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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 4601 ..

MS GALLAGHER (continuing):

Customer satisfaction surveys show that students and employers in the ACT have a satisfaction level above the national average. All in all, the ACT has a vocational education and training system of which it can be justifiably proud.

Mr Speaker, there are, of course, areas where we must strive to do better. This is not surprising, given the rate of change in vocational education training in recent years. In this regard, the committee's report provides a very valuable indication of the concerns held by stakeholders in the system. While many concerns expressed during the inquiry point to a need to better communicate what are the current arrangements and policies, they also point to areas where consideration should be given to making improvements.

The committee has made 38 recommendations. The government agrees or agrees in principle with 27 of them. The government has noted a further 10 recommendations. In only one case, a recommendation involving quality assurance, does the government not agree. Of the 10 recommendations that the government has noted, most would require the government to commit to provide additional funding to an unspecified level. The government notes the point of view put by those appearing before the committee or who made submissions that gave rise to those particular recommendations. The government will take the recommendations into account in an overall budgetary context.

The government does not agree with recommendation 22, which is that government colleges not be required to have registered training organisation status, with the Department of Education, Youth and Family Services taking on this role for all government colleges.

The registration of training providers and the associated audit requirements are key components in the ACT's focus on a quality vocational education and training system and in the national system of quality assurance. It is in the best interests of students, as well as for the general image of VET and schools in particular, for individual colleges to remain formally responsible for the quality of the training they provide. Moreover, it would not be appropriate to discriminate between government colleges and other RTOs, including non-government schools.

Mr Speaker, the government acknowledges the views and concerns expressed to the committee in the course of this inquiry. The government also appreciates the effort the committee has made to represent these views and concerns in its recommendations.

As I said at the beginning, the opportunity provided by the inquiry for government to hear what stakeholders have to say about VET arrangements is a valuable one. The report will inform work to enhance our training system so that the ACT continues to be among the leaders in VET in Australia.

There are many things we can improve on and should do so as part of a commitment to continuous improvement, but we should not lose sight of the fact that we have a robust and high-quality VET system that I think is probably world class. We are certainly among the leaders in Australia in this regard. This is a sentiment that I was pleased to see echoed by the standing committee in its media release when the report was tabled.

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