<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2012-07-12" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2457" />
  <endPage num="2516" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Skills for All</name>
      <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000535">
        <heading>SKILLS FOR ALL</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3124" kind="question">
        <name>Mr PISONI</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Unley</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2012-07-12">
            <name>SKILLS FOR ALL</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2012-07-12T14:39:00" />
        <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000536">
          <timeStamp time="2012-07-12T14:39:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3124">Mr PISONI (Unley) (14:39): </by> My question is to the Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills. Why are nationally accredited training organisations that have been rejected for Skills for All funding being told that they must wait three months before reapplying, and why has the minister waived this three-month period only in certain cases?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3119" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. T.R. KENYON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Newland</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Science and Information Economy</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Recreation and Sport</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2012-07-12">
            <name>SKILLS FOR ALL</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2012-07-12T14:39:00" />
        <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000537">
          <timeStamp time="2012-07-12T14:39:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3119">The Hon. T.R. KENYON (Newland—Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for Recreation and Sport) (14:39):</by>  Very simply, there have been 300 applications to be a Skills for All provider in the last few months. It obviously takes time to work our way and assess our way through all of those providers. If someone is rejected, they have not met the criteria. If someone has not met the criteria, then we need to just make sure we get through the remaining applications as quickly as possible and then get back to those that were rejected and work with them. There was one instance where I waived that—</text>
        <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000538">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000539">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order!</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3119">
        <name>The Hon. T.R. KENYON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="201207122a45ebcba5a2460aa0000540">
          <by role="member" id="3119">The Hon. T.R. KENYON:</by>  —the requirement for that provider because they had been operating as a provider in South Australia for 16 years. If that is not the right amount of time, I will get back to the house on that but, from memory, it is about 16 years—a substantial amount of time—in South Australia. They were well known. I suspect they relied in their—well, I will not make suppositions about what they expected but they are known to us. I am happy to work with them and I will waive the three months for them, but I need time or the department needs time to get through the other applications and then we will get back onto those that were rejected.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>