King Colin: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:13187] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is interesting to compare Part 2 of this Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill in respect of industry training organisations with related amendments to other enactments. It is just a little bit of material compared with what is in Part 1 and it sort of indicates where the problems are in the tertiary education system. 
When I stop to think about industry training organisations and the Industry Training Act I would say there are about 40 such organisations. It was a marvellous concept that went forward with cross-party support and it was seen to be a solution at that time—before 1992—to an apprenticeship model that was not quite meeting needs. It worked itself through very very effectively and by 1999 some 50000 people were employed in training under the industry training organisations’ standard training measure model. They effectively covered a full range of industries. 
So when we look at Part 2 we see the changes around plans and proposed plans are transferred into the Industry Training Act. On that basis it is significant to appreciate that a proposed plan is what it says—it is a proposed plan; it is not an approved plan. Basically it is a plan put forward with consultation and discussion to be approved by the Tertiary Education Commission. Once it has been approved it becomes the plan. However it is worth noting today that a complex situation has been created around tertiary education whereby some 15 percent of people go to university and some 85 percent of kids leaving school go into trades-related or industry training provider types of training and employment. Therein lies some of the concern in relation to this entire bill but which is particularly highlighted because of the Industry Training Act 1992. 
Very little has been said about the New Zealand Qualifications Authority but it is a fascinating beast in itself because it is meant to ensure the quality of training of the qualifications of the moderation and of the approval of new qualifications. The industry training organisations manage industry training. They manage the qualifications which are put on to the New Zealand Qualifications Authority framework and those providers that are contracted by the industry training organisations deliver to those qualifications. 
However the Plumbing Gasfitting and Drainlaying Industry Training Organisation which has been trying to align its qualifications with the exams and registration that come from the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board has taken virtually 2 years to get that approval through. I recognise—as highlighted by Hazel Armstrong—that some personality problems were involved but in putting questions to the Minister for Tertiary Education the feedback we were getting was that things were pretty well in line. On that basis it is hugely concerning for the many people involved in industry training that it is taking as long as this. It is not good enough. When reference is made to a plan and people are interfacing with the Tertiary Education Commission the fatigue and demoralisation caused because of the time it is taking is concerning. Quite often the comment that comes back to us is “We’re being thorough.” Unfortunately we are hearing from the industry training organisations that every time they make contact with the New Zealand Qualifications Authority they are making contact with a different person. There seriously needs to be a way of managing institutional knowledge so that things are moved forward quickly. 
When we look at the plan in Part 2 it is worth noting that the industry training organisations have been capped for many years at a total of $174 million. In the last Budget they were given $14 million to take on a leadership role. On that basis it is interesting to see that the private training establishments and the industry training organisations were capped. In fact the majority of the industry training side of things has been capped which leaves us with an interesting challenge in the middle. 
I want to talk for a few minutes on the issues that this bill does not address but which are referred to in Part 2 “Related amendments to other enactments. Amendments to Industry Training Act 1992”. It is the overlapping provision and it is something that no doubt an incoming National Government will have to get to grips with. 
There is a bad relationship between the industry training providers and the industry training organisations. It has been brought about by an overlapping of provision. What that means is that the industry has developed qualifications that are funded at a standard training measure rate of $3200 per year per 120 credits. However the polytechnics are funded at a rate of up to and above $8700 per standard training measure. So this is an area that a National Government will have to sort out because it is untenable. 
Sue Moroney 
: Oh like you did last time! 
COLIN KING 
: If I may seek the indulgence of the Chair I would like to talk for a few moments about the Modern Apprenticeships scheme because for the benefit of the new junior whip it too has now been embroiled in this. The Minister Pete Hodgson said the other day that there are now 13000-odd Modern Apprentices and that barely 4000 of them have completed their apprenticeship. An example of the butchered nature of what would otherwise have been a very good policy is the case of Masterlink which is a Modern Apprentice coordinator receiving $165000 and having only one completion. That is only half of the equation because if we put in the standard training measure funding which is probably another $50000 there is in excess of $200000. I want the junior Government whip to remember that. There has been a good policy. This member was a Modern Apprenticeship coordinator and the first time I met the Minister Steve Maharey was when I shook his hand when Labour introduced the policy. Unfortunately it has been totally butchered. 
Sue Moroney 
: Labour introduced the policy! 
Lesley Soper 
: There we are. 
COLIN KING 
: If the two members who are interjecting would just listen they will learn. Last year in Auckland under the building and construction industry training only 9 percent of building apprentices completed their apprenticeships. The Manukau Institute of Technology’s managed apprenticeships—we now have managed apprenticeships being run by the industry training providers—had 90 percent of completions. So now we have a real issue. The Modern Apprenticeships scheme which was the Labour Party flagship has an abysmal completion rate and on the other side there are high levels of completion on the managed apprenticeship programme which is actually an overlapping provision that the Government—or National when it becomes the Government—is going to have to sort out. We have a massive problem there and it has all been due to the problems associated with a 7-year butchering of the tertiary education sector.