Ms LEY (Farrer—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (12:23): I'm pleased to rise today to speak on vocational education and training. I do so as a product of Australia's vocational education and training system. As I've said before in this place, skills policy is personal for me. In fact, I found the title of the minister's statement quite curious. The first word, 'Revitalise', is, as to be expected with the Albanese government, quite the loaded word. Turning to the ever-trusty Oxford dictionary, we see 'revitalise' is a verb—a doing word, for those children watching outside. It's a verb that means 'to imbue something with new life and vitality'. The Minister for Skills and Training has come into this place and immediately asserted that he has revitalised the skills sector. It may appear as though this is a mere rhetorical flourish from the minister and his team of advisers, who, no doubt, pored over the wording of the statement, but it is so much more than that. This is an assertion of impact—an assertion that the actions this Labor government has taken have injected our skills sector with new life and vitality. I have to say my scepticism levels are high when such bold claims are made by the Labor Party. We should not forget the record of the Labor Party when it comes to skills. When they were last in government, everything the Labor Party touched on skills was made worse. When last in government, Labor delivered systemwide policy failures. Apprenticeship numbers took a nosedive. When Labor last left office, apprentice and trainee numbers were in freefall, with the number in training collapsing by 22 per cent, or 111,000 people, between June 2012 and June 2013. This was a direct result of funding cuts by the Gillard Labor government in 2012. They oversaw widespread rorting of training incentive payments that were supposed to help apprentices gain skills but instead just subsidised existing workers' salaries. Labor's VET FEE-HELP disaster saw the reputation of the Australian skills system hit rock bottom, as tens of thousands of Australians were loaded up with debt for doing courses that would never land them a job. The taxpayer is still picking up the tab for this enormous public policy failure, which is now over $3.3 billion. The scheme, established by the Labor government in 2008 and expanded in 2012, was plagued by systemwide rorting, with some training providers exploiting loose rules and charging students— Mr O'Connor: Ninety-five per cent happened under the coalition government. Mr Ted O'Bri en: We were silent during your speech. Show the same respect. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Goodenough ): Order! The minister is warned. Ms LEY: The scheme, established by the Labor government in 2008 and expanded in 2012, was plagued by systemwide rorting, with some training providers exploiting loose rules and charging students substantial debts for training they never undertook or benefited from. It also targeted people with disabilities and substance abuse issues, public housing residents, those from non-English-speaking backgrounds and others, with offers of free laptops and incentives like that. Unfortunately the minister who presided over all of these failures was none other than the former, and now returned, skills minister, the member for Gorton. So I am very wary of claims of revitalisation because we pay on the receipts, not the claims. Today I have to temper the soaring assertion of the minister in his effort to claim the mantle as the saviour of Australia's skills system. Skills is such a critical area of public policy, and I stand by our record in government. We handed the Albanese government a skills and training system not just trending up but powering ahead on the back of record investments guaranteed by a strong economy. Our policies invested over $1.3 billion in skills over the past two years alone. That is a fact. We didn't just clean up Labor's mess; we made the most significant reforms to Aussie skills in over a decade. Guided by an expert review, we commissioned the Joyce review. We got on with bringing our skills system into the 21st century. We overhauled and put in place industry led clusters to speed up qualification development so our skills system could keep up with the evolving needs of our modern economy. We established the National Skills Commission to provide evidence based leadership on the skills we need for our workforce today, tomorrow and into the future. We reformed and increased training incentives, through our new apprenticeship incentive system, including the introduction of direct payments to apprentices to see them through their studies and into a job. Our policy settings got apprentice numbers to record levels. We supercharged incentives for apprentices, which saw the number of trade apprentices in training hit record highs around the time of the last federal election. The National Centre for Vocational Education Research found that trade apprenticeships hit a new record high in June 2022. That research shows there were 415,240 apprentices and trainees in training at 30 June 2022. That is 21.6 per cent higher than at the same time in 2021. We did all of this while saving a generation of Australian workers from the biggest hit to Australia's workforce since the great depression. In contrast, the Labor Party promised a skills revolution but hasn't even delivered a skills renovation. Labor have either rebranded our programs—as is the case with JobTrainer, to fee-free TAFE, and with the National Skills Commission, to Jobs and Skills Australia—or adopted our policies wholesale, like the Australian apprenticeship support loans. I do not mind the government doing a bit of rebranding, a bit of a paint job, to make it look like they've overhauled the joint, but that's not revitalising; it's remodelling. I can understand why they do not want to overhaul the system, because the coalition's strong record is one to stand on. But sadly they have not stopped at repackaging our policies. This government is making decisions that are not good for the skills system. I was disappointed that one of the first actions this new government took in skills was to rip skills policy out of the Department of Education and put it in the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. Instead of trying to bring universities and vocational education closer together, this government pulled them further apart, and how you structure the bureaucracy has real consequences. At every single opportunity, whether it is Jobs and Skills Australia or the Jobs and Skills Councils, this government has created taxpayer funded seats at the table for their union mates. Today we've seen the minister make a virtue out of it. At least they're honest about their intentions. Further, against the advice of the skills sector and the opposition, the government charged ahead with its TAFE-only approach. I have heard that they've quietly changed that behind the scenes, but there's a clear preference and policy for an almost entirely TAFE-only allocation of skills funding. This is concerning, as I've said before. The minister has repeatedly touted the fast rollout of fee-free TAFE places and the fact that enrolments have reached over 200,000 the first six months. Sadly the reality is that, on the current trend, one in two of those who take up these opportunities will not complete their qualification. This is simply not good enough, and I would prefer we focus on funding courses and pathways across the skills system that deliver outcomes, not just talking points. Given not all training providers or training approaches see such low completions, a TAFE-only approach is wasteful. I'm sure the minister and all those in this place would agree with me in saying these sorts of completion rates are not acceptable. The government can highlight the take-up of these new courses, but, unless we get those students through to completion, they will not see the benefit of a new career and our economy will miss out on them joining the workforce. Having said that, we will always support the role of TAFE. We want to see TAFE stronger and delivering better outcomes, but we will only get there if we ask the hard questions and face up to the reality of the challenges in our skills system. On the topic of TAFE and revitalisation, I want address something those opposite have spun for far too long. Time and time again, the Labor Party has falsely claimed that we underfunded TAFE when we were in government, and that's just not the case. Vocational education and training is a shared responsibility between the Commonwealth and the state and territory governments. State and territory governments are responsible for running their own training systems, and they have discretion over how much government funding is provided to TAFE and other training providers. For example, in the 2022-23 financial year, the Commonwealth provided the states and territories with $1.61 billion through the National Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development. That funding was guaranteed and grew each year of the coalition government. The change in government to Labor did not change that. Right now, they're using the same agreement and the same funding levels that we put in place. The fact is that when Labor came in they did not change that recurring funding; they just topped it up with fee-free TAFE courses. In fact, Labor's fee-free TAFE policy kicks in less money than we did through our $2 billion JobTrainer Fund, which was jointly funded by the Commonwealth and the states. Indeed, under JobTrainer, almost half of all enrolments were with TAFE and other public providers, but it supported the whole skills system, not just one-quarter of it. Under the Albanese government, we have essentially the same level of base funding through the National Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development as when the coalition was in government. We now also have less money going to the fee-free TAFE program, compared to JobTrainer. In conclusion, I return to the theme of this statement and note that, while those opposite can claim all they like to have revitalised the VET sector, we know that all they have done is rebrand and remodel. I thank members opposite for keeping the substance of the coalition's approach, because it will make it much more straightforward for us when we return to government.