Act were allowed to lapse about the middle of last year. As an aside, it is interesting to note that it has taken Mr Berry almost a year to react to this.

Mr Speaker, training for the building and construction industry is an important issue. The industry is fragmented, with high levels of subcontracting. The industry needs to promote a training culture where employers recognise that an investment in training is an investment in the future of the industry and ultimately a benefit to them. Like many industries, the future of the building and construction sector is ultimately in the hands of today's apprentices. Attracting and training competent young people should be of the utmost priority to the sector.

It is important for the Assembly to note that this Government already provides significant training assistance for the building and construction industry. The industry receives a comparatively high proportion of government-funded training. Although the industry comprises 4.8 per cent of the work force, it receives 8.7 per cent of funded training hours. Not only do we provide funding for direct training, we also fund an Industry Training Advisory Board which coordinates training to ensure it meets industry's needs. Additionally, two of the seven group training companies represent the building and construction industry. These bodies also receive considerable Commonwealth and ACT funding and indicate the high ratio of funding for training in the building and construction industry. Moreover, there is a role for the industry itself, at a broad level, to ensure effective training strategies.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .