<!--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="2015-06-03" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="1431" />
  <endPage num="1517" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Vocational Education and Training</name>
      <text id="2015060357fe66c42068495390000364">
        <heading>Vocational Education and Training</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Dunstan</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2015-06-03">
            <name>Vocational Education and Training</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2015-06-03T14:27:43" />
        <text id="2015060357fe66c42068495390000365">
          <timeStamp time="2015-06-03T14:27:43" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:27):</by>  Given that we have a fully contestable market this current financial year, is it true that in fact the state government has given notice to the federal government that we will not be returning to full contestability until the 2019-20 financial year?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Cheltenham</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2015-06-03">
            <name>Vocational Education and Training</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2015-06-03T14:27:57" />
        <text id="2015060357fe66c42068495390000366">
          <timeStamp time="2015-06-03T14:27:57" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (14:27):</by>  I will have to take that on notice. I do not know what communications have occurred with the federal government except to say that what has been causing the difficulty or causing the upset at the moment is the reduction in the actual amount of Skills for All funding which is no longer there. So, that is what has caused the upset and the relatively small number of subsidised training places that are being put out there. That does not stop these private training providers from charging a fee for service in relation to their arrangements, and many of them have a proportion of their business—some a substantial proportion of their business—which indeed is fee for service. That can sustain their business models, but we accept that the reduction in government subsidy is something that will put a number of these businesses under pressure.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>