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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (2 July) . . Page.. 2235 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

And then he said, "But we would like them to spend a bit more". That is fair enough. I can totally understand that. I might not necessarily say that we could; maybe in an ideal world we could. But he at least agreed that this Government had increased education expenditure. I really do get sick of the convoluted twisting of the facts by those opposite in terms of there being a cut in education spending. That is absolute garbage.

Mr Berry, you are right; we have in one area. But we have put it right up front. The budget is very much a full monty budget. In terms of the CIT, we have said that we are seeking to make savings there. We have put that up front. There are cuts there. I said at the Estimates Committee that we have looked at those very carefully. We have looked at those so that they do not affect the operational efficiency of the CIT. In fact, we are looking to enhance that. We are looking at ways in which we can do things better. But there are cuts there; we are not disputing that. I am being quite honest about that; there are. I think that the CIT, contrary to what Mr Berry might think, can handle them very well. That is something that this Government will continue to monitor.

Mr Berry, when you say that we are not committed to training, I must really put toll to that. In 1995, we had about 2,000 people in apprenticeships and traineeships. We have about 4,300 and I saw some figures recently indicating 13 and 15 per cent increases this year in apprenticeships and traineeships; they continue to go up. In fact, I recall putting out a press release countering a rather strange article in the Canberra Times which suggested that some figures had gone down. We are seeing a continuing increase there. We do have a real commitment to training. We have a commitment to doing it efficiently, but we do have a real commitment to training.

We do not want to take everything from the CIT willy-nilly. The CIT is an excellent institution. It is the primary provider of training in the ACT. It will, for obvious reasons, remain so. Yes, we have got money out there for contestable training. I am pleased to see that the CIT wins 90 per cent of that for apprenticeships and about 50 per cent for other contestable training. There is nothing to indicate that that is going to change. That is something that is happening right across Australia. We have indicated that we are looking at, say, 15 to 20 per cent of our training dollar being used in a contestable way. I have already indicated what the CIT is winning at present and there is a fair consistency there, but that is all. Obviously, the CIT remains the primary provider of training. Indeed, Mr Berry, one of the central planks of this Government in terms of education was to increase the emphasis on vocational education and training.

I am very proud of that increase from 2,000 to about 4,300 over a four-year period, because it is a fact that about 70 per cent of students Australia-wide - in the ACT it is a bit less; it is about 62 per cent - do not go to university and they need to do courses that are relevant to assisting them to get into the workforce. That is where institutions such as the CIT are so important. That is also where the emphasis we have put on vocational education and training in Years 11 and 12, and even in the high schools area now, is so important. I am delighted to see that 50 per cent of our Years 11 and 12 students are now doing at least one vocational education and training course. I am also proud to say that we put emphasis on it well before Dr Kemp, who also places emphasis on it, became the relevant Federal Minister. I must stress again that it is painfully obvious - blind Freddy could see it and a Year 3 student doing maths could see it - that,

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