Bills Digest no. 9 2007–08
Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in
Achieving Australia's Skills
Needs) Amendment Bill (No. 2)
2007
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Key issues
Main provisions
Endnotes
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in
Achieving Australia's Skills
Needs) Amendment Bill (No. 2)
2007
Date introduced: 20 June 2007
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education, Science and Training
Commencement: Royal Assent
Links: The
relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second
reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/.
When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is
at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The purpose of
the Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving
Australia's Skills Needs) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2007 (the Bill) is
to amend the Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in
Achieving Australia's Skills Needs) Act 2005 (the Act) to
implement a 2007 08 budget measure for the establishment and
operation of another three Australian Technical Colleges (ATCs).
[1] These ATCs,
catering for approximately 900 students, will be located in
Northern Perth, Southern Brisbane and the greater Penrith region of
NSW. They are scheduled to open by 2009.
ATCs were established as the result of a 2004
Coalition election policy commitment. They are part of the
government s broader strategy to address skills needs in the case
of ATCs, in regional areas where there is a high youth population
and a strong industry base.
ATCs operate as schools, providing both
academic and vocational education and training (VET) programs for
Year 11 and Year 12 students. They are directly funded by the
Australian Government and are run by consortia which can include
representatives from local businesses, industry, schools, and
training organisations. As explained in recent Senate Estimates
hearings, there is no single model for their operation:
The delivery models vary significantly across
the colleges. Some of them are stand alone, which means that they
are providing all the academic and trade training in the school or
in the college. Others are partnering with existing organisations
and using existing infrastructure. So some of those are purchasing
or outsourcing their trade training to existing RTOs (registered
training organisations).
[2]
Originally 24 ATCs were to be established for
up to 7200 Year 11 and 12 students in nominated regions across
Australia. In July 2005 the government decided to establish an
additional college in Adelaide. This Bill will bring the total
number of ATCs to 28 with a target enrolment, once all ATCs are
fully operational, of 8400 students each year. Currently 21 ATCs
are operating (the most recent commencement is the Pilbara ATC
which opened in July). Five ATCs are due to open in 2008, although
a successful proponent for one of these the proposed
Lismore/Ballina ATC has yet to be announced. [3]
The ALP has committed to maintaining
established ATCs but proposes to transfer their management to state
and territory government and non-government school sectors. This
will be done through consultation with all interested parties and
as contractual agreements allow. [4]
If elected, the ALP has stated it will also
provide $2.5 billion in capital funding over 10 years to build new
trades training centres in all Australia s secondary schools to
promote vocational education for students in Years 9 to 12. This
commitment will be augmented by programs targeting stronger links
between schools and industry and improving student access to
on-the-job training. [5]
The Bill provides
for an increase in appropriations of $74.701 million over the
period 2008 to 2011 (thereby also extending the ATCs Programme by
two years) as follows:
2008 09:
$17.125 million
2009 10:
$24.802 million
2010 11:
$15.823 million
2011 12: $16.951
million
[6]
The proposed establishment of three additional
ATCs comes amidst continuing concerns about the establishment and
operation of ATCs, most recently from the Australian National Audit
Office (ANAO). Their establishment is also occurring ahead of a
review of the ATCs Programme that has been foreshadowed for 2008.
[7]
The establishment and
operation of ATCs has not gone to plan. Additional funds of
$112.6 million were provided in 2006 because, as the then
Minister explained, the earlier opening of more ATCs than
anticipated had resulted in higher operational costs. He also
attributed the additional costs to the flexibility of the program
which had resulted in more new sites and multiple campuses than
were anticipated. [8]
As at the enrolment
census on 31 March 2007, of the 20 ATCs that were then operating,
one had exceeded its enrolment target for 2007, one had matched its
enrolment target, and eight were within 10 per cent of their
enrolment target. Some ATCs were significantly below their 2007
enrolment targets. [9]
The total planned expenditure on ATCs ($530.9
million from 2005 to 2011) and the numbers of young people that
will benefit (8400 students per year once all ATCs are fully
operational) has drawn unfavourable comparisons with state and
territory VET systems. In 2005 there were approximately 1.2 million
publicly funded VET students and total government revenue to the
VET sector was approximately $4 billion $2.7 billion from state and
territory governments and $1.3 billion from the Australian
Government. [10]
Critics typically argue that ATCs duplicate existing VET facilities
at far greater cost and that the funds would be better invested in
existing VET arrangements. [11]
Since the establishment of ATCs some states
have also announced the establishment of state-run technical
colleges which the Australian Government sees as an endorsement of
the ATCs Programme. [12] According to the Prime Minister ATCs have:
[created] a renewed interest in technical
education all around Australia. As a result of what we did with
Australian Technical Colleges, the states are now, in a number of
areas, returning to dedicated technical schools, something that
should never have been abandoned in our education system 30 or 40
years ago.
[13]
In relation to the lower than expected
enrolments for ATCs and the existence of state and territory
publicly-funded VET alternatives, one issue that has not been
generally raised is the affordability of ATCs for potential
students. Most ATCs are non-government schools and are located in
regional areas. Whether the fees they charge (including the usual
fees non-government schools charge and any additional fees/costs
involved for the VET courses) are a deterrent to enrolments may be
a consideration. However as there is no separate information about
the fees that ATCs are charging it is difficult to consider their
impact.
The ANAO s report on
the ATCs Programme concluded the Department of Education, Science
and Training (DEST) adequately planned the program s implementation
and consistently assessed the ATC proposals. However the report
draws attention to what the ANAO regards as shortcomings in the
program. While the Minister in his second reading speech highlights
that, unlike the three years on average it takes to establish a new
school, the Government established 20 ATCs in less than 18 months,
the ANAO report raises concern about this haste:
The policy provided DEST with little time to
plan for the establishment of the colleges. The new schools had to
be established in far less time than is usual for new schools,
which can take three to four years of preparation before acceptance
of their first students. This limited time made more difficult DEST
s tasks of selecting the best educational and financial models to
achieve the programme s objectives.
[14]
The ANAO identified that aspects of the
program s implementation could have been improved by giving more
attention to the interests of state and territory governments; that
more attention needed to be given to the financial administration
and management of the program, including the ATCs ability to
administer funding for capital projects; and that each ATC
developing its own training curriculum is time consuming and
costly. The report s recommendations to address the latter two
issues have been accepted by DEST. [15]
Item 1 of Schedule
1 amends subsection 18(4) of the Act, providing $74.701
million over the period 2008 to 2011 for the establishment and
operation of three additional ATCs.
[7]. ANAO, op. cit.,
p. 25.
[14]. ANAO, op.
cit, p.19.
Marilyn Harrington
3 August 2007
Social Policy Section
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted
by the Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any
part of this work by any process without the prior written consent
of the Parliamentary Librarian. This requirement does not apply to
members of the Parliament of Australia acting in the course of
their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian
Parliament using information available at the time of production.
The views expressed do not reflect an official position of the
Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal
opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au. Any
concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary
Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the
contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff.
To access this service, clients may contact the author or the
Library’s Central Entry Point for referral.
Back to top