campusreview.com.au
16. The article referred to an undercover video recording that
could be viewed on the newspaper’s website. It showed a young,
prospective salesman who walked into the office of a brokering
firm that signs up VET students for courses that attract a student
loan. The article noted that “within minutes, the lure of big,
uncomplicated bucks is being dangled in front of him”.
All the salesperson has to do was sign up people for VET courses
that attract FEE-HELP loans. The recorded script continued: “We
have people who [sign up] 10 customers per week, and we give
$800 [per sign up] ... so you make $8000 per week ... $32 grand
in a month.”
Since the publication of this article in The Age, numerous others
on the situation have appeared in the national media. And in
November, the ABC’s 7.30 provided more examples of students
with inadequate academic achievements signing up for large debts.
Notably, ASQA was criticised by an interviewee during the program
while the ACCC’s chairman, Rod Simms, appeared on the show
and explained why ACCC stepped into the breach:
“We’re alleging they’re targeting vulnerable consumers, sometimes
consumers that really are not able to complete these courses,”
Simms says. “We allege they’re doing this really to get their hands
on the Commonwealth money. We’re alleging that really the
Commonwealth is paying a lot of money and not getting what it’s
paying the money for … We’ve had cases where people were signing
up for an online course and didn’t know how to use a computer.”
This mess is the product of policymakers who, when the next inquiry
into VET convenes, will probably argue they didn’t see it coming.
This blindness is well known to Henry. In an interview for the
latest Quarterly Essay, by The Australian Financial Review’s political
editor, Laura Tingle, as summarised by the AFR’s Jacob Greber,
Henry says, “Many departments have lost the capacity to develop
policy; but not just that, they have lost their memory … I seriously
doubt there is any serious policy development going on in most
government departments.”
Greber also added these comments by Henry’s successor,
Parkinson: “In addition to growing doubts about the ability of
the bureaucracy to solve national problems, Dr Parkinson – who
succeeded Dr Henry as Treasury secretary – laments in the essay
the consequences of ‘blurring of boundaries’ between public
servants and political advisers.”
Do the critiques by Henry and Parkinson apply to the federal bodies
that have had responsibility for VET in recent years, including the
latest one, the Department of Education and Training?
Over the last year, this column has certainly pointed out the
“relentless focus on message over substance” by the current
Department of Education and Training and the minister of education’s
office, particularly the previous minister responsible for VET, Simon
Birmingham’s (or ‘Birmo’ as he styles himself on Twitter) championing
of eradicating the sector of poor practice around VET FEE-HELP.
Obviously, if the ACCC had believed these messages about the
brilliance of ‘Birmo’, it would not have bothered to intervene in
the sector.
The focus on message over substance by the Department of
Education was exposed on July 16 by the Senate inquiry into
private providers in VET. The three bureaucrats interviewed that
day were among the top figures from the department: the overall
group manager, the acting group manager and the acting branch
manager VET FEE-HELP. All three must grimace when they re-read
the transcript, which is now in the public domain.
Under questioning from the Senate committee members, the
b \