2015-12-04
Ms SPRINGLE (South Eastern Metropolitan) — My question is to the Minister for Training and Skills, and it is about the cap on registered training organisations (RTOs) that I understand is being considered. As the minister knows, registered training organisations can be either for profit or not for profit. Many not-for-profit RTOs offer vocational training for refugees and asylum seekers and other disadvantaged Victorian communities. Vocational training offers pathways for members of disadvantaged groups into meaningful employment, which has immeasurable flow-on effects for their families and whole communities. There is a concern within the sector that the government plans to impose a cap of 1000 funded places on each RTO. If that cap extends to the not-for-profit RTO sector, that will have a significant and detrimental impact on disadvantaged groups in particular. Can the minister confirm that any cap on RTO places will not be extended to the not-for-profit sector?
Mr HERBERT (Minister for Training and Skills) — There are a number of ways to answer this one.
Mr Finn interjected.
Mr HERBERT — Being absolutely frank, something you would — —
Mr Finn interjected.
Mr HERBERT — I always do. The Mackenzie review made a whole heap of recommendations about the funding system, and we are committed to reform the funding system to bring it in line with industry and community needs and to ensure that quality is the key word across our training system, quality that leads to opportunity for people and productivity for industry. We have that report, and we will make a response as soon as possible. There is a Council of Australian Governments process there, but we will release that report with the government response.
With regard to the 2016 RTO contracts and entry to market, we had a situation in Victoria where there was a huge discrepancy between the needs of employers, the job outcomes and the amount of training that was done. For instance, I think it was office management where we funded something like 26 000 places and there is about 1000 jobs annually in that particular area that come onboard. We had a whole quality review, and it made a whole range of recommendations, so as part of next year's training contracts we have put in place a range of measures.
Firstly, we have a greater scrutiny of those who get the contracts. We are having a look at the 31 000 responses we had from the student satisfaction surveys. We are having a look at their outcomes and how they performed. We are banning people who were in management of a company that lost funding because of poor performance. We are asking companies to state the area where they want to do the training and the scope of their training. If there is a suite of companies, only one company can get that scope, and that is to stop dodgy companies from Victoria that get defunded shifting their activity to another one. We are also, however, amongst a whole range of things, putting an initial limit of 1000 student placements per company.
That is an initial limit to try to get our training system more in line with economic outcomes. If that is hit, that training provider simply needs to come back to us and say, 'We've hit that. Here are the areas where we are employing people, and here is the need', and they will get more. So it is not a cap; it is an initial allocation, an initial limit.
In relation to private training providers and not-for-profits, many of them will take lower numbers. They might choose to do a 200 limit, in which case they have much less compliance — much less oversight, I guess you would say — and that is what many of the not-for-profits and learn locals will do. The aim is not to limit the number of places — absolutely not. It is to try to get our system more in line with quality outcomes that meet job needs. One thousand, initially, is a fair amount. If there is more, there is more. I would not have thought the not-for-profit sector would have any worries whatsoever.