Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Education and Training) (17:05): I present four government responses to committee reports as listed at item 16 on today’s Order of Business. In accordance with the usual practice, I seek leave to incorporate the documents in Hansard. Leave granted. The documents read as follows— Australian Government response to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services report: Inquiry into proposals to lift the professional, ethical and education standards in the financial services industry August 2017 Parliamentary Joint Committee' s recommendation Government response Recommendation 1 The term ' general advice' in the Corporations Act 2001 be replaced with the term ' product sales information' to better reflect the nature of that information. The Government notes the recommendation. The Government agreed to rename ' general advice' to improve consumer understanding as part of the Government' s response to the Financial System Inquiry. The Government will consult with a wide range of stakeholders and conduct consumer testing before finalising the new term. Recommendation 2 The term ' personal advice' in the Corporations Act 2001 be replaced with ' financial advice' to better reflect the nature of that advice. The Government notes the recommendation. The Corporations Amendment (Professional Standards of Financial Advisers) Act 2017 (Professional Standards Reforms) incorporates the terms ' relevant financial product' and ' relevant provider' into the Corporations Act 2001 and protects the use of the term ' financial adviser' and ' financial planner' for individuals that meet higher education, training and ethical standards. These changes clarify the current use of the term ' personal advice' by making it clearer to consumers that only individuals that have met the required standards can provide ' personal advice' to consumers on complex financial products. Recommendation 3 A financial adviser will only be permitted to provide advice if they are registered. The Government agrees to the recommendation. Under the Professional Standards Reforms, all financial advisers who are authorised to provide advice personal advice to retail clients on complex products will be listed on the Financial Adviser Register. Recommendation 4 The terms ' financial adviser' and ' financial planner' will be restricted to those who meet the new professional standards. The Government agrees to the recommendation and is implementing it through the Professional Standards Reforms. The Reforms specify that only financial advisers who have met specific education, training and ethical standards may use the titles ' financial adviser' and ' financial planner' , terms of like import and combinations of words which include these terms when dealing with retail clients. Recommendation 5 The Register: 1. include the information fields announced by Government on 24 October 2014; 2. have a unique identifier that follows every individual adviser throughout their career; 3. only list financial advisers on the register when an approved professional association advises that the adviser has completed the requirements of the Finance Professionals' Education Council approved professional year and passed the registration exam; 4. record any higher qualification awarded by a professional body to the adviser; 5. annotate any censure or limitation placed on a financial adviser by a professional body, ASIC or a licensee; and 6. highlight that an adviser is no longer authorised to provide financial advice if the adviser has their membership of the nominated professional body suspended or revoked. The Government agrees to the recommendation with modifications. 1. On 31 March 2015, the Government established the Financial Advice Register (the Register) to list the following information on financial advisers: the adviser' s name, registration number, status, and experience; the advisers' qualifications and professional association memberships; the adviser' s licensee, previous licensees/authorised representatives and business name; what product areas the adviser can provide advice on; any bans, disqualifications or enforceable undertakings; and details around ownership of the financial services licensee and disclosure of the ultimate parent company where applicable. 2. The Corporations Act 2001 provides ASIC with the power to give a financial adviser a unique number. 3. From 1 January 2019, financial advisers will need to have a degree or equivalent qualification and have passed an exam to be listed on the Register. These advisers will be listed on the Register on a provisional basis until they have completed a professional year. Existing advisers (who are already on the Register) will have until 1 January 2021 to pass the exam and 1 January 2024 to meet the education requirements. 4. Information about education qualifications and training completed by the financial adviser are listed on the Register. 5. Any bans, disqualifications or enforceable undertakings are also listed on the Register. In addition, the Professional Standards Reforms will make further enhancements to the Register, by requiring licensees and monitoring bodies to notify ASIC of changes to a financial advisers education qualifications and breaches of the Code of Ethics or continuing professional development (CPD) requirements. This information will generally be reported to ASIC and made available to consumers through the Register within 30 business days. 6. The Register clearly highlights the status of a financial adviser. From 1 January 2020, all financial advisers will need to be a member of an ASIC-approved professional association or independent third party that monitors and enforces the Code of Ethics. The status of a financial adviser will be contingent on maintaining membership with a monitoring body. Recommendation 6 Fees for organisational licensees will be increased to reflect the scale of the financial advice operations. The Government notes the recommendation. The Government has committed to recover ASIC' s regulatory costs from ASIC' s regulated population from 2017-18 onwards through a combination of levies and fees‑for-service. Industry funding will ensure that the costs of regulation are borne by those entities that have created the need for it, rather than the Australian public. Recommendation 7 Financial advisers will be required to complete a degree at AQF level 7 and a structured professional year. The Finance Professionals' Education Council should set the core and sector specific requirements. The Government agrees to the recommendation with modifications. Under the Professional Standards Reforms, all financial advisers will need to complete a bachelor or higher or equivalent qualification. The degree and equivalent qualifications are to be determined by the standards body. Recommendation 8 ASIC should only list a financial adviser on the register when they have: satisfactorily completed a structured professional year and passed the assessed components; and BULLET passed a registration exam set by the Finance Professionals' Education Council administered by an independent invigilator. The Government agrees to the recommendation with modifications. Under the Professional Standards Reforms, individuals are prohibited from providing unsupervised advice until they complete a degree or equivalent qualification, pass an exam set by the standards body and undertake at least one year of work and training (the professional year). New advisers can be listed on the register on a ' provisional basis' once they have met the degree or equivalent qualifications and passed the exam. Provisional relevant providers (those advisers who are completing their professional year) will be listed on the register, with their provisional status noted, and allowed to assist in the giving of advice while being supervised by a fully qualified adviser. Financial advisers that are currently on the Register will have until 1 January 2021 to pass the exam and 1 January 2024 to meet the degree or equivalent requirement to maintain a ' current' status on the Register. Recommendation 9 Financial advisers will be required to complete ongoing professional development. The Government agrees to the recommendation and is implementing the recommendation through the Professional Standards Reforms. Under the Professional Standards Reforms, financial advisers will have an obligation to complete CPD. Licensees have an ongoing obligation to ensure that their financial advisers comply with the CPD requirement determined by the standards body. Recommendation 10 An independent body will be established by professional associations approved by the Professional Standards Councils (PSC) to: 1. set curriculum requirements (where relevant working with ASIC); 2. set the requirements for the professional year; 3. develop and administer an exam; 4. establish recognised prior learning pathways for existing advisers; and 5. set the requirements for continuing professional development. The independent body will: 6. comprise representatives from professional associations approved by the PSC, academics, consumer advocates and an ethicist; and 7. be funded by industry. The Government agrees to the recommendation with modifications. The Government will establish a Commonwealth company as the standards body to: 1. approve degrees or higher or equivalent qualifications (including foreign qualifications); 2. determine the requirements for the professional year (including setting supervision or other requirements); 3. approve and/or administer the exam; 4. recognise bridging courses for existing advisers to raise their qualifications to an equivalent level; and 5. determine the CPD requirements. In addition, the standards body will also set the Code of Ethics. The standards body will be governed by independent board comprised by nine board members including: an independent chair; three industry representatives representing practitioners and licensees; three consumer representatives; an ethicist; and a person with education/standard setting experience. The cost of establishing the body will be met exclusively by nine large financial service licensees. The Government will take steps to develop an ongoing industry funding model for the body as soon as practicable. Recommendation 11 Financial advisers will be required to subscribe to a code of ethics developed by their professional association and approved by the PSC. The Government agrees to the recommendation with modifications. The standards body will develop a Code of Ethics. All financial advisers must comply with the Code. Compliance of the Code will be monitored and enforced by ASIC‑approved professional associations or independent third parties. Recommendation 12 Financial sector professional associations that wish to have representation on the independent body and to be able to make recommendations to ASIC regarding the registration of financial advisers, should be required to establish Professional Standards Schemes under the PSC, within three years. The Government does not agree to the recommendation. There are substantial legal impediments to using the PSC or the Professional Standards Authority as an approving body under Commonwealth legislation. Recommendation 13 Any individual wishing to provide financial advice should be required to be a member of a professional body that is operating under a Professional Standards Scheme approved by the PSC and to meet their educational, professional year and registration exam requirements. The Government does not agree to the recommendation. Financial advisers will not be required to be members of a professional association. The Government' s model will instead require financial advisers to be members of a professional association or an independent third party approved by ASIC. Recommendation 14 An appropriate transitional schedule will be developed. The Government agrees to the recommendation. The new Professional Standards Reforms will commence on 1 January 2019. Existing financial advisers will have access to transitional arrangements, allowing them two years, until 1 January 2021, to pass the exam, and five years, until 1 January 2024, to meet the education requirements. This transition period is designed to give existing advisers sufficient time to comply, and ensure that prompt action is taken to raise minimum standards and improve consumer confidence. Australian Government Response to the Senate Economics References Committee Interim report: Personal choice and community impacts: bicycle helmet laws (term of reference d) May 2017 Introduction As part of its inquiry into personal choice and community impacts, the Senate Economics References Committee invited submissions addressing a number of specific terms of reference. The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development made a submission addressing: "The economic and social impact of legislation, policies or Commonwealth guidelines, with particular reference to: d. bicycle helmet laws, including any impact on the health, enjoyment and finances of cyclists and non-cyclists." In May 2016 the Committee released an interim report on bicycle helmet laws (term of reference d). This is the Australian Government's response to the interim report. RESPONSES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1 4.15 The committee recommends that a consistent and comprehensive national data set be established. The data set should provide nationally consistent information on cycling- related injury trends as well as cycling participation rates. The committee recommends that the Department of Health in cooperation with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and state and territory counterparts develop the national data set for application across all states and territories. The Australian Government supports this recommendation in principle. Although the Government supports the aim of developing more comprehensive data on cycling injury and cycling participation, it is not currently feasible to establish a national data set as described in Recommendation 1. This would require both on-road and off-road injury data, neither of which is currently available as a consistent national collection. Work is underway through the National Road Safety Action Plan 2015-17 to examine and progress options to improve the measurement and reporting of non-fatal and disabling injury road crashes. A project being carried out through Austroads (the peak organisation of Australasian road transport and traffic agencies) entitled "A national approach to measuring non-fatal crash outcomes" is investigating data linkage of police-reported crash data and hospital admissions data at the national level, and is expected to run until late 2017. Further information about possible sources of road crash serious injury data and the development of a national injury monitoring system is available in Information Sheet 76, "Developing national road safety indicators for injury," published by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) in September 2016. It is known that a large proportion of cycling injuries are not reported to police, even when assistance is sought from a local doctor. The NSW government published a report in September 2015 to investigate linking data from police and hospital records of serious injuries called Serious Injuries in NSW: reporting methodology and results. This report found that 78% of serious injuries to cyclists on NSW roads who were admitted to hospital were not reported to the police. Un-matched cycling injuries are typically those which do not involve a collision with a vehicle. Given the data limitations, a significant investment would be required to establish and maintain a national data set for cycling-related injury trends to capture both on-road and off-road injuries. State and territory governments currently report cycling injuries which occur on public roads, however each jurisdiction defines injuries differently and this data cannot be aggregated. Efforts to develop a national measure of serious injuries from road crashes, through the Austroads project mentioned above, are currently a high priority for the Australian Government. The Australian Government has recently announced funding for the Australian Trauma Registry, which will in due course provide a source of detailed information about very severely injured cyclists, both from on-road and off-road crashes. Recommendation 2 4.17 The committee recommends that the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development in cooperation with the Department of Health conduct a national assessment of mandatory bicycle helmet laws once a national data set of sufficient quality has been established. The impact of the Northern Territory legislation should form an important part of the overall assessment. In addition to safety concerns, this assessment should consider the relationship between bicycle helmets and cycling participation rates, drawing on the experience of bike share schemes and other initiatives directed at improving cycling participation rates. The Australian Government does not support this recommendation. The Australian Government recognises that there is strong evidence that bicycle helmets are effective in reducing serious head and neck injuries to cyclists. Recently released research from the University of New South Wales further supports the efficacy of bicycle helmet use to mitigate serious head and neck injury in a crash or fall1. A review of 40 studies found that bicycle helmet use reduces the odds of head injury, serious head injury, facial injury and fatal head injury. This research also confirmed that neck injury was rare and not attributed to wearing a bicycle helmet. The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws is a matter for the individual state and territory governments. 1Olivier, J. & Creighton, P. 2016, Bicycle injuries and helmet use: a systematic review and meta-analysis, International Journal of Epidemiology. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SENATOR DAVID LEYONHJELM – LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY Recommendation 1 Cyclists aged 16 years and over should be exempted from the mandatory helmet road rule when riding in parks, on footpaths and shared/cycle paths and on roads with a speed limit of 50 km/hr or less. The Australian Government does not support this recommendation, recognising that there is strong evidence that bicycle helmets are effective in reducing serious head and neck injuries to cyclists. The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws and any exemptions is a matter for the individual state and territory governments. The committee may be interested to note that the ACT Government's Road Safety Action Plan 2016-2020 includes an action to investigate and assess the risk of allowing cycling without helmets in parks, town centres and other low speed environments. Recommendation 2 As part of this recommendation (and tied to the collection of a comprehensive data set), this should be accompanied by a 24 month evaluation process that includes baseline measurements and data collection so that a reliable assessment can be made which measures the effect and notes any benefits. The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws and any exemptions is a matter for the individual state and territory governments, as is the evaluation of any trials undertaken. Recommendation 3 At the conclusion of this evaluation, and subject to its findings, I recommend also exempting cyclists under 16 years from an obligation to wear helmets, while making clear to parents that their responsibility to their children should include serious consideration of wearing one. The Australian Government does not support this recommendation. Australian Government response to the Senate Economics References Committee inquiry into Scrutiny of Financial Advice report: Scrutiny of Financial Advice Part 1 – Land banking: a ticking time bomb Senate Economics References Committee Scrutiny of Financial Advice Part 1 Report – Land banking: a ticking time bomb Government Response Recommendation 1 (paragraph 8.56-8.57) The Committee recommends that the Government, in consultation with the states and territories, should strengthen the regulatory framework of the property investment industry to bring it into line with regulations applicable to the financial investment industry. Specific areas include: • making the regulation of property investment advice a Commonwealth responsibility (recognising that services provided by licensed real estate agents would remain under state and territory regulation); • inserting a definition of property investment advice into the Corporations Act and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act; and • requiring that anyone providing property investment advice should hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (with appropriate exceptions). In respect of the last recommendation, the committee suggests that the independent industry-established standards setting body for financial advisers could set the educational and training requirements for property investment advisers and the code of ethics to which they would subscribe. The Government does not support this recommendation. The Government does not intend to expand the definition of financial products to include real property. The regulation of the real property market is a matter for state and territory governments. Recently, the Government enacted the Corporations Amendment (Professional Standards of Financial Advisers) Act 2017, to improve the professional, ethical and educational standards of financial advisers. – The reforms restrict the terms 'financial planner' and 'financial adviser' to persons authorised to provide personal advice on complex financial products under an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). The legislation will prevent property spruikers from holding themselves out to be financial planners or financial advisers. These reforms supplement action already being taken by both the ACCC and ASIC against property spruikers through their existing consumer protection powers. – The ACCC can take action under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) against conduct in trade or commerce that is misleading or deceptive, unconscionable, or can be viewed as harassment or coercion. ASIC has advised the real estate industry that making recommendations that a person use a self-managed super fund (SMSF) to purchase a property requires an AFSL and that penalties apply to persons carrying on a financial services business without an AFSL. Recommendation Two (paragraph 8.77) Having regard to recommendation one, the Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand, in its review of the Australian Consumer Law, give serious consideration to: • the options for reform proposed by the national review project into property spruikers; • whether investment property advice rightly belongs under the same regime as financial products and financial advice and, if not, how consumer safeguards available to investors in financial products can be replicated for investors in property; • measures needed to prevent property investment spruikers with demonstrably compromised integrity from continuing to operate in the business; • introducing a licensing regime for those providing advice on property investment which would include minimum qualifications and a code of conduct to which they would subscribe; and • increasing the penalties for misleading and deceptive conduct, including the introduction of civil penalties and criminal sanctions. The Government notes this recommendation. The final report of the Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand's Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Review was released in April 2017. The ACL Review invited stakeholder feedback on whether the law is working effectively and what could be improved, including whether the law has the flexibility to respond to new and emerging issues in the marketplace. As the Terms of Reference for the ACL Review were broad, consumer affairs officials leading the ACL Review were able to consider a range of existing reviews and reports, including the Scrutiny of Financial Advice Report and the national research project on property spruikers led by Consumer Affairs Victoria. Recommendation Three (paragraph 8.63) The Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Ministers consider the terms of the reference for the review of the Australian Consumer Law with a view to inserting a specific reference to advice on property investment in term of reference no. 1. The Government notes this recommendation. The final report of the ACL review was released in April 2017. The Terms of Reference were sufficiently broad to allow for an exploration of consumer protection issues related to property investment advice. Recommendation Four (paragraph 6.26) The Committee recommends that state and territory governments consider requiring that moneys paid to purchase an option in a land banking scheme be held in trust consistent with the requirements for off-the-plan agreements. The Government notes this recommendation and notes that it is directed to state and territory governments. Recommendation Five (paragraph 8.104) The Committee recommends that ASIC, the ACCC and state and territory regulators have a stronger focus on providing up-to-date and accessible information alerting consumers to risks arising from the activities of spruikers as part of their efforts to improve the financial literacy of Australians and to encourage the early reporting of concerns about property investment seminars and schemes. The Government notes this recommendation and notes that it is directed to ASIC, ACCC and state and territory regulators, which are independent of Government. Recommendation Six (paragraph 8.90) The Committee recommends that the Australian Government give due consideration to: • the characteristics of investment seminars, wealth education programs and similar product sales environments when consulting with stakeholders and conducting consumer testing to rename general advice; • whether the general advice warning needs to be strengthened to ensure consumers are aware that general advice is not required to meet the higher regulatory obligations applying to personal advice; and • whether the obligations on those providing general advice should be strengthened in regard to misleading information. The Government supports in principle the matters raised in this recommendation. In response to Recommendation 40 of the Financial System Inquiry, the Government has agreed to rename 'general advice' to improve consumer understanding, as consumers may consider that the use of the word 'advice' means the information is tailored to their needs. The Government will give consideration to the matters raised in Recommendation six as part of this work. Recommendation Seven (paragraph 5.22) The Committee recommends that the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and Legal Services Board (and, where appropriate, other state and territory legal professional bodies) investigate thoroughly the conduct of lawyers involved in providing advice to investors in the land banking schemes considered in this report, as well as those lawyers who provided advice, and controlled trust accounts, for the operators of the schemes. The Government notes this recommendation and notes that it is directed to the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and Legal Services Board. Recommendation Eight (paragraph 5.23) The Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Victoria investigate whether Market First and/or other parties, including lawyers, breached the requirements in the Sale of Land Act 1962 (Vic) in regards to off-the-plan contracts of sale for the Foscari and Veneziane developments The Government notes this recommendation and notes that it is directed to Consumer Affairs Victoria. Australian Government response to the Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee report: The shortage of engineering and related employment skills August 2017 Response The Australian Government acknowledges the 2012 report: The shortage of engineering and related employment skills, which was relevant at that time, given the rapid growth of infrastructure activity within the resources sector and the consequent demand for engineering based labour into this sector. A number of recommendations in the 2012 report are in accordance with current Government policy, including supporting education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics and improving trade commencements and completions and these are referenced in Attachment A. The Government will also continue to seek to support all Australian students to have the opportunity to gain the skills for high-wage, high-productivity jobs of the future as well as continue to link Australia to the best talent from overseas to meet our on-going skill needs. This support includes having higher education and vocational education and training (VET) sectors that deliver quality education and skilling, and improve outcomes for students, employers and the economy. It is worth noting that some recommendations in this report have been overtaken by changed conditions across the Australian economy and other developments. For example, a combination of structural adjustment in manufacturing and a transitioning mining sector, from an investment phase to a production phase, has resulted in the softening of labour demand for some engineering professions and trades.1 These changed labour market arrangements confirm that shortages in engineering are cyclical and not chronic. Background On 7 November 2011, the Senate referred issues relating to the shortage of engineering and related employment skills for inquiry. The relevant committee was asked to examine the nexus between the demand for infrastructure delivery and the shortage of appropriate engineering and related employment skills in Australia, with particular reference to: the implications of the shortage for infrastructure delivery in terms of economic development, cost, efficiency, safety and disputation; the impact of the long-term outsourcing of engineering activities by government on skills development and retention in both the private and public sectors; options to address the skill shortage for engineers and related trades, and the effectiveness and efficiency of relevant policies both past and present; options for infrastructure delivery using alternative procurement models which aim to foster collaboration and achieve effective community outcomes, including skills development and retention; effective strategies to develop and retain engineering talent in the private and public sectors through industry training and development, at enterprise, project and whole-of-sector levels; opportunities to provide incentives to the private sector through the procurement process to undertake skills development; consequences of skills shortages in the construction sector to the public sector's capacity to effectively procure and manage infrastructure projects; and the impact of delayed and stalled infrastructure projects on economic development, workplace productivity and employment. ATTACHMENT A Recommendation Comment Recommendation 1 - The committee recommends that the Government seeks recommendations from the Chief Scientist about how it can best continue to support the development of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Australia ' s Future released. www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2014/09/professor-chubb-releases-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-australias-future Recommendation 2: The committee recommends that the government works through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) to promote STEM ability in states and territories. Addressed by the Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda [A more skilled labour force – Promoting STEM skills in schools] www.dpmc.gov.au/domestic-policy/taskforces-past-domestic-policy-initiatives/industry-innovation-and-competitiveness-agenda and the National Innovation and Science Agenda [Talent and Skills] www.innovation.gov.au/page/agenda. In December 2015, COAG Education Council agreed a National STEM School Education Strategy. www.educationcouncil.edu.au/EC-Reports-and-Publications.aspx Recommendation 3: The committee recommends that the Government requests the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency (AWPA), or a similar body, to investigate the reason why attrition rates for Vocational Education and Training (VET) courses in engineering trades are so high. Based on the findings of this study, the committee recommends that the government work with VET providers and the states and territories to improve completion rates. Addressed by the Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda [A more skilled labour force – Reforming the VET system] www.dpmc.gov.au/domestic-policy/taskforces-past-domestic-policy-initiatives/industry-innovation-and-competitiveness-agenda and the Australian Apprenticeships Support Network reform https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/australian-apprenticeship-support-network-factsheet Recommendation 4: The committee recommends that the Government considers extending funding for Government supported places to all domestic students accepted into public higher education Engineering Technology programs accredited by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. The Government currently provides subsidies to all eligible domestic students enrolled in bachelor-level courses at public universities. The Government remains committed to enhancing the quality and diversity of Australian higher education. Recommendation 5: The committee recommends that the industry committees advising universities take an active role in ensuring engineering courses are suited to industry requirements. To ensure their effectiveness, committees should include representatives with direct experience supervising and working with engineering graduates. Addressed by the National Innovation and Science Agenda [Collaboration] www.innovation.gov.au/page/agenda. Recommendation 6: The committee recommends that the Government consider creating senior technical engineering roles in the Australian Public Service. This measure would ensure that highly qualified technical engineers may continue to build upon specialist knowledge while enjoying career progression in the public sector. The Government already has considerable flexibility within existing Australian Public Service classifications to provide occupation-specific pathways. www.apsc.gov.au/publications-and-media/current-publications/aps-classification-guide Recommendation 7: The committee recommends that the Department of Finance and Deregulation reviews the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines to ensure that the government is an informed purchaser of engineering infrastructure and that appropriate advice is provided in relation to procurement decisions that require specialist technical knowledge. Since the initiation of the Senate Inquiry, the Department of Finance (Finance) has replaced the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules. Government entities are expected to be informed purchasers to ensure that they achieve value for money. Entities are expected to obtain appropriate advice, either within the organisation or from contracting expertise, in relation to procurement decisions that require specialist technical knowledge. Finance will maintain ongoing guidance on informed purchasing behaviour. Recommendation 8: The committee recommends that the Government work with states and territories through COAG to engage with engineering industry peak bodies with a view to developing measures to encourage the provision of practical, paid work experience to university students. The Australian Industry and Skills Committee (AISC) was established on 8 May 2015 www.education.gov.au/news/australian-industry-and-skills-committee-established and supported by the National Innovation and Science Agenda [Collaboration] www.innovation.gov.au/page/agenda. Recommendation 9: The committee recommends that the Government consider how it can encourage Commonwealth contractors to provide graduate and cadetship programs through its procurement processes. The Commonwealth procurement framework is principlesbased framework that implements our international trade obligation and supports a fair, efficient and transparent contracting system for the Government and its suppliers. The proposed amendment of the procurement framework to support individual programs would introduce significant red tape and costs for agencies and suppliers. For these reasons, the Government supports the development of workforces through more direct mechanisms, for example, supporting internships in STEM disciplines through the provision of at least 1200 scholarships under the Commonwealth Scholarships Program for South Australia and at least 1200 scholarships under the Rural and Regional Enterprise Scholarships Program. Recommendation 10: The committee recommends that the Government work with AWPA and employers to develop targeted policies that encourage women to remain in, or return to, the engineering workforce. Addressed by the National Innovation and Science Agenda [Talent and Skills] which acknowledges fewer than one in 10 engineering graduates are women and outlines initiatives to address this situation. www.innovation.gov.au/page/agenda Industry associations and companies are also putting strategies in place to increase participation and retention of women. For example Engineering Australia's "Women in Engineering" and global engineering company AECOM, whose 2017 graduate recruitment intake has a 50:50 gender split for the first time. www.engineersaustralia.org.au/portal/news/recognition-hitting-gender-diversity-targets AWPA closed at the end of June 2014. Its functions concerning analysis and demand for skills are undertaken across Government. The Government's commitment to 1400 industry PhD internships will focus on women and STEM and be delivered by the Australian Mathematical Science Institute. Recommendation 11: The committee recommends that the government work with AWPA to continue to develop targeted policies that encourage mature engineers to remain in or return to the workforce. The responsibilities of AWPA now rest with the Department of Education and Training. Since the report was released structural changes in the Australian economy and a slowing of mining investment has significantly impacted on the demand for engineering skills. Recommendation 12: The committee recommends that the government continues to work with the states and territories through COAG to make a national registration scheme for engineers a priority area for reform over the next decade. The Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda seeks a lower cost, business-friendly environment with less regulation, lower taxes and more competitive markets, noting occupational licensing/registration are primarily a state and territory issue. www.dpmc.gov.au/domestic-policy/taskforces-past-domestic-policy-initiatives/industry-innovation-and-competitiveness-agenda 1 Occupational skill shortages information – Engineering Professions Australia 2015-16) and Engineering Trades Australia (December quarter 2015) refer, www.employment.gov.au/occupational-skill-shortages-information