Debated in Parliament on 11 Jul 2016.
Mr Desmond Choo asked the Acting Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (a) how are private Continuing Education and Training (CET) Centres contributing to SkillsFuture initiatives; and (b) whether there are plans to expand Earn and Learn Programmes to private CET Centres beyond Polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education.
Mdm Speaker, maybe let me take a step back in answering this question, which is that MOE and MOM are in the process of restructuring the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) into what we call SkillsFuture Singapore, which will then come under MOE.
There is significance in this change with regard to our understanding of SkillsFuture and it is this: the work done by WDA on Continuing Education and Training and, before that, the Skills Redevelopment Programme, provided the foundation for SkillsFuture today.
It was WDA which set up the CET Centres, funded and supported them, made them publicly accessible, so that workers are empowered to sign up for training and benefit from Government subsidy directly. The philosophy that each of us is responsible and empowered to take charge of our lifelong learning continues to underpin SkillsFuture. Today, the funding and support for CET Centres remain substantial.
CET Centres must, therefore, continue to be an integral part of SkillsFuture. We must ensure they remain publicly accessible, deliver courses that are relevant to industries and offer progression pathways.
From a policy perspective, CET Centres can deliver the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programmes (ELPs) so long as they have the capability and willingness to do so and the industry recognises and supports the programmes. Centres, such as SEED and the Lithan Academy, already offer work-study training programmes that predate and are broadly similar to the ELPs in terms of funding, delivery, structure and industry acceptance. They are designed to help mid-career individuals and include features tailored to facilitating career switches. I will be happy to align the branding of these programmes with the ELPs.
Madam, I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Just one supplementary question. With the Government going towards industry transformation projects, how would the current suite of CET Centres meet the aggregated and differentiated demand and needs of workers, especially existing workers in the workforce?
We started maybe 10-12 years ago with one or two CET Centres. Today, we have 41, I believe. We started one or two ELPs. Last year, we started about 15. This year, we are aiming for 20 ELPs. The system is always expanding every year. Throughout these 10-12 years of this work, we went through a Global Financial Crisis. We set up CET Centres and rolled out programmes that were needed by workers at that point in time. Should we enter a new phase where we have older PMEs or other vulnerable workers that require help, certainly, we have to set up CET Centres and ELPs that will cater to their needs. This will have to be a tripartite effort.
Will the Ministry be open to include non-CET Centres, such as private companies or organisations that provide skills training in areas, such as sports or the arts? For example, you can have a company that deals with football but they have certification courses in football refereeing that may provide opportunities for those who are seeking a second career to be referees in that sport, for instance. Can they be included under SkillsFuture?
SkillsFuture is really an inclusive concept. Everything can be included under SkillsFuture. I think maybe the differentiation the Member wants to make is not so much between companies or non-companies because even CET Centres are companies – they are training providers. But maybe what the Member is referring to are employers or non-employers. We do support employers because some of their workers are vulnerable or they are trying to raise their productivity. So, as part of SkillsFuture, we can support them – to raise the capabilities of their workers.
But there are also other employers who are trying to provide training for the entire industry and we have them. For example, Ascott has been providing training for the entire hotel industry. In those cases, we have to ask them to set up a separate entity, negotiate the terms so that it continues to be open, accessible to the entire industry. And the entire industry must also be comfortable – that I am sending my workers to a particular company, maybe my competitor, for training. I think industry players have to start working together to raise the standard of the industry overall.
PAPERCUTS