Bills

TAFE SA Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta) (16:42): It is a privilege to continue my remarks from earlier in relation to the TAFE SA Bill. Members may remember that I had, prior to the lunchbreak, identified that the Liberal Party would be supporting the bill and that we considered that the bill was an improvement on the status quo. I expressed my own personal hope that in 10 or 15 years' time from now, future parliaments and future people involved in the TAFE sector and the training sector more broadly, when reflecting on how this bill, this new act, has served our state, will be kinder to it than we all are now about the reforms—the Gillard-Kenyon reforms, as I may start thinking of them—of 2012. Those reforms, of course, were designed to support a training environment, a market, that was never realised.

I said prior to the lunchbreak that there were Labor ministers hoping that contestability would become a reality even as late as 2017, and indeed over lunch I found a quote from the member for Port Adelaide when she was the Minister for Education highlighting, even as late as 2017, the work that TAFE SA had done to enable itself to be able to withstand the rigours of a fully competitive and contestable market. By the end of 2018-19, during the election campaign, that of course changed. I remember that one of our ambitions as the Liberal Party was to have that full contestability within which the act would be able to operate as intended, if we were elected, and the member for Port Adelaide at that time clearly had changed her mind and identified that it was a bad idea.

As I was frank about before the break, during the time that we were in government it became clear to me and to our government that full contestability was not going to work too. The times had moved on. The federal funding arrangements had moved on. Where TAFE SA was to be ongoing, continuing its work as South Australia's public provider, there was no real capacity for there to be a pure market in place.

TAFE SA's costs per hour were always going to be three to four times those of a non-government provider. I am not saying this critically. There were several reasons for this. One of them is the obvious one. I think 70 per cent of the costs identified to me were due to the staffing differences in the way that a public servant under the arrangements that were in place for TAFE staff would be different to a staff member doing the same job at a non-government provider. Those costs were just going to be higher, and our industrial arrangements were not going to make a different arrangement possible.

TAFE also delivers outcomes for the state in potentially low-margin areas that were not going to attract the interests of private providers. TAFE delivers outcomes for the state that the government needs it to. When we were identifying the need for a radical upskilling off welders in South Australia and the skills department wanted to invest $1 million in purchasing virtual welders, which would enable welders to be trained more quickly so as to serve those working in our shipyards for the needs of the state, TAFE was the only organisation capable at the time of operating those, so those virtual welders were installed at Regency.

The ambition is always to ensure that government-owned facilities are enabled to be used by non-government providers where possible. We endeavoured to do that through best endeavours, working with the CE, working with TAFE, and that happened to a greater or lesser extent. I know there are a couple of examples where it has happened since too, but it is not easy. Frankly, this change in the act may well be an example of where that sort of project is easier to deliver, which is one of the reasons that we support the bill in front of us today.

Staffing costs and those particular state projects were not the only ones. There were also remote and rural communities that TAFE serves, for which the subsidy to a private provider would have to be dramatic to take their interest, so there is going to be a public provider.

We endeavoured, through the time we were in government, rather than to focus on a fully contestable marketplace—which would not have worked, in my view—to have a curated approach instead. Depending on the thickness of the market—the number of quality providers that are capable of delivering outcomes for students, businesses, industries in the state that we needed, to a quality delivery that was respected by business and industry—we would make sure that the appropriate proportion of government-funded places were able to be delivered under that arrangement. TAFE was able to serve the state in delivering others.

This government has not an entirely dissimilar approach with their fee-free TAFE places. They have an articulated number, which I assume would have been negotiated with the federal government, that certainly within South Australia are delivered for TAFE SA, as similar government providers have an articulated number in other states, and then a certain number assigned to certain non-government providers too.

The government's processes in identifying quality are potentially similar to those that were there under the previous government. I am almost certain that it is mostly the same people doing many of those assessments, but the proportions have potentially changed a bit. In a funny way, it is less a change in principle as it is in the nuances of greater or lesser priorities, and that is fine.

Prior to the break, I highlighted that in this second part of my contribution I would provide some context for the arrangements that came into being as we came into government in 2018 that informed my experience. It also is relevant to the bill, because many of these circumstances were triggered by the same set of reforms that were contemporaneous with the current TAFE act's introduction.

The current TAFE act's introduction assumed a number of reforms that were described in South Australia as the Skills for All approach. I want to put in place a little bit of the narrative of those five years after the introduction of that, until we get to 2017, where we had what I would consider the three significant contemporary crises, and there were a number of others alongside them: the slash-and-burn Mid-Year Budget Review of 2017, which I spoke about in detail before the break; and the governance issues coming to a head, which were not necessarily public at the time but were later revealed by the Moran-Bannikoff review and the Nous report, which I will offer some quotes from—all of which contributed in different ways to the quality crisis highlighted by the ASQA accreditation process, during which TAFE initially failed 16 out of 16 courses, then 15 out of 16 as it dropped a number, and then failed 10 out of the 10 that they were still trying to do, until ultimately that was finally remediated in December 2018.

Prior to that, though, these things did not happen in a vacuum, and it was not necessarily the act itself that was the cause of many of the problems but it was possibly a symptom of some of them, a symptom of a system that was not designed as fit for purpose and did not have the attention from government that it deserved. I described earlier the member for Wright's status as the first Labor skills minister in 40 years to serve a full term—if he makes the next five months, and we wish him well in achieving that goal.

During the time of the 16 years of the former Labor government there were I think nine skills ministers who I named. Paul Caica might have achieved three years; most of them were two years. Well intentioned as many of them may have been, and whether or not they had the gravitas within cabinet to assume that there was the priority demanded for this portfolio, or whether or not they had the attention to detail, that might be a different answer for each of those nine ministers.

But the circumstances created with the TAFE board were seen, I think, by Treasury as a cash cow, an opportunity to change budget fittings to suit the needs of the budget papers from year to year on the assumption that the TAFE board were not going to complain and the TAFE minister was not going to complain. And so the Treasurer of the time could put whatever they wanted into their forward projections, on the basis—it was not necessarily bad accounting, I am not blaming Treasury per se here—that they were able to apply to the TAFE board an efficiency dividend or, indeed, revenue assumptions that were completely impossible to achieve.

There were $90 million-plus worth of cuts and inappropriate revenue assumptions over the forward estimates, when we came to office, that had not been disclosed to the public, and beyond that, unachievable targets, especially in a system that the government at the time had said was going to become more contestable. You could guarantee if that had continued as it had the problems that the current minister has foreshadowed with the act would have been put in place.

The salvation over the last seven or eight years has been that the departments and the ministers have put in place performance expectations and charters that have directed the TAFE organisation to the best interests of South Australia, for the most part. Over the last seven years I think Treasury and the ministers—and I count myself and the current minister and former minister Pisoni alike in that, and former Treasurer Lucas—were actually paying attention and having an understanding of the realities of the budget.

In the period where that was not the case, between 31 March 2013 and 31 March 2018, the impact of a different approach was dramatic. Apprentices and trainees in South Australia dropped by 58 per cent in real terms from 36,000 to 15,000 between the 2013 and 2018 March periods. The number of commencements for the same period decreased by even more, by 63.8 per cent, from 22,990 to 8,325.

We often repeated when we were in government the fact that the work done by Minister Pisoni and the education department and TAFE saw the fastest growth in apprenticeships and traineeships in the country. I guess if there is one thing that the minister might point to if he wanted to be political is that we came off a low base. I highlight that it was a really bloody low base. That 8,300 commencements in March 2018, according to the figures I have in front of me, is a low base. A drop from 36,000 to 15,000 apprentices and trainees in five years is remarkable.

I appreciate that I think we now have a bipartisan shared mission to highlight the benefits of skills training for young South Australians. Mr Deputy Speaker, you may not and other members of the parliament may not be aware, but the member for Unley used to be an apprentice. He holds it close to his chest that he went from cabinet-maker to cabinet minister. He is a discreet person who does not brag about such things.

What was really useful was having the insight of him as a shadow minister and a minister. He was able to help the department refine some of our messages and ensure that in the Department for Innovation and Skills, as it was, there was a laser-like focus on continuing to promote that message, and indeed expand the fields within which apprenticeships and traineeships are offered. It was not just to the traditional trades, the male-dominated industries, but to modern trades, such as might give more parents confidence in the future. The IT traineeships grew by, I think, over 1,000 per cent over a couple of years. It was a new field, admittedly, and one where great new opportunities are continuing to flourish.

The Minister for Skills, as was the member for Unley, also had a really significant focus on traditionally feminised industries, having the opportunity to have apprenticeship and traineeship pathways applied in those industries. It was traditionally always the blokes who were able to get paid while they were learning. We are very supportive and indeed put in place a lot of measures, including TAFE measures, to encourage women into non-traditional industries.

But it would be folly, when we are concerned about how to meet the pay gap, not to think about those industries that have traditionally had, and continue to have, high levels of female workforce. Therefore, for skilled qualifications including child care, the traineeship and apprenticeship pathways in those fields were really encouraged and supported. There were changes made to some of the national agreements about how they are funded that made that easier. Those changes were all significant and helped us grow apprenticeship and traineeship numbers during our term in government.

There is another field where the early work, I think, was done by the member for Unley when he was skills minister and Renee Hindmarsh when she was the Skills Commissioner. I do commend the current minister and the current Skills Commissioner, Cam Baker, for the work they have done to continue and expand the ambition of that work, and that is to have university degree apprenticeships.

Particularly when the minister and I were in England visiting BAE facilities, talking to students who were doing degree apprenticeships, it was potentially a five-year apprenticeship where the student was working at BAE and getting the skills they needed. That is something that has not traditionally been a feature of the Australian landscape. I thank the universities, the Skills Commission and government, who continue the work that Minister Pisoni was also supportive of. This will become a really important feature in the future.

Going back to the circumstances pre 2018, when it comes to campus closures, one of the things that was notable during the former government's first year, when we were trying to identify some efficiencies that could then be reinvested back into TAFE, was some suggestions that came forward from the organisation to close some campuses. I made the point subsequently that some of those recommendations were a mistake, and indeed we reversed some. The Urrbrae TAFE campus, for example, was a savings measure from the 2018 budget that I absolutely regret. I am very proud to have had the courage to admit that mistake while still a minister within about a year and a half.

The thing was, although we backtracked on the decision to close the campus, we did in fact through that process identify some significant deficiencies. The facilities at Urrbrae that are second to none, that are absolutely world class, to deliver horticulture and a number of other skilled qualifications through TAFE needed to stay with TAFE. We needed those facilities to stay with TAFE. But some of the administration blocks, for example, that were very expensive pieces of real estate in the context of the operations there, and the location of some of the public servants who were working in those, did not need to be at Urrbrae. They were just as easily able to be transferred into other locations, including the city. The school had a desperate need for more area, too.

So it was a good outcome, for example, that the school was able to expand its footprint into some of the areas TAFE did not need. TAFE was able to save some money. But I make no bones about it: it was an error to say that it should close in the first place, and I am glad we did not. There were a couple of country campuses where we identified the savings of closing the campuses. In retrospect, they were so minuscule as to make the prospect of the proposal laughable, and indeed we were able to reverse those closures.

There were three campuses that closed, and they attracted a significant level of criticism from the Labor Party in opposition. At Port Adelaide, a number of the facilities were ageing, and courses had already been transferred elsewhere. I think the major one left at the time Port Adelaide closed was nursing, and those courses were then transferred to new facilities in the city and at Regency—I think maybe in the city in the end.

For a number of years, the service delivery at the Tea Tree Gully campus had been winding down, and by the time it finished and was transferred to Datacom, which took over all of the relevant site, it was to a point where I suspect Datacom is now training more people on that site through their everyday operations as business as usual than the campus was, with all the particular areas it was offering having been removed.

The third one was Parafield. I hesitate to include Parafield in the list. Parafield was closed because, in 2017, CASA did an audit of the programs that were offered there, which were all aviation related, and cancelled them. I will talk more about that in a little bit. Parafield was one that was closed, more by the TAFE organisation's inability to maintain accreditation to offer the courses than as a government savings measure. In the end, the advice that came to me as the minister was it would be impossible to resurrect those courses to the standard desired, and so that was closed too.

That criticism irked me, I have to say, because there was a real context in which we made those decisions. We admitted the ones that were mistakes and we fixed them, but the three that were closed were really very modest in terms of their scale, especially when the criticisms were coming from members of the Labor Party who had presided over double-digit closures in just the previous two years prior to changes in government.

The point that I made at the time was that sometimes campus closures work in the interests of students. Just because a campus had existed historically and was continuing to be maintained, it did not necessarily mean if it was within striking distance of another campus with better facilities that it was not necessarily possible to have that consolidation as a positive outcome for the state.

That is not to say that I supported every closure. As I have just said, Urrbrae is a prime example of where it was a mistake, it would have been a mistake. It would be a mistake to close certain other campuses where those services cannot be replicated. Any campus closure must be for a specific and important reason but that was not the approach taken by the Labor Party in opposition and I encourage them to reflect on that behaviour when they make criticism of the current opposition for doing what oppositions have to do, which is to hold the government to account.

On this occasion, I highlight closures in the years immediately prior to us coming to government: in 2017 the closures of the Naracoorte, Bordertown and Millicent TAFE campuses, and indeed Kangaroo Island; in 2016, Cleve, Clare, Kimba, Morphettville, Waikerie, Renmark and Gawler. In the years prior to that, in 2015, the English Language Services at Rundle Mall TAFE campus were closed. In 2011 to 2013, we saw closures at Yorketown, Marleston, O'Halloran Hill, Panorama, Croydon and Roseworthy. In the years prior to 2010, still in the term of the Labor government but prior to Skills for All and the current reforms, we saw Peterborough and Jamestown closed.

I highlight this to make the point that the TAFE board made those decisions. I do not know whether the ministers in the Labor government at the time were aware of them or supportive of them. I certainly hope they were. I would imagine they would have been briefed on them. I imagine cabinet would have discussed them and the Labor government would have taken ownership of them. The opportunity was always there, as we demonstrated when we reversed the decision of the TAFE board on places like Urrbrae, for the government to make its feelings known. These sorts of decisions would be more easily overseen with the changes to the act that are in the bill proposed today but that does not mean that they cannot be overseen and were not overseen and should not have been overseen previously.

We have talked about the massive drop in student numbers and the massive drop in campuses between 2013 and 2018. The other big change was the massive drop in staff. It was revealed in January 2018 in an excellent article by Daniel Wills, now Labor government Chief of Staff, who identified what he described as a $65 million TAFE cull over five years. He wrote:

TAFE SA spent $65 million in the past five years on golden handshakes to slash almost 600 staff, a move its former boss said led to many of its most talented being shown the door. The Auditor-General has revealed 583 TAFE staffers received targeted voluntary separation packages since 2012-13, including $3.9 million in redundancy payouts offered last year alone—

that would have been 2017—

as part of a long-term cost-cutting scheme intended to reform the state training providers.

The point that is relevant, particularly here, is that sometimes there is this suggestion that the Liberal Party in government cut TAFE, and that the Labor Party has always been supportive. The Rea report, as I highlighted further, had this strange dynamic in its context period of being very praiseworthy of Labor governments from Whitlam to Albanese, and immediately and instinctively critical of the Fraser and Howard governments.

The government in South Australia's history that has cut more staff, budget and students from TAFE SA—and it is not even close, it is by a factor of tens if not hundreds—is the Labor government in the Skills for All period through to the 2018 election.

So, in that context—and I will come to the Terry Moran and Kim Bannikoff's remarks in a little bit—these problems became very public during 2017. In May 2017 there was a CASA investigation that cast doubts on the accreditation of TAFE SA's aircraft safety students.

The CASA investigation and accreditation issue, as I described, ultimately led to the closure of those courses at Parafield altogether. Some 90 students had to have their courses remediated, from memory, and it was a very difficult thing to do. I think there was a significant need to engage outside assistance.

The ASQA accreditation issue began with a question in question time from Steven Marshall, the Leader of the Opposition, to the Deputy Premier. This was in early September, I believe. The question was simply about whether or not there was an issue with an accreditation, an audit of TAFE SA. The former Deputy Premier, the education minister at the time, did not know the answer, which was fine as it had not been brought to her attention, and it became clear to us later why that was the case. I have some sympathy for her in this situation. We expect those people who are there to serve us and who are expected to serve the people of South Australia to give ministers useful information when it is their job to do so, as they were being paying $100,000 a year as a part-time board chair. Anyway, that was not happening.

The Labor Party's Twitter account immediately started mocking Steven Marshall for asking questions on this non-issue. After a little while—it was only a few days—I think the member for Port Adelaide clearly had her office immediately have their attention drawn to what this question was about, and the penny must have dropped. Whatever information had gone to the opposition finally made its way to the government as well, and that was that ASQA had audited TAFE and, indeed, the 16 courses had gone very badly. The Adelaide newspaper The Advertiser, a little bit later in an editorial, summarised it thus:

These are dark days for TAFE SA.

The damning report from the Australian Skills Quality Authority, released last night, found 14 courses were deemed to be substandard, among a total of 16 courses; all of which were found to have problems.

I identified earlier, of course, that two of the courses were able to be remediated before the second review. The Advertiser went on to report that:

The human toll is potentially enormous, with 800 students facing an uncertain immediate future and needing additional assessment—and possibly further study—to finish their courses.

It did not take long for the bloodletting to start.

Chief executive Robin Murt has resigned from his post and Education Minister Susan Close was equally quick to throw TAFE SA board chairman Peter Vaughan under a bus, saying she would ask Governor Hieu Van Le to dismiss him on the grounds of no confidence.

The Advertiser article sums up pretty well what happened over those few months. On 25 September 2017 ASQA issued a notice of intention to remove or suspend 16 qualifications; 28 September the education minister announces the formation of a task force; October 2017, the Auditor-General finds 45 students have passed part of courses despite having withdrawn from them—that was actually a separate issue entirely but contemporaneous.

On 15 October there were 2,500 students identified at that point as having problems, and TAFE was no longer accepting enrolments in meat processing, automotive refinishing technology, motorcycle technology, commercial cookery, individual support (ageing), hairdressing, plumbing, leisure and health, building and construction, and visual merchandising. The revelations here about funding cuts and 600 staff being lost were received poorly, as you can imagine, and it is an area that I think was really worth noting. By 6 December, Daniel Wills—excellent journalist as he was—wrote an article highlighted: 'No faith, minister? Neither have we.' It reads:

Higher Education and Skills Minister [the member for Port Adelaide] has lost confidence in just about everyone who's running TAFE, and can't be surprised if the public does the same.

Their fury won't stop with a couple of bureaucrats and board members, but run right to the top as students and parents dump the blame for this latest bungle right on the Cabinet table.

He went on to write:

Now, with a new academic year and state election around the corner, [the member for Port Adelaide] says she will take 'swift' action to ensure this agency in crisis brings its performance up to scratch.

That looks to be a daunting—and maybe close to impossible—task.

Subsequently, on the same day, Alex Reid—who was then the Deputy Chief Executive of the Department of State Development—was appointed as TAFE's interim chief executive, and I reflected earlier on her good work at this time.

A couple of days later it was revealed that, far from The Advertiser editorial's concerned remarks, 800 students were in jeopardy. On 8 December, it was then again reported by state political editor, Daniel Wills—excellent reporter as he was—that hundreds more students would now be potentially caught up in the TAFE debacle than first revealed, 'as Premier Jay Weatherill says as many as 1300 may now be affected.'

Prior to the luncheon break, I highlighted that it ended up being about that number. Several hundred of them were students who required further assessments to be applied during the courses, several hundred of them were students who had completed but not yet received their parchment who then needed to do further assessment, and several hundred were people who had their parchments and who effectively had those parchments retrospectively not recognised and had to go back and do further assessments so that their parchments would then again mean something. More than 1,000 TAFE staff of its 2,000 staff were involved in that process of remediating the students and helping those students, but also actually fixing the courses—and not just the 16 that were identified: every single course on the TAFE list had to have a quality process applied to it.

There was a quality assurance committee with a new senior executive leading that work. I think it was Dr Norman Baker whom I believe, if I am not mistaken, has now just recently been appointed as the chief executive of TAFE in Tasmania, which is a credit to him and the work he has provided to South Australia over the last seven years, and we wish him well.

That culture of quality had not been applied before; it had not been a focus of the leadership of TAFE because it had not been a focus of the board whose agenda seemed to be focused on meeting the budget needs of the treasurer of the day from 2013 to 2018, whoever that was—I wonder if it is somebody still in the parliament—and, indeed, consequently no strategic approach to the training needs of South Australians. I remind members that, at the same time, 90 per cent of the training budget was going to TAFE SA and, in return, the non-government sector was denuded of funding.

I really enjoy when we have the opportunity to look at reports from journalists who have been serving the people of South Australia for some time. Still in the press gallery is the journalist of note, Paul Starick, from The Advertiser. Paul Starick wrote an article on 9 December 2017, and it was Paul at his best:

Inside the TAFE SA Crisis.

Broken system damned by culture of bungling.

The course accreditation calamity rocking 1300 TAFE students risks becoming a lightning rod for deep-seated discontent with a Labor government in power for almost 16 years, insiders claim.

Paul is a very good writer, it must be said, and that is very good writing. He went on to write:

TAFE has been turned upside down and inside out through divergent policy measures championed by nine different Labor ministers since 2002, the most recent being [the member for Port Adelaide].

Paul Starick broke another story highlighting some of the problems and the lack of oversight of TAFE:

Australian Medical Association chief executive Joe Hooper says his group spoke to Gail Gago, whose ministerial term expired in January last year—

that being January 2016—

'explaining the concerns we had regarding the quality of training in aged care at TAFE and that our own nursing lecturers who undertake accreditation of aged care standards estimated 50 per cent of TAFE graduates needed upskilling and were unemployable'.

'Nothing was done, to our knowledge, to help these students and save this much-needed health workforce resource,' he said.

'At the same time, quality private training providers in South Australia were defunded.' Mr Hooper's views are substantially shared by senior and highly respected education and training industry figures, some with intimate knowledge of TAFE's inner workings, spoken to by The Advertiser on the condition of anonymity.

Sheradyn Holderhead broke a story a couple of days later, 'TAFE scandal could impact on SA's image', with news that:

About 100 international students have been caught up in the TAFE SA scandal.

The Federal Education Department has contacted TAFE to seek assurance the students are going to be able to complete their study or get their money back.

In February of the next year, in the lead-up to the election, it became very clear, as a Senate committee by now was looking at this. They highlighted evidence from the Australian Skills Quality Authority that TAFE's response to the crisis did not address the issues, explaining why it was still a major problem. In the last of my round-up of journalists from The Advertiser of the time, Tim Williams. education reporter of note, highlighted:

An independent review of TAFE SA is costing taxpayers $3000 for every day of work done by each staff member assigned to it.

And the final report will not be ready until late March, after the state election.

The price tag for that Nous report was $152,000. That Nous report was quite useful, so I certainly thank the member for Port Adelaide for commissioning the report. I thank her for commissioning the Moran-Bannikoff report as well. They were both useful and I will get to them momentarily. I just wish that 16 years of Labor ministers had had better oversight of this, such an important part of their portfolios, so that we did not get into that mess.

My reason for going through the reporting of the time was that I find it a little bit unfathomable that the government's report that has been relied on for this bill highlights, only in two sentences in brackets with factual errors, dismissing any challenges of the time, what was for anybody who was involved in the training sector at the time—TAFE SA or non-government providers alike—a really difficult time, a time when most private providers either feared for or, indeed, actually lost their jobs, when non-government RTOs were closing their doors, high-quality providers like the MBA.

It was a remarkably difficult time, a massive drop, as I have identified, in students and staff and funding, and in confidence and reputation. The Moran-Bannikoff strategic capability review said:

TAFE SA's emphasis on cost-cutting and centralisation has overwhelmed and distorted its strategic focus. The business model does not enable educators to respond to business and industry requirements. Nor does it empower staff to take initiative and innovate within an accountable organisational culture.

They went on to say of the TAFE organisation:

Ageing infrastructure, obsolete equipment, unreliable technology and inflexible online platforms have severely limited organisational capacity and innovation.

This is in contrast to the advice given to the house by the member for Port Adelaide as minister a few months earlier in July 2017, when she said:

TAFE has undertaken an extraordinary effort in modernising its service operations. It has made significant savings in the process and is operating extremely professionally, so I have no reason not to believe that they are well on their way to the contestability anticipated by the end of 2018-19.

Once again, the minister was getting terrible advice from the organisation through whoever was reporting to her. It is a real shame. She, by the way, inherited that board. She did not appoint them, from memory. She appointed some good people. She appointed Jo Denley, who did some great work, but that collective failure of Labor governments over such a period of time had a tremendously negative impact on our state and on TAFE SA. The strategic capability review also said:

The corporate structure, operational business development strategies and focus on cost savings and external revenue targets have diminished TAFE SA's emphasis on education.

I spoke before about how so much of that, when we came into government, included those 2017 budget cuts applied by the Treasurer of the day that had not been identified to the public prior to the election, to my knowledge. He can come in here; he is still in the parliament. He has a job in the cabinet still. To my knowledge, they had not been identified to the public before the election. I came in and we found $90 million worth of cuts that TAFE was expected to manage. That was Labor's legacy in 2018. That was the starting point for the reforms in the work we did to rebuild confidence over the subsequent four years.

The Nous report in quality, the one that was identified before, produced a useful report. One thing I did highlight before lunch, but I want to highlight it again here, and I will use Nous's words:

There is a large contingent of highly motivated and loyal staff who want to help restore confidence in the institution of which they were very proud, but who have felt alienated from and unclear about the overarching strategy and role of TAFE SA in the wider system.

Nous reported that cabinet-approved time limited funding to assist TAFE SA meet its transition costs, primarily funding targeted voluntary separation packages on the basis that investment in TAFE SA's downsizing, would significantly ease budget pressure over the medium to long-term. However, the focus on cost cutting became an obsessive one, meaning that leaders and managers paid much more attention to cost inputs rather than the quantity or quality of outputs.

The Liberal Party is supporting this bill. We hope that it is an opportunity for a renewed fresh start for TAFE SA. TAFE SA is in such a better position now than it was in March 2018. I am pleased that it has had consistency in ministers. Obviously, the change in government saw an adjustment in priorities. That is fine. We disagree with some of the government's priorities—that is politics—but when it comes to legislation that is going to serve the state, I think for all of us, we really need to reflect on what is the impact of this legislation not on the newspaper tomorrow or the political culture over the next six months, but what is the impact going to be on the system that is impacted by this legislation over the next 12 years? It was not necessarily the current act that was responsible for the disasters, but it was part of the reforms that did impact it. We very much hope that under this new act there will be an improved future.

The Hon. Dennis Hood is the shadow minister for training and he has given me some words particularly to highlight the articulation of the Liberal position on the bill shorn of my commentary relating to the historical context.

The bill provides for TAFE SA to deliver high-quality, responsive and industry relevant education and training that responds to the current and future needs of employers, aligns with the strategic priorities of the state, and strengthens the state's economic prosperity through the development of a skilled and adaptable workforce; to ensure equitable access to education and training for all eligible South Australians; and to operate as an efficient, transparent, innovative and accountable public institution.

The TAFE SA Bill 2025 enshrines the legislative means to transition TAFE SA from a public corporation to a statutory authority without eroding corporate governance performance and accountability standards currently applied to TAFE through the general provisions of the Public Corporations Act 1993. Similar to legislation for other statutory authorities, the bill ensures TAFE SA obtains its authority and operating context from its enabling act, and its functions, level of independence, and the respective roles of the board, chief executive and the minister are derived from its enabling legislation.

The bill defines TAFE SA's objectives and functions as a public provider. Unlike the current act, broad application of the Public Corporations Act and the commercial principles therein, the bill ensures that TAFE SA performance functions in the public interest first and foremost. The bill changes the attributes for TAFE SA board membership to include members who collectively have expertise, abilities and experience required for the effective performance of TAFE SA's functions. The board is to consist of not less than six and up to 10 members nominated by the minister and appointed by the Governor.

The bill formalises the authority of the TAFE SA board to appoint an acting chief executive for any period for which the chief executive is absent or unavailable to carry out official duties and requires the board to meet a minimum of four times a year. The bill also formalises the authority of the TAFE SA board to establish committees or subcommittees to advise or assist TAFE SA in relation to its functions. The bill requires TAFE SA to prepare a business plan and compels the minister to provide a Statement of Priority to TAFE SA, which will replace the current Ministerial Charter and Performance Statement requirements under the current act and arrangements.

The Minister is compelled to consult with the Treasurer and TAFE in the development of that Statement of Priority and TAFE must address the requirements contained in it in preparing its business plan. A new power is authorising TAFE SA to issue barring notices in a manner stipulated in regulation in relation to specified conduct with the breach of such a notice resulting in a penalty that is enforceable. This provision endeavours to protect staff and students of TAFE SA on all its campuses from unwanted conduct by others. It increases the maximum fine for breach of a by-law from $1,250 to $2,500. TAFE SA's rule-making powers are expanded to include setting standards in relation to student admission and selection, staff behaviour and conduct, and staff and student academic standards.

The requirement for Governor confirmation of a proposed TAFE SA rule or by-law is removed from the current act by this bill; I imagine the Governor will be disappointed that she will not get these reports anymore, but it will save time. Proposed rules and by-laws will, however, continue to require agreement of the TAFE SA board, and in addition to ministerial approval, by-laws will continue to be tabled in parliament and subject to disallowance.

The Hon. Dennis Hood, as shadow minister for the Liberal Party, has consulted with peak industry bodies and stakeholders on this bill and, in broad, found in-principle support from most. There were issues raised by some and there were issues identified by Dennis Hood, which the Liberal Party will move on as I have described. We are indeed keen to ask some questions, which hopefully we will have time to do quickly tomorrow; I hope it will not take up much of the house's time. I indicate that at the moment I am not proposing to move amendments in the house. We will endeavour to provide them to the government between the houses so that they can be given full consideration ahead of debate in the Legislative Council, and hopefully they will be passed.

I think that there is worthy consideration of a review after three years to be undertaken of the proposed legislation. I wonder what might have been the benefits of a three-year review after the current act had been put in place. There is currently no requirement for regional representation on the TAFE board. When I was the minister, I made sure to appoint somebody from regional South Australia: from memory, Dr Jen Cleary—I will seek to correct the record if I am mistaken—and I know that she did a great job. I am sure that there is no in-principle objection from the government and I hope that if that is an amendment we move, it will be supported.

With respect to the proposed barring orders, I am interested in why the similar measures incorporated recently in the Education and Children's Services (Barring Notices and Other Protections) Amendment Bill for an opportunity to appeal to the minister have not been included in this bill. We will explore that and potentially consider an amendment between the houses.

I am interested also if the minister, in summing up, wants to make any comments on the anticipated impact of the legislative change on staff workforce numbers, student and industry outcomes, and how the bill will enable the government to consider—or indeed whether the government has any interest in considering—those facilities that are currently underutilised to see whether their utilisation opportunity is able to be maximised, or indeed if there are new opportunities that can be provided to share those facilities with non-government providers in the best interests of the people of South Australia.

The bill is worthy of the house's support. The opposition will support it and I look forward to further debate and the committee stage in due course.

Ms CLANCY (Elder) (17:27): I rise today in support of the TAFE SA Bill, which seeks to repeal and replace the TAFE SA Act 2012. This bill seeks to place TAFE SA back where it belongs: firmly in the community's interests. Since 2012, TAFE SA has operated as a statutory corporation under the Public Corporations Act 1993 at the direction of an independent board of directors.

TAFE SA is a public provider. It should be transparent, directly accountable to the public and given every opportunity to be the strong public training provider that South Australians deserve and need. This bill does exactly that, transitioning TAFE SA to a statutory authority, aligning it with other important state institutions. Similar to the Adelaide University Act 2023 and the South Australian Skills Act 2008, the bill before us today provides new objectives that reflect our contemporary and aspirational values for the vocational education and training sector.

South Australians rightfully expect a TAFE SA that functions unequivocally in their best interests, delivering high-quality, industry-leading education and training. No matter where they live, South Australians should have equitable access to the relevant and transferable skills that vocational education provides, and then have the opportunity and qualifications to give back to their communities.

In my community we have the incredible Tonsley TAFE, a place where I have always been very welcomed. I am so grateful to all the staff who have facilitated my visits there. It is incredible to meet with the people who are learning there as well as the people who are teaching them. It is an amazing place where you can basically see, before they put the concrete down, before they do the slab, all the sections that have been taken out of the soil—the place inside—so that people who are learning plumbing can actually learn how to do the plumbing before a foundation goes down.

There is also a section where you get up high and you can do some roofing. There is a lot of space for electrical work, refrigeration. There are some beautiful bricklaying examples, some fantastic painting. There is so much there. In construction, you can see people putting together frames of homes inside these facilities. It is really incredible.

After more than a decade of conservative government in the federal parliament, South Australia is not alone in facing a skills crisis. Across industries from defence to health, construction to early education, we need more skilled workers. This issue is most apparent in addressing the housing crisis, where, after years of gutting vocational and skills education, some of those on the conservative side of politics are now stoking fear and blaming housing accessibility and affordability on immigration. This is unproductive at its best and blatantly racist and offensive at its worst.

On this side of the house, we are focused on getting on with the job, providing South Australians with the skills they require to complete the work our community so desperately needs. We know that supply is the issue. To build more homes, we need more tradies. We need more carpenters, more bricklayers, more plumbers and more electricians.

By strengthening TAFE SA to train these workers, we are giving our state the best chance to meet this urgent challenge. Whether it is training workers for the Torrens of Darlington (South Road upgrade) project that runs through the guts of my electorate or for the new Women's and Children's Hospital, South Australians are relying on TAFE SA to provide the pipeline of workers to deliver these generational projects. But it is not just major projects. TAFE SA plays a critical role in training nurses, aged-care workers, childcare workers, disability care workers and a critical role in agriculture, clean energy and our sovereign capability, just to name a few things.

I am particularly proud that the Malinauskas Labor government is delivering on our commitment to build five new technical colleges across metropolitan Adelaide as well as regional South Australia. This is particularly exciting for my community, as construction is now complete and enrolments are open for students to begin their studies at the new Tonsley Technical College next year.

Just last sitting week, my office was contacted by Ewa, who had read in one of my previous community newsletters that we are opening the Tonsley Technical College and thought this might be of interest to her 15-year-old son. Guess what? He is now enrolled to begin to start at Tonsley Technical College next year, which is really exciting. This is an absolute game changer for my community and the broader southern suburbs of Adelaide, providing new pathways for young people to pursue trades, apprenticeships and technical careers. By establishing the Tonsley Technical College, we are not just building new learning environments; we are building new opportunities—new opportunities for more South Australians to learn hands-on skills, ensuring they can step straight into secure, well-paid jobs.

Another game changer for my community has been our delivery of fee-free TAFE in collaboration with the Albanese Labor government, which has already seen as many as 700 students in my community alone enrol in fee-free tuition over the past three years.

This bill also ensures strong government oversight for TAFE SA. It retains ministerial directions power and includes a new ministerial statement of priorities, which must be reflected in the new annual business plan and requires an annual report to be tabled in parliament. By providing strong government oversight, we can ensure that TAFE SA is at the centre of public interest, delivering on our government's priorities in a manner that is responsive, accountable and transparent.

In closing, I would like to thank our Minister for Education, Training and Skills and everyone in his team for all of their work in bringing this bill before us today and their ongoing commitment and dedication to transforming vocational education in our state. Today and every day, the Malinauskas Labor government is delivering on our commitments we made to South Australians, like building the Tonsley Technical College, to ensure we have the skilled workforce we need to build the houses, staff the hospitals and deliver the projects that will shape South Australia for decades to come. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (17:34): I rise today in support of the TAFE SA Bill 2025, a bill that is not just legislation but a statement about the transformative power of vocational education in South Australia. I speak today not just as a member of parliament but as someone whose life and the life of my family has been shaped by TAFE.

I first attended TAFE through the Certificate II in Community Services at Panorama TAFE, and it really ignited my passion to get into cooking and also to think about how I can help others. It was after I got a job working at the local Belair Bhavan, the first Indian restaurant up the hill, from what I remember. As a waitress, looking after people was something that I thoroughly enjoyed, but one day they hired a chef called Steve and he was this new-fashion chef and he brought in all these fantastic ideas about things, including making little jammy love hearts in the custard, which I thought was just absolutely sensational, and so I asked him how to do it and from then on continued to ask him how I could get involved with cooking, because I figured that this was going to be my direction.

The Certificate II in Community Services was a way to get a foot in the door of cooking, because to get an apprenticeship you either needed to be indentured to an employer, or you did the certificate III all in one hit. Unfortunately I could not afford to do that, so I decided to do the Certificate II in Community Services, and that was cooking for childcare centres, hospitals and that kind of thing. Whilst we were not putting out Michelin star food, we were learning the basics.

It was so wonderful. We had some incredible lecturers who were really supportive of us. During that time I went and did work experience at our local Kalyra nursing home, where I learned from the chefs and the cooks there about what a really busy kitchen looks like, especially around mealtime, but it did not quell my interest in becoming a chef and I continued to look at ways in which I could do that.

An opportunity came up in the newspaper to apply to become an apprentice chef. I had two job offers, actually, and one was at Sizzler. It was when they were first looking at putting in head chefs and chefs rather than just cooks. I applied for that and then I also applied for a job at the Botanic Cafe on East Terrace, which was this fantastic, new, very flash restaurant straight out of Melbourne and was being run by these two chaps who had come over from Melbourne.

My parents suggested I went with Sizzler because it was a well-known company, but I decided to go with the Botanic Cafe and the two men from Melbourne because it looked like it would be a lot more fun than going to Sizzler. Thankfully I did, because Sizzler shortly afterwards, unfortunately, closed its doors, which was a shame. I think we all miss especially the cheese bread drastically.

The path of becoming an apprentice really threw the doors open to me and I worked as an apprentice for all of about three months before the head chef left, which thrust me into being head chef. So I went from apprentice to head chef in three months and for quite a long time ran the kitchen there and did not have a lot of time to get into TAFE for trade school, but finally the owners decided they had better employ a chef and I was able to get along to Regency hotel school.

It was such an amazing opportunity to go and learn from other chefs and also to meet other chefs in the industry. What I noticed is that chefs are really passionate, not only about their craft but about having a good time, and we learned a lot through that process.

I was about two years in when I moved to Melbourne and moved from Regency hotel school to William Angliss hotel school over in Melbourne. That was another interesting opportunity because I was no longer working in a fast-paced cafe. I was working at the Kelvin Club, which is not too dissimilar to the Adelaide Club here and so it was a lot of traditional food. The TAFE training at both of these establishments was fantastic and I cannot stress enough how much it really opened up some doors for me in that space.

Within a couple of months, like I said, I became a chef and then I was able to have apprentices of my own and put them through TAFE as well. It was an incredible opportunity not only to give them what I had learned but then to hear what they were learning, which was newer and moving fast at that time. The lecturers who are at TAFE are chefs themselves, and they are really inspired to make sure that we turn out some fantastic new young people into our hospitality industry.

From there, I had the privilege of working as head chef at some of Adelaide's favourite places, including the Austral hotel, the Stanley Bridge Tavern and Jimmies in Crafers. TAFE did not just teach me skills; it opened the doors to a career and a life that I could never have imagined. I met so many people, including my partner, through hospitality. I did not think I would have headed into hospitality when I was studying science, but it is a different type of science, so it is not surprising.

My son also has followed me through the TAFE journey. He has completed a certificate II in construction down at Tonsley. It took us a little while. He put his name down to do horticulture for a little while, but unfortunately COVID got in the way of that, and then cabinet making, which again COVID put paid to. He put his hand up to do a certificate II in construction. He finished that course. It came out that his TAFE lecturer referred him as one of his best students, and he got a job straightaway out of that course.

I think that is the thing with TAFE: there are so many opportunities for roles, especially within carpentry but across lots of industries, to be able to move straight into employment. After doing his cert II, he has gone on to do a cert III, or a full apprenticeship, with his employer. The cert II that he did has given him recognition of prior learning, so he got credited for his whole first year of being at trade school. That allowed him to move on and move upwards. He is now in his final year, well on his way to becoming a fully qualified carpenter. Seeing him thrive after going through TAFE and after having that backing has really showed me the power of what TAFE can do for people.

I have also known people in our community, whether they are cleaners or support workers or even older students, who have taken up our fee-free TAFE courses. A cleaner that I know in particular took on aged-care training, and now he is well on his way to be able to work within that industry. That is a life-changing move for him. TAFE does that for people. It can take you from where you are, give you the skills you need and allow you to get into employment really quickly.

This bill is about more than just these individual stories. It is about ensuring TAFE provides a topnotch learning environment for everyone that puts excellence first. The bill repeals and replaces the outdated TAFE SA Act 2012, which no longer sets a vision for what TAFE should be. The 2012 act lists functions like even providing internet services, which is probably something that is a bit of a given these days. It does not really reflect the modern purpose of TAFE as a public provider delivering skills, training and opportunity in the public interest.

The Roadmap for the Future of TAFE SA, led by Associate Professor Jeannie Rea in 2023, recommended reform to reposition TAFE. This bill implements those recommendations. Under this new act, TAFE SA will transition from a statutory corporation to a statutory authority with updated functions, governance and management structures. It will be clearly required to focus on excellence, demonstrate integrity and deliver in the public interest, with accountability to students, staff and the broader community.

The board and the chief executive will have defined responsibilities, whilst ministerial oversight remains strong, including ministerial directions, a statement of priorities and parliamentary reporting. The bill also reflects contemporary values for the vocational education and training sector, ensuring that TAFE SA delivers industry-relevant training aligned with our government's priorities and that it provides equitable access to all eligible South Australians.

I think that is one thing around TAFE, that you have the opportunity to go to TAFE whenever you want to. If you find a subject or course that you want to do, you do not have to have a year 12 certificate, you do not have to come from university. You can put your hand up, you can do recognition of prior learning. They can get you to do an adult entry test, and you have the opportunity to go a long way with your TAFE course. The bill also supports innovation, quality teaching and lifelong learning, engages with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and continues to provide critical training in regional and remote areas.

TAFE SA is at the heart of our state's response to the skills crisis, delivering vocational education and training that supports major projects, from our Hunter class frigates and AUKUS submarines to the new Women's and Children's Hospital, new preschools and the thousands of new homes that we need to build in South Australia.

I can tell you that my son is a busy guy. They are constantly out on site and, whether they are building brand-new houses or whether they are renovating old houses, they are never short of work. I think that is really positive for a lot of young people coming through who are considering doing carpentry—there is definitely going to be a job for you. This legislation ensures that TAFE SA continues to meet these needs while maintaining equitable access, especially for regional, remote and disadvantaged students.

I am especially excited about the connection of these TAFEs and our new technical colleges. The tech colleges offer young people a unique combination of education, apprenticeship and career pathways, whether that is in construction, advanced technology or motor mechanics. These are the things that are available down at Tonsley right near my community. For us, this is a game-changing opportunity. It allows students to gain these real-world skills and enter industries that are vital to the future of our state.

I recently went to the open day of the new Tonsley Technical College and, wow, as someone who is not a builder or a motor mechanic, I was blown away with the toys they have there and the opportunity for students to go there and learn. I think if my son had had that opportunity when he was at high school, or many kids who really want to get their hands dirty really early on—it is a huge opportunity to get in, start their apprenticeships early and start that journey on their way to their new careers.

The fact that we have teamed up with employers to make sure that every student who comes out of these technical colleges has the opportunity to get a job is just fantastic. It allows us to make sure that we have the skills of the future that we need. My story, my son's story and the stories of countless others in our community demonstrate what TAFE can do. It changes lives. It opens doors. Now, through this bill, TAFE SA will have a modern, fit-for-purpose legislative framework that ensures that it can deliver these life-changing outcomes in the public interest and is aligned with the priorities of our South Australian government. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (17:46): I rise to speak on the TAFE SA Bill 2025 and, in doing so, put on the record my support for TAFE SA and the thousands of dedicated staff who, over the years, have delivered exceptional training across the state—the teachers, lecturers and skill trainers who provide opportunities for young school leavers as well as career changes for many who have found themselves out of a job, often due to technology, closure or a decrease in demand.

For thousands of people each year, TAFE SA provides a wealth of opportunities in the areas of aerospace; maritime and logistics; agriculture, animals, science and environment; automotive; building and construction; business and finance; creative industries; defence; education and community services; engineering and mining; English languages and foundation studies; health, beauty and fitness; hospitality, tourism and events; and information technology, library and digital.

Studying and/or training at TAFE SA is a win-win situation. It is a win-win situation for individuals and for South Australia as a whole, playing a significant role in the provision of a skilled workforce at a time when our state and, in fact, our nation is facing a skills crisis across so many areas, including construction, health and early childhood education.

The legislation before us today, introduced by the Minister for Education, Training and Skills, is our government's response to the recommendation of Associate Professor Jeannie Rea in the report for the 2023 Roadmap for the Future of TAFE SA. To deliver the road map, I am advised there was significant engagement with industry, unions, government, and TAFE SA staff and students, giving consideration to changes required to support TAFE SA delivering the skills needed for our state. It included that the TAFE SA Act 2012 be reformed, with these reforms reflected in governance, management structure and functions.

The bill itself will transition TAFE SA from a public corporation to a statutory authority, with a clear explanation of the responsibilities of the chief executive officer and the TAFE SA board. Importantly, this bill ensures TAFE SA's focus is on excellence and now also delivering in the public interest. In this bill, government oversight remains strong. It retains ministerial directions power and a board with strong oversight. It includes a new ministerial statement of priorities to be reflected in the new annual business plan. The minister maintains approval of the CE, and both the minister and Treasurer's reps will continue to attend meetings and have access to papers. There is a requirement that the annual report be tabled in parliament.

Delivery of high-quality, responsive and industry-relevant education and training that responds to the needs of employers and aligns with the strategic priorities of the South Australian government is a requirement, as is equitable access to education and training for all eligible South Australians, assisting them to build the skills needed to contribute to the economic, social and cultural life of their communities, and performing as an efficient, transparent, innovative and accountable public institution underpinned by strong governance, effective leadership and a commitment to public interest in educational excellence.

Further under the bill, TAFE SA is required to focus on excellence and to demonstrate integrity. It is to demonstrate quality and innovation in teaching, including through the application of leading and contemporary industry practices. It is to enable pathways to further learning or training in VET or at university and promote lifelong learning, engage with the broader VET sector, provide appropriate student support services and be responsive to the diversity of needs of students. It is to focus on the impact and success of its services on students, staff and the communities that TAFE SA serves.

TAFE SA must also engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to provide appropriate education and training to meet not only the needs of our state in a broader context but also the needs of their communities. It is to provide inclusive and culturally safe services on all TAFE SA campuses. It ensures our continued focus on delivering training in regional and remote areas and equitable access to education and training for all eligible South Australians.

TAFE SA will also continue to perform its commercial functions. Over the years, I have had the opportunity to attend many of our TAFEs in my capacity as a member and in my teaching days. Many people tell stories of TAFE in days gone by. A lot of lecturers today will also speak about things that they believe need to happen and it is great that the bill before us today is going to address these. I commend the bill to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Odenwalder.