Recent changes in VET: ANTA's abolition; proposed new arrangements; continuing puzzles

During 2004, the Australian Federal Government announced its intention to make major changes to the arrangements for managing vocational education and training (VET) in Australia. These changes included the abolition of the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA) on 30 June 2005, a substantially enhanced role for the Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST), the establishment of 24 Australian Technical Colleges (ATCs) from the beginning of 2006, funding to establish an Institute for Trade Skill Excellence, with 'shareholders' to include the Australian...  [+] Show more

During 2004, the Australian Federal Government announced its intention to make major changes to the arrangements for managing vocational education and training (VET) in Australia. These changes included the abolition of the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA) on 30 June 2005, a substantially enhanced role for the Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST), the establishment of 24 Australian Technical Colleges (ATCs) from the beginning of 2006, funding to establish an Institute for Trade Skill Excellence, with 'shareholders' to include the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Australian Industry Group, the Business Council of Australia, and the National Farmers Federation, and downgrading of the union contribution to VET policy and implementation. This working paper considers the implications of these changes for the management of VET in Australia. It is divided into five sections. A brief introduction describes the main changes and the current arrangements. The next section investigates various implications for the intergovernmental management of VET, for relations between Federal and State/Territory governments, for the regional VET arrangements which have been developing over recent years, and for the relations between the VET systems in different States and Territories (where substantially closer alignment has resulted from ANTA's past activity). The following section looks at various other implications, including the balance between: public and private VET, between VET and other sectors of education; educational and industry interests; employer and employee organisations; and VET and other providers of education and training. The final section contains five comments, recognising that in mid-June 2005 when the paper was completed, the full impact of the changes was not fully apparent. First, the author comments that the changes provide an opportunity for improvements in VET. Secondly, the new arrangements place increased responsibilities on the Commonwealth and DEST in particular. Thirdly, developments so far raise the issue of the process by which the Commonwealth is intending to proceed. Fourthly, it is important to ensure that the progress recently made in VET is not sacrificed unnecessarily. Fifthly, the author suggests that 'disentangling the influence of changing interests, institutions and ideas in this area is not easy. So far the Commonwealth's approach is hard to understand in terms of any genuine desire to improve outcomes in VET; perhaps it is better understood as (the only partially resolved) interim consequence of a clash of interests, ideologies and individuals'.