TAFE Privatisation

» Hansard & Papers » Legislative Assembly » 29 October 2008 » Full Day Hansard Transcript » Item 43 of 44 »
TAFE Privatisation
About this Item
Speakers - Torbay Mr Richard; Deputy-Speaker
Business - Private Members Statements, PRIV
TAFE PRIVATISATION
Page: 10862

Mr RICHARD TORBAY (Northern Tablelands—Speaker) [6.43 p.m.]: Madam Deputy-Speaker, I commend you on your leadership this afternoon. Any attempt by the Federal Government to privatise TAFE will be strongly resisted in regional areas. It is surprising that a Commonwealth Labor Government should be leading the charge on a scheme that is clearly socially inequitable and will have disastrous results. But that is the situation. At present State governments are being coerced into signing a new intergovernmental agreement on vocational education and training. Victoria has already signed up, and today I urge the New South Wales Government and the Minister for Education and Training not to follow suit.

The scheme is not being called privatisation but that is what it is, and the National Partnership Agreement and national competition policy are driving it. Under the plan, TAFE colleges would have to compete against each other and with private providers for funding to offer vocational education and training courses. It would mean dismantling the current TAFE system. It would mean more centralization. It would mean that people living in rural and regional areas would inevitably lose their local colleges and training opportunities. It would also mean that country people on low incomes looking for a second chance at education could no longer afford the travel or would have difficulty in accessing courses.

What can the Federal Government be thinking? We already have the failed Howard model of creating Commonwealth-funded super TAFEs in competition with the States. They are foundering through lack of enrolments. Now we are looking at applying more market-based ideology to the sector for which it is least appropriate. Perhaps we should remind ourselves that our society was built on the basis of equitable access to education opportunities. We have a public system that is open to all, regardless of geographic location, race, religion or income. TAFE has always been an extension of that nation-building philosophy.

In my Northern Tablelands electorate each major centre has a TAFE campus, part of the larger New England Institute. There are campuses in Armidale, Glen Innes, Inverell and Tenterfield. As well as offering a wide range of courses for the local population, these colleges work with local schools, industry, councils and community groups to offer flexible training options. There are also articulation and outreach agreements with the University of New England, Higher School Certificate courses, and literacy and numeracy courses. Only the other day I was at Armidale TAFE to mark the start of a new literacy and numeracy course for the Aboriginal community to enable them to obtain driving licences and the basic skills to find work.

Should this new Commonwealth initiative succeed, I wonder how many of these colleges would survive. In the dog-eat-dog environment of competitive tendering the smaller campuses would be the first to fall. The larger might survive but they would be hard-pressed in competing for resources against even larger centres. I am sure that other country-based members of Parliament in New South Wales will not be content to stand by and see their successful and accessible local TAFE colleges demolished through an ideology which threatens to erode the quality of life and the opportunities of rural and regional communities.

We have known about the skills shortage in Australia for many years, yet TAFE has remained under-resourced all that time. My advocacy for the TAFE system includes upgrading it and changing it to meet the national need for skilled workers. The TAFE network is of immense value from an educational and social perspective and should be strengthened, not torn apart. This mad ideological drive towards privatisation is looking tarnished in the current environment. Unbridled market forces are not the answer. Australia was built on a solid conviction of excellent public education available to all regardless of where they live. That conviction has served us well. TAFE is no longer free, and I agree that student loans should be made available. But that should not mean pricing courses out of the reach of the poor and the underprivileged.

TAFE offers access to disabled students, non-English speaking students and to those with other difficulties who are trying to reposition themselves in society. What happens to them in country regions if their local colleges close? Does some other government agency step in at equal or greater expense to try to mop the damage? By all means, let us modernise, resource and upgrade the TAFE system to supply the skilled workers needed to meet national workplace demands. However, we should not dismantle a system that offers equitable access as far as possible to the majority of people in rural and regional Australia and metropolitan Australia.

Question—That private members' statements be noted—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Private members' statements noted.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! Private members' statements having concluded, the House will now consider the matter of public importance.