VET & TAFE campusreview . com . au
Public scrutiny improves policy
The difference in how two Labor governments handled criticism of programs shows how bringing problems to light leads to better reform .
By John Mitchell
Just one glance at the policy failures in the VET sector suggests there is eminent sense behind the calls for a sensible , national debate about the issues surrounding deregulation before the higher education sector changes any policies .
The current VET policy debacles are partly because the sector did not have such a debate before deregulation was pushed through COAG and driven with fervour into Victoria and other states .
From 2009 onwards , so-called VET reform was driven by statebased bureaucrats – including those in Treasury – convinced they could artificially design a well-functioning VET market in which governments could set prices for courses , students could safely select their training provider , funds could be calmly withdrawn from TAFE and quality providers could triumph over rogues .
Victoria admits it ’ s at ‘ rock bottom ’ A glance at the VET sector in the first week of April 2015 showed that none of these market mechanisms had been well designed by bureaucrats around the Australian states .
For example , in Victoria , the minister for training and skills , Steve Herbert , admitted that employer and student satisfaction with the quality of training in Victoria is the lowest in Australia . Herbert told the Sunday Age in early April that employer and student satisfaction is now “ at rock-bottom levels ” – a sad indictment for the pro-market bureaucrats who foisted VET reform onto the Victorian population .
Fairfax Media periodically lampoons the flawed policies in Victoria that led to this low point for the VET sector . Prior to the state election in November last year , The Age argued that , “ The falling away of the TAFE sector , through government neglect and , worse , deliberate government action , is a tragedy for this state and to those who want to further their education . It strangles a person ’ s hope and possible opportunities to take part in the economy .”
Another editorial in the same paper in late March noted that “ slashing TAFE funding was likely to have been one reason for the Coalition ’ s dramatic one-term defeat ”. The editorial recollected that reduced TAFE funding was introduced “ just as youth unemployment was rising , and hit regional areas particularly hard ”.
“ Nor was it properly explained why one of Australia ’ s wealthiest states , with a balance sheet to be envied , thought it necessary to slash an education sector geared to getting people into work ,” the editorial continued . “ Thousands of Victorians had their learning and employment opportunities stymied . TAFEs could not cut hard enough or lift fees high enough to keep up with the government ’ s cuts , with five institutes having their financial stability risk rated as high . Worst of all , according to the new state government , student enrolment numbers tumbled .”
Far from disagreeing with this description of VET policy failure , Herbert has committed to a review of VET quality assurance and a separate review of VET funding . He has also added to the initial $ 320 million allocated for rescuing TAFE by finding an additional $ 50 million to assist those TAFEs that are struggling financially and to fund programs to connect colleges with local employers .
28