28.5.12 Australian Technical Colleges

Mr HAWKE (Mitchell) (21:15): I rise tonight to raise a longstanding grievance about Australian technical colleges. This government is failing to address the nation's skill shortages. The reason I rise tonight is that the failure of this government in skills training and technical training in Western Sydney has become such that it bears raising in our national parliament. To underscore the seriousness of what I am saying, the participation rate in north-western Sydney—Blacktown, Penrith, and the Hills and Hawkesbury shire council areas—was down to 59 per cent in April 2011, basically a halving of the participation rate among 15- to 19-year-olds in Western Sydney. Youth unemployment also remains too high in Western Sydney.

The government vaunts its skills agenda as one of its main priorities. The coalition has had a longstanding history with technical colleges. The Howard government's technical colleges provided trade skills to young people that were relevant to employers in conjunction with industry. The Howard government established 24 Australian technical colleges, tackling the nation's skill shortages directly. The key words here are 'relevant to employers'—that is, jobs focused on outcomes.

The Howard government had committed to establishing another 100 trade schools, but this program was cancelled in 2007 by the Rudd government. Labor's answer instead was trade training centres, effectively classrooms within regular schools designated for trade work—something completely different and an alternative to what we were talking about with the technical colleges. Once again, Labor's approach is a one-size-fits-all policy. Trades based learning cannot be in the same environment as academic learning and the needs of these students can be very different. That is not to say they are always at odds, but the combination of this, with an outcome and a focus on getting a job and getting the skills required to do a job, must be at the forefront of skills training, and technical colleges are a very viable way of achieving this.

To think that one classroom based in an academic school teaching a trade based skill on a part-time basis will produce the same outcome as a full-time school dedicated to specific, identified, industry based skills is absolutely absurd, particularly when you think about how placements can be weeks at a time for some of these young people involved. In typical Labor fashion, they substitute the impractical for the practical. Even when Kevin Rudd came to office—and we hear he may become Prime Minister again—we heard this unbelievable promise about skills shortages: that he would start 2,650 trade training centres. The latest figures have come in and there are just 160. Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister, promised 2,650 trade training centres would be in operation and we have 160. It is typical of this government's short-sighted approach to all of its policy development. On top of this, they have now frozen the program until at least 2015-16. Dedicated trade technical schools have a curriculum based on real-world skills formulated by direct engagement with industry associations and employers, ensuring students graduate with the skills needed in their chosen industry.

This is such a grievance of mine because this now is affecting the Anglican Technical College in Western Sydney on the border of my electorate, in the electorate of Greenway. A critical training facility in Western Sydney, the Anglican Technical College is a school based trade training facility and registered training organisation established at Glenwood. The college produces career-ready apprentices in many skills based industries. These include hospitality, building, construction, electrotechnology, motor trades and plumbing. The Anglican Technical School maintains strong links with all of the industry associations: the master builders, motor traders, restaurants and caterers, master plumbers and the master painters. All of these say that this is the model that is producing the people they need to fill their employee skills shortage—the apprentices they want, ready to go on the job. Engagement with these industry bodies ensures that the college produces the apprentices that the industry actually wants and needs. Working closely with industry provides a school based path to the HSC and apprenticeships in a way that TAFE does not. This is not to disparage the TAFE system or the importance of it, but it is a vital employment based outcome. It is absolutely appalling of this government, just because it is not its program, to suggest that this is not valuable, not needed or not helping a segment of our economy.

Each year the Anglican Technical College of Glenwood supports about 100 students in getting their HSC. The college is a proven success. Between 2008 and 2010, 250 out of the 276 students had continued full-time apprenticeships after graduating from the two-year program. Many students are not suited to the academic environment: 45 per cent of students have been diagnosed with a learning difficulty, and the dedicated skills based environment allows those students, who felt marginalised in an academic classroom, to focus on practical assessments in the areas that they are passionate about. Again, this is a massive success story.

The college started in 2007 and has moved a number of times. But when you think that each year 40 per cent of students do carpentry, 15 per cent electrotechnology, 10 per cent plumbing, 15 per cent automotive—all of the different crafts and trades, all with industry associations, all with outcomes needed—you get an understanding and a flavour of what is going on there.

There are all kinds of facts and figures that you would think a good socialist ALP member would come to the table with. There are people from all kinds of backgrounds, generally people who have very great difficulty: 25 per cent were born overseas or have parents for whom English is not their first language. Seven to 10 per cent are of Islamic background. Ninety per cent have never achieved well academically at school, although they are very bright. The college draws students from across Western Sydney. They all come to the college to get wonderful skills and a great outlook. It is a great success story and something that we have seen time and time again to be a proven achiever in this space.

Then we have the current Prime Minister's view on this great success story in the vital electorate of Greenway in Western Sydney. In 2008 the Prime Minister, as Minister for Education and Workplace Relations, answered a question in relation to her ideological pursuit of these technical colleges. They were not her government's idea. She was against them from the beginning. She preferred academic trades training centre based learning. Why does that have to disrupt what is going on with these already capital-intensive, constructive facilities achieving great outcomes in conjunction with industry for kids from very low socioeconomic backgrounds? Ideology is the answer.

The Prime Minister, as the then Minister for Education and Workplace Relations, cited cost. In her answer to a question from the member for Wakefield on Wednesday, 24 September 2008, she said that the training cost under this model, the Australian technical college model, was $100,000 a student. She said that that was a massive blow-out. That does sound like a lot of money, but the Prime Minister failed to tell—and this goes to the heart of her integrity in relation to policy matters—that that was inclusive of the capital costs of the facilities per student. It is completely unreasonable to put into the training costs the capital required to buy the land, to put up the building, to construct the facilities and then suggest to the parliament that that is an annual training cost. That was not the cost of these facilities training their students at these facilities. It was a total misnomer to suggest that. The reality is somewhere between $12,000 and $20,000. It is expensive, but it is valuable.

They come out with employment skills. They go into employment. This is a great saving for government in the long term, because young people, instead of being on the unemployment queues, instead of being unable to find jobs in some areas or not participating in the workforce, get a job, get a trade, get something they want to do. Ideology should have very little place in what is practically delivering these benefits for these young people across Western Sydney.

I am grateful to my colleague Marise Payne who identified that the Labor budget, in their Skilling Australia for the Future policy document, committed to a $2.5 billion plan to build trade training centres in all of Australia's 2,650 secondary schools for the one million students in years 9 to 12. This sounds like a noble endeavour. But Western Sydney missed out completely on this huge policy that was allegedly to build 2,650 centres. How many of those have been constructed? One hundred and sixty, and none in the high youth unemployment zone of Western Sydney. It is not good enough that there has been a decision not to proceed with the Australian technical college in Penrith, a critical part of Western Sydney, and to cut federal funding for the Glenwood Anglican Technical College, which is producing such great outcomes for the young people of Western Sydney. Ideology should not play a part in policy delivery in relation to outcomes for the youth of Western Sydney and their employment chances. It is of great concern to me that these people are being left behind, and that colleges and facilities that are working and delivering the training for young people are now facing closure because of the mindlessness of this government and ideological pursuit of their own policies.