Senator CROWLEY —My question is addressed to Senator Vanstone, Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. My question relates to recent comments on the Commonwealth's new appren ticeship scheme by the Victorian Minister for Tertiary Education and Training, Mr Phil Honeywood. Are you aware, Minister, that Mr Honeywood has stated:

The coalition's recent announcement of 220,000 new apprenticeships and traineeships is so poorly designed it might force the government into setting up a higher education contribution scheme for TAFE.

And that:

The scheme is unlikely to have a significant impact in Victoria because there are no funds to create TAFE places.

Given these strong statements by your Liberal colleague in Victoria, what actions will you take to protect the quality of TAFE services and to ensure adequate funding for the much heralded new apprenticeship scheme?

Senator VANSTONE —I thank Senator Crowley for the question. Senator Crowley, your question relates very closely to the question that Senator Carr has asked—

Senator Carr —What a surprise!

Senator VANSTONE —Yes, what a surprise; you often do not manage to have a coordinated approach. I think that the answers that I have given to him are very applicable to this. You see, we are in the middle of renegotiating the Australian National Training Authority agreement. That very much relates to VET funding for the states.

There is a lot of positioning going on by the states at the moment—and I probably would be doing the same if I were a state minister—obviously seeking to maximise the opportunities for funding from the Commonwealth. What the Commonwealth has said to the states—and we have made this offer—is that we will maintain funding in real terms for five years, but they have got to find efficiencies. We have indicated that those efficiencies should be put into extra places.

All you are seeing, Senator Crowley, is the same as I told Senator Carr that he was seeing: negotiating and repositioning by the states—in this case Minister Honeywood, an excellent minister who is very keen on more vocational training in schools, who has put more vocational—

Senator Carr —He speaks highly of you as well!

Senator VANSTONE —That is pleasing to know, Senator. Thank you very much. He is keen to put more vocational training back into schools and to ensure that that vocational training is not a lock-off—that is, that people are not locked off from a higher education and can move on, for example, to university. He is doing an excellent job. But, as any state minister would be doing, he is trying to renegotiate and get more money from the Commonwealth. It is as simple as that. We are in negotiations with the states and, when they are resolved, everybody will know about it.

Senator CROWLEY —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I am sure that Mr Honeywood will be pleased to know that what he is doing is merely positioning.   Are you aware, Minister, that Mr Honeywood has also said that Dr Kemp is more interested in his profile than in solving youth unemployment, and that:

At the end of the day unfortunately David is so hooked on his national profile and gaining the kudos for the federal government for its training reforms that he completely ignores his responsibilities.

Given this breakdown in trust—which is more than positioning, Minister—between the states and Dr Kemp, will you discipline your junior minister to ensure that he keeps his eye on the ball and not on his personal promotion?

Senator VANSTONE —Senator, I am not aware of those remarks by Mr Honeywood. I must say they seem most out of character to me.

Senator Carr interjecting—

The PRESIDENT —Senator Carr, cease interjecting.

Senator VANSTONE —Phil Honeywood is not the sort of person or minister to play the person rather than the ball, and those remarks therefore come as a surprise to me. I do not see a need to discipline Dr Kemp. He is focused very much on the job. I would never have described Dr Kemp as someone who was seeking to promote his personal profile in any way whatsoever. He is very much a minister who focuses on getting the job done.

Obviously, in this repositioning between the states, every now and then there is a little bit of hot air one way or another, but I would not put too much on it, if I were you.

Senator CROWLEY —Which of your comments is hot air, Minister?

Senator VANSTONE —Senator, if you wanted to answer the question yourself you should have stayed in government and been on this side. I am simply indicating to you that, in the renegotiations, often things are said, and you do not want to get too carried away with it. (Time expired)