Page 3955 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 25 November 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
However, when I questioned officials in a briefing last week, I was advised that there would be no selection panel; nor were they sure whether expressions of interest would be called for. I understand that, in effect, the minister will be choosing the board, presumably from a list supplied by the directorate.
I am disappointed that the government, having decided on a more commercially focused, independent CIT, did not take that one step further and make the board selection an open, transparent process. Some could suggest this is just an advisory council by another name.
My next concern—and it is another I raised with officials in the briefing that the minister’s office provided—is the potential for conflict between the new CIT board and the existing CIT Solutions board. CIT Solutions is a wholly owned subsidiary of CIT and it will be imperative that a new working arrangement be agreed between CIT Solutions and the new board. I trust that this is done quickly and effectively.
The management of CIT has had its challenges in recent years and I have been one of its harshest critics. However, I was the strongest advocate of its teachers and students. Much of what took place occurred before the current director, Adrian Marron, took over management. He walked into a time bomb and has been forced to shoulder much of the heavy lifting in trying to get the issues sorted.
I understand that under the new arrangements his position will transform into a chief executive role and that he has offered to stay on until the new arrangements are in place, to ensure a smooth transition. Given the difficult years, his commitment to CIT is laudable and I place on record the opposition’s thanks for his dedication to the task of heading CIT at such a difficult time.
The final aspect of the legislation that I wish to comment on amends the provision for fees to enable the minister to make guidelines about the fees that CIT may charge for government subsidised training. Again the opposition hopes that this power is used appropriately, minister, and does not impinge on CIT’s ability to remain viable and competitive in the VET sector. I am sure all Canberrans want CIT to be a successful, business-focused vocational education and training provider. As Canberra grows, we want to be sure we have a well-trained workforce and for Canberrans to have access to first-class training.
As I have previously said, the opposition supports this bill and we do so in the fervent hope that CIT continues to focus on the delivery of quality training for Canberra, the region and beyond.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (11.35): The ACT Greens will be supporting this bill. As I have said recently with regard to another piece of legislative change in the vocational education and training—VET—sector, there are major structural challenges facing education in the ACT and the surrounding region, and we need to be adjusting to these challenges with a view to ensuring that the CIT remains a keystone of our education landscape.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video