#teqsa2018 Panel Discussion: Innovation, Excellence, Diversity in a Joined Up Sector

>>ANDREW NORTON: So, Ian Solomonides from VU, is not able to attend today, so Nick Hunt has agreed to step in at extremely
short notice. So, thank you, Nick. He’s still from William Angliss Institute, as he
was this morning.>>NICHOLAS HUNT: [Laughter]. [Laughter]>>ANDREW NORTON: Sitting next to him is
Chris Gravina, who is a student at the… …completing, I think, at the Box Hill Institute, studying a diploma of sports development. Richard Speed is Pro Vice-Chancellor (Regional), at La Trobe University. And Kathleen Newcombe is CEO of the Sarina
Russo Education Group. Now this session, called joined up sector,
mainly as joining up vocational and higher education, though we might stray
to other forms of connection. Now we actually already have a reasonably joined up sector
at the institution level. About half of higher education providers are also offering vocational
education. Only 2% of RTOs are also in higher education, so they aren’t massively
into it, but the higher education sector itself, is. This year 9% of applicants for higher
education already had a vocational qualification. Getting this 9% a few times. In the AVS
Qualifications and Work Survey in 2015 about 9% of Bachelor degree holders also held a
diploma or a Certificate 3 or 4, which might have been acquired before or after their Bachelor.
And similarly again, about 9% of vocational education commencing students already have
a Bachelor degree or above. So it’s 9% is very, very common. These numbers are done on a slightly different
basis in each data set, but my reading is it’s quite possible that there are
more higher education graduates in the vocational sector than there are vocational graduates
in the higher education sector. So it’s not really in practice the kind of pathway
that we are going to talk about and normally discuss it as. We’ve heard several times in the conference
already that there are obviously very, very different funding and regulatory systems
and we’ll try and explore a bit how they affect this joined up sector. Kathleen, can I start with you and this, sort
of, idea of pathways from vocational education to higher education. I’m interested in both,
the positives for the students and also some of the potential negatives for the vocational
qualification if it’s been reinterpreted as a pathway rather than as an independent
valuable qualification in its own right.>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: Andrew, I think you characterised
the challenges in your introduction, in the sense it’s not lineal. Increasingly we’re
finding it’s about just in time education, the right education at the right time with
a focus on employment outcomes and looking at the consumer requirements and the
employers’ requirements. So there are some real challenges in terms
of the currency. And I don’t mean in terms of the in the moment,
but the currency in terms of capacity for vocational qualifications to be recognised
and valued sometimes. You know, the true value applied to them when our pathway students
go into higher education. Peter Noonan’s comments this morning about the Australian
Qualifications Framework Review are critical to this in the sense that the importance of,
of true value being attributed to those qualifications as a pathway. But I think the point equally sits the
other way, in that the way the frameworks operate. When we have students…in our
organisation we run a Masters of Professional Accounting. We have students in that course
who actually need to do basic bookkeeping in a vocational programme because really,
to get their first job sometimes it is a very entry level job and that’s what they
need to do. So the capacity for a vocational provider
to indeed recognise and give any RPL or any sort of credit out of the
Masters of Professional Accounting when the tight training package requirements are so
rigid is equally a barrier. So there’s barriers both ways which we are constantly dealing
with and so taking ourselves out…you know, we’re sitting here as providers thinking
about lineal movement backwards and forwards, but if you are the consumer or the employer
sitting outside that, that’s not of interest to them. They don’t want to understand what
those barriers are. They want to understand how they get the right skills at the right
time and to get the benefit of recognition for what they have achieved in its entirety.>>ANDREW NORTON: So is this a common issue
where the qualifications don’t neatly match the occupations? The whole panel… Sounds
like in accounting, you need this very basic bookkeeping as well as the higher level
skills and is this true in other fields?>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: Or if you’re doing
tourism and hospitality management you need to do your RSA, responsible service of alcohol,
and at the moment under the current CRICOS rules you’re not allowed to. So there are
barriers that we put in place through regulatory frameworks which actually inhibit
international students, for example, being able to do their work integrated learning
and internship and it’s an unintended consequence, I suggest, but it’s a thing
we need to fix, because it is an inhibitor.>>RICHARD SPEED: After you.>>NICHOLAS HUNT: I was just going to say,
Andrew, it’s all about what the selection and what the students are interested
in doing and we talk about pathways, but we really should be talking about really deeply
entrenched train tracks, rather than a more, sort of, broader plain. Because the
students will just say, look, I want some of that and I want some of that and where
I’m going to go to work I’ve been told I need to do that. So often that doesn’t reflect
the educational mix that the educational providers are putting in front of them. So, it is important that I think we’re
very conscious of what’s happening in change, we’re talking about compliance, talking
about getting a start, every students come with different skills and experience and so
therefore the value add as education providers that we can provide to them will differ. And
often that’s not necessarily structured in the same way that the AQF and
the certification and programmes are designed.>>RICHARD SPEED: I think
the point about university students benefitting from VET qualifications is a very strong
one. And it is very difficult. I mean, once you’ve got the, the kind of single shop
rule that we have around funding that you find that some of the students
are able to get funded to do, let’s say a package in blood collection.
So as part of their nursing course some of our students we funded, some of them weren’t. But the benefits of the VET qualifications,
once you recognise that you’re dealing with a cohort of students at university who
have to go out and earn. Those students, you know, don’t get employability benefits
from university subjects, but they can get them directly from TAFE qualifications and
VET qualifications. So, you know, I mean, this whole idea of micro-credentials is actually
already out there. If we think of pulling VET training packages into degrees to give
people the ability to go out and earn more.>>ANDREW NORTON: And is that a state government
policy issue around the funding of the vocational qualifications?>>RICHARD SPEED: We do a lot of work
in partnership with TAFEs. Andrew Harvey mentioned in the last session about this. Franz Beckenbauer, the famous German football manager
once commented on a German defeat by saying that you can put the entire team in a bag
and hit the bag and it didn’t matter who got hurt. That’s kind of my feeling
about funding arrangements. Put it this way, if it’s not one level of government
making it difficult, it’s the other one. [Laughter]>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: But I…on the funding
arrangements, the issue also is… …I totally support, you know, the…it’s quite dysfunctional, because it varies so much across, but one of the challenges
is price is often used as a lever for volume and governments use pricing, and I’m going
to use that term, pricing, as a lever. And, and so we see people flooding in directions
because of a… I’m going to use a term, a fee-free course, because as a private provider
I’ll be in serious trouble if I’d say that my courses are free. But let me just
leave it there. And, we’re using pricing as
a lever to direct people in certain directions and so it is of significant consequence as
well as to the providers and how we access those programmes and how our clients
do. But it’s also a community issue, because we are directing people based on fees.>>ANDREW NORTON: Chris, you’ve said
you just completed this diploma of sport development. Now you want to be a teacher, which is going
to require a university degree. Could I ask, what was that your original goal or
was that something you decided on while you were doing your diploma?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: I previously just completed my diploma, but prior to that I was looking to go study in the
[unclear] College, still with the teaching in mind, but didn’t really have
a thought of TAFE at all. TAFE was just, sort of, down here and the back up… Well,
not, sorry, not a back up, university was the back up and TAFE was really just,
just, don’t know… It wasn’t even in the picture. So I did have the teaching
in mind. The way I got to TAFE was my best
mate was signing up to do Business Admin at Box Hill Institute and he goes, oh,
do you want to come, you know, come for lunch and, umm, you know. Just sign up with
me and, you know, just wait around, that sort of thing. So I said, yeah, I’ll come, you
know, wait till he does the testing. I was sitting around bored on my phone and I thought,
might as well, you know, make my time useful, so I asked some questions about
what sort of sport subjects, sport diplomas they have and what they
offer and Diploma in Sport Development was really what I wanted. So, still in the mindset of teaching, I was told that some units will transfer, which didn’t end up happening,
but I look back at the big picture and the amount of industry experience I got and what
I learned at TAFE this year was huge. Recently being part of the world
conference, the leadership camp, travelling to Canada for three weeks. We were part of the study abroad programme, so, yeah, it’s been great and still
next year looking to do teaching. That’s my answer [?] [overtalking].>>ANDREW NORTON: So, have you used your
vocational education in applying for teaching or…>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, definitely, I’ve
been doing some work done out at my old high school. Just been doing
a lot of work there and still with the goal of teaching.>>ANDREW NORTON: So, do you feel that
the sector has been joined up from your perspective, that it’s kind of…it’s going
to be a relatively smooth transition from your diploma into a Bachelor?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, definitely. I
just think…>>ANDREW NORTON: I should ask you this in
12 months maybe, but…>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, [laughter]. Oh, I’ve
felt like I’ve learned a lot of more… a lot more people… a lot of people skills with regards to, you know, being in the industry, whereas
I felt like if I didn’t got to TAFE this year, I just wouldn’t know how to approach
things. Stuff like LinkedIn has been a really big thing and
I had no idea before TAFE. So, yeah. I think I’m ready for next year, hopefully.>>ANDREW NORTON: Great. And Richard, you,
you kind of alluded to some issues that you�ve had trying to run vocational and higher
education courses together. Would you like to elaborate further on that? Because
presumably it has…there are lessons there for other people in the room.>>RICHARD SPEED: Yeah, for those
who don’t know, we ran what we called dual enrolment programmes with a range
of the regional TAFEs that we’re co-located with. And the idea
of that was that students were simultaneously enrolling in a university degree and a TAFE
diploma and the two mapped across onto each other. That meant that we were dealing with federal funding for the higher education component, VET funding for the vocational
component. We had to reconcile two financial systems, between institutions. We had
to satisfy two funding bodies on how this worked and just to bring TEQSA into
the picture, we found ourselves confronted by the opt-in, opt-out ruling around nested
programmes. So the objective of these programmes was to
drive up the proportion of students in… And they were in nursing, community services
and early childhood. It was to drive up the number moving through to degree level qualifications
and it worked. We went from about 5% transfers from TAFE nursing to university
nursing under a standard articulation model, to about 30% coming across. Now this is in towns that have chronic shortages
of nurses at both levels. So, it worked. But we found ourselves
in a situation with nursing where, because of the way it was structured, it was technically, let me get this the right way around, an opt-out qualification, which meant that
the TAFE was teaching at AQF Level 5, but it was being judged as Level 8. So we
then found ourselves in a situation where for AQF+1 the TAFE tutors all had
to up-skill and those skills are not available in these communities. Now it’s an unforseen consequence of the
way those rules work, but, you know, that’s the kind of thing where we suddenly found
ourselves dealing with this stuff and it really is difficult for our compliance
people to…relax…to be confident about doing something innovative
if you are in this…in this…in the current system that we have. So, it’s difficult. We’ve had
to pull the pin on that arrangement because of the changes to
CSP funding and so on and we’re going back to an articulation model that we’re trying to make sure that the benefits that allowed people
to come across are still there. But at the moment they’re not funded. But that experience of two governments, two
regulatory agencies, throw in some professional regulators with their own views on who
should be doing what, makes for a massive amount of transaction cost. I’m sorry, that
was very long-winded explanation, but…>>ANDREW NORTON: Kathleen, do you have similar
issues with…>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: I would just echo. I think it’s across public and private sector, these same issues,
because we are working in environments where we’re a single tertiary sector. We’re
a post-secondary sector, we’re supporting people whether…there are very few university degrees which aren’t vocational in some nature. You know,
they have a job or they have a career outcome as part of it and their capacity to be able
to join up those and the type of regulatory limitations… And sometimes I think it’s right, it’s the risk-averse nature of the institutions, because we’re so fearful.
Everyone wants to do the right thing, we’re focused on quality, we want to deliver, and
so we have multiple Masters. We have the customer which might be the employer and the student
or the industry association, and we have our, our regulators as well. So, it, it is a very difficult area to navigate
and I guess communication is, you know, is one of the big things there because
often these things are new and emerging. They weren’t contemplated when the legislation
was first established. So as we move forward… I was at a skill summit yesterday. In fact,
Professor Coaldrake spoke at that skill summit in Queensland about the nature of the
future. And, you know, increasingly there are future jobs that aren’t going
to require degrees, but they’re high level, but they’re not at what we would consider
the AQF level…>>ANDREW NORTON: Thank you.>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: For a degree in, you
know… So people are telling me…Dr Kathryn Ball talking about Certificate
4 in Cyber Security is all you need to be working in that space. So it’s a changing environment and the lack of joining up of those two regulators
I think is part of it. A single regulatory environment for post-secondary would certainly
be a mechanism to more seamlessly navigate it.>>NICHOLAS HUNT: Just a comment on that, Andrew,
just to take it further. Often in these forums we talk about the parody of esteem
between higher education sector and the vocational education sector. That gets rebalanced really,
really quickly, when you have a student or someone from industry looking to get a certain collection of skills to secure either further advancement in their own workplace
or another opportunity. So there’s that, sort of, you know, need that drives
off on the choices, but I think the education sector sometimes gets a little bit too lost
in some of the language around how it should be managed or administrated. And I think that’s where we need
to, I think, as an educational, tertiary education offerer, really think
more closely about how that’s being presented to those who are wanting to engage in
the system. So it is totally seamless, it’s not just a pathway, but a lot of our language
is linear. A lot of our process is linear, but when you actually talk to the people working
between institutions for the students who are interested, it works pretty well in the
end. There’s just a lot of back-end rubbish that could be tidied up a bit.>>ANDREW NORTON: I want to talk about how
this is perceived by students. Chris, you seem to have some slightly unusual overseas study ideas when you were at school. But how were these options presented
to your class mates? You know, you kind of suggested that TAFE was barely
even mentioned, is that right?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, it wasn’t…
A lot of the open days, we just had at universities, and a lot of the talks
we had during the senior years of high school was mainly just university, so, of course it’s a major option for a lot of students, but
I felt like TAFE was sort of left out and looked upon as a lower level. Whereas I had that feeling, going into post-secondary TAFE is sort of down
here, but not with the realisation of the opportunities it’s given me, so I feel like
it does need to be recognised more. Now after speaking to students at my
old high school and talking to them about options and
saying that TAFE is an option, it doesn’t have to be your last option. So, yeah,
I feel like it should be recognised a little bit more.>>ANDREW NORTON: Did you observe any cost
differences between TAFE and higher education? Because the fee market is very messy
in vocational education. Did you…>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, two answers to
that. Firstly, with my course this year I’d say it was fairly lower than
my university course will be next year. But then, in saying that, I declined enrolling in next year’s Cert 3 for fitness… It was a two week programme asking for three to four grand up front. So, financially it was lower, but in
saying that, some courses are and some…>>ANDREW NORTON: So, would you have done it
if there hadn’t been an upfront charge?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Sorry?>>ANDREW NORTON: Would you have done that
if there was a loan available?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: I would have reconsidered
it.>>ANDREW NORTON: Yeah.>>CHRIS GRAVINA: I wouldn’t have been,
whereas because it was a sort of, HECS fee this year, didn’t have
to worry about it, whereas if it was upfront it would have been a lot different.>>ANDREW NORTON: Kathleen, is this a problem
that there are courses that receive no loans or receive inadequate loans in the
vocational system? Is this something that affects students?>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: It does, as I said,
there’s the multi-layered impact of funding in the vocational and training
sector. So at the Certificate 3, or even at the foundation skills level for enabling skills,
state government funding is available, but as was pointed out earlier, it’s
often, not always and exclusively, but it’s often a once-off opportunity. When
you’ve used you Certificate 3 guarantee funding, you’ve used it and unless
there is a particularly compelling proposition… And, of course, decisions are made, industries
change and those arguments can be put forward. So that drives a lot of people to that,
I’m going to say, that lower end. And, please, that’s not a value judgment, around those
entry level roles. Whereas, at the diploma level, the fact that only certain courses
are approved for VET student loans now, there is the premium on those loans, which [overtalking]…>>ANDREW NORTON: We’ve heard about, yeah.>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: Debate separately.>>ANDREW NORTON: Yeah, yeah.>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: …does have
an impact. But, interestingly, what we’re finding increasingly is the willingness
of people to engage in fee-for-service because it can be a more flexible
option for them. And so, I think one of the things that
we’re sitting in this room, talking about funding, but the amount of training that is
actually happening outside the Australian Qualifications Framework, is extraordinary
and growing and people are paying for the privilege. So I think as providers we have
to understand what is driving people in that direction in terms of choice. Is funding part
of it? And is it choice in structure? And, the nature and the flexibility
of those qualifications also are also a drivers. So it’s a very, very multi-faceted
answer. I’m sorry, but I think they’re all factors.>>ANDREW NORTON: Factors. Got plenty of questions.
I’ll ask one more before we go to those questions, which is, should we do
more to alert people to the articulation into vocational education or one of these
other qualifications than we do in higher education? That if you go to a lot of the
upper level vocational qualifications it’ll clearly state what Bachelor degree you can
go to or what kind of Bachelor degree. I don’t think I’ve ever seen something equivalent on a higher education course. Should we have that?>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: Should we have it? I
think it goes back to Chris’s comment around the fact that vocational educational and training
branding at the moment probably wouldn’t be perceived as being the next step.
I think it’s a branding issue as much as anything. But the real opportunities are around
identifying these as career readiness or career development skills, etc,
and where possible, engaging with those through the university process to introduce it as was attempted, so admirably, as something which sits alongside with equal
standard, equal footing and equal value.>>ANDREW NORTON: Right.>>RICHARD SPEED: Yeah, it’s a really…
that’s a really interesting idea, actually. Certainly, if I was working for a
dual sector university, I would be going back to the office after this session and
coming up with the idea of ‘want to enhance the impact of your qualification,
consider this VET skill, VET programme that will complement it’. So not
necessarily the kind of, this leads to that, but this adds value to this and I think that’s
where there’s a game to be played. And I shall do that very shortly. [Laughter].>>ANDREW NORTON: Might go to audience
questions. There’s one for you, Chris. Did you have the opportunity to share any
learning experience with the uni students and if not, do you think this would be a valuable
experience for university and TAFE students to study and learn together?>>CHRIS GRAVINA: So I haven’t
specifically gone to any universities or… …I’ve spoken to friends about my experience…what the question’s gone. What was the second part, sorry?>>ANDREW NORTON: I think whether we’re going
to benefit working together [overtalking].>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Oh, benefits, yeah. I think
it would great to have this sort of experience in the industry and having
opportunities to go out and work in your field while still learning in lectures. So I think combining it would be great, if that can work. So I know there is in some courses minimal or a level of industry in your…experience in your
industry, but I think it would be great to lift that level.>>ANDREW NORTON: There’s a question here
about the course content relationship between vocational and higher education, which is,
is there a partnership between TAFE or other providers and universities that ensures
the universities’ course contents are in synch with the TAFEs’ course contents? To
what extent does this go on, where we’re actually coordinating the course in some detail?
Does that happen at all?>>RICHARD SPEED: [Overtalking].>>NICHOLAS HUNT: That does for us, because
we offer higher education as well as a vocational education as part of our educational
programmes and there’s a high level of exchange, looking at those pathways, looking at
the needs of the students as they progress through the AQF. And so, for example, culinary
where you go from hands on the pans and the knives and things through to culinary management,
understanding, all of those broader management principles and there’s a high level of integration. And we make sure that there is the right mix
as we do as best as we can, we’re looking to continually improve of course about embedding
an applied focus across all of those programmes. And a structure which drives a strong
dialogue between the educators in both our higher education area and the vocational
education area is key to that success.>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: In our institution, and we’re a VET provider, we’re a higher education provider in our own right
and we also act as a third party provider for a public university. We do, in fact,
engage our lecturers out of the university programmes in the design and development of
the VET programmes. So it’s a little bit more of a one-way, but
we want to optimise the learning opportunities. But we do certainly, have that co-design
model which just supports so that students aren’t getting to that point where
we hear sometimes, look, I’ve done this before and I’m having to repeat it. So the
idea is that it is a more seamless and less repetition and wastage
in the pathway.>>ANDREW NORTON: I’ve got a couple of questions mentioning the voice of industry and the role of industry. Is this an issue that
there…is there a lack of consultation with the industry? I wouldn’t have thought so,
but as…or is higher education worse than vocational education on this? Do the panel
have views on the role of industry?>>RICHARD SPEED: Oh, look, I mean, we’re currently working on a couple of projects with the TAFE sector where the first phase of that has been some really deep engagement with
industry. Now, I think in terms of establishing demand, establishing needs,
talking about content and so on, that’s somewhere where it’s pretty straight
forward to advance the industry engagement. I guess the challenge
always is that in trying to implement what industry’s asking for you finish up again
tripping all over these regulatory and sector-specific issues.
So, I mean, I agree the voice of industry is missing, but frankly, if I invited our
industry partners in to join in the kind of discussions we have to have, I would burn,
you know, all of the goodwill that we have with these people right from the start.>>ANDREW NORTON: [Laughter].>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: I think there’s
two issues in the VET space. I think the recent estimate is it takes about six years
to get a training package from beginning to fully developed and out into market.
So the concept of being able to deliver in the accredited space in the VET.
Now that’s a statistic which Minister Shannon Fentiman shared with me.
So I can’t state the source of that, but the other is that if, as a
private higher education provider, if you are not self-accrediting, the timeframes for
a product to be taken to market is significant and the industry’s requirements are usually
immediate or, in fact, you know, yesterday. So, it’s a challenge to, other than if you are using existing product and working with that, to get anything
new into market is a very time consuming exercise.>>ANDREW NORTON: Is this one of the things
driving the micro-credentials and other forms of alternative education?>>KATHLEEN NEWCOMBE: Well, I think I would
say yes and I think the other thing it’s driving is the fact that people are moving
outside the accredited space and they’re seeking industry qualifications.
And we saw the rise of that over the last decade in project management with standards
and groups and we saw it previously with Microsoft credentialing, etc. You know, industry
developing its own standards as well, so I think it’s a combination of
industry and industry driving its own solutions, but equally, the capacity to be able
to do… And, and I’m sure there’s Deakin representatives here in the room. I think some fabulous things that I
see… I’m sure there’s other universities doing, that Deakin really taking what I call
recognition of prior learning in the VET space and applying it into the higher education
space. Those, sort of, flexible options of recognising real-life experience and
managing credentials around learned experiences.>>ANDREW NORTON: I’ve got a question from
someone who’s doing a Bachelor degree at a TAFE who says it tends to get looked
down upon even though it is a recognised degree in the same way that all other Bachelor
degrees are recognised. How does the panel think this can be improved from being looked
down upon as a last option to a normal academic choice? Chris, do you want to…>>CHRIS GRAVINA: Yeah, from my personal
experience, as I mentioned, I think just being more recognised,
being more promoted at schools. As I previously mentioned, there was no one
coming out from Box Hill, no one coming out from Holmesglen, no one speaking to us
and saying, hey, TAFE is an option. It was more, you know, as the backdrop,
so… Yeah, it just needs to be more, more spoken about in schools and publicly.>>ANDREW NORTON: This is overlapping with
some earlier sessions, but what hope is there that the AQF Review and the Provider
Category Reviews will help sort out some of these issues, particularly if they flow through
to funding? Do you hold out hope?>>RICHARD SPEED: I’ll be the cynic
on the panel today. I think the point you made earlier about the
fact that the legislation and, you know, a lot of the guidance is… It takes
a long time to flow through to action, is an important one. I think if we can get
the, you know, through the various reviews that are going on… If we can almost, kind
of, carve out a area where it’s okay to innovate and it’s okay to ask for advice,
as opposed to act and then if you like, have to deal with the consequences retrospectively, I think that would be a major step forward. It’s almost… It’s not quite
a get out of jail card, but, you know, again, the idea that you could actually have
an agreement that this is a pilot, we will test it, we will see what happens and then, you know, if it works, we’ll take that evidence and use it into a, sort of, more
permanent part of the system. I would hope that would be an outcome from some of this.>>NICHOLAS HUNT: What’s interesting
is the focus of the landscape of the debate. We’re talking about 160, 170 providers.
If you’re within the TEQSA frame, you drop to the ASQA frame and there’s thousands.>>ANDREW NORTON: Thousands.>>RICHARD SPEED: Umm.>>NICHOLAS HUNT: And for those that
are bridging within that, there’s… It would be wonderful to have a particular
tertiary view and a particular tertiary vision which might help stitch up some of those differences
between the way in which state jurisdictions interpret things and where the
Commonwealth come in over the top. I mean, maybe that’s a hope beyond all hope, but
I think that we certainly should be having some discussion around that. I think
the AQF is something that we all, kind of, get. And those improvements that I think
will assist, but it’s the separation through regulation, which I think is entrenching some
of the challenges that are really the parts that all of the providers in the
space are really dealing with.>>ANDREW NORTON: So I think we’re headed
towards many reviews, you’ve got to look at this, which will, I think, address
the themes in this conference. We’re also headed towards lunch, so I will thank the
panel and hand back to Deb.>>DEB: Thank you. [Applause]

Danny Hutson

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *