Deputy Speaker, Members of Parliament, I rise to present the report of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training relating to our eight-day study tour to Germany in the first week of December last year. The purpose of the visit was to do research on the dual vocational education and training system and the German skills development approach in order for us to be able to benchmark this with our own post-school education system.
We met with various crucial stakeholders in Germany, including the federal government ministries responsible for economic co-operation and development, education and research. We also met with the Confederation of German Trade Unions, Humboldt University, the Chamber of Skilled Crafts and Vocational Training, the Federal Institute for Vocational Training, the national marketing manager for vocational education at Siemens, and so on. The interactions that we had with these various institutions are contained in the report published in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATCs. I will traverse only a few of the highlights we noticed about the German vocational system.
In Germany, there are 350 occupations recognised or registered by the state. We found that 60% of the student populace is enrolled in the vocational education system, as opposed to the academic sector, because it provides them with opportunities to learn and earn at the same time. The system really ensures that training happens in companies as opposed to our own system, where it would happen in the FET colleges. In Germany people really are being given an education in the skills area they enrolled for at the place where they will learn in practical terms.
Currently 1,6 million trainees in the vocational system are able to be incorporated into two million German companies. We have 600 of those companies in our country. We just need to link up with them to learn how they engage with this matter of apprenticeship because it is a classic example of integrated workplace learning.
In their country, the Germans are able to ensure career-pathing at the early age of 10, because their formal education system allows for that at intermediary level. At secondary level, there is quite a clear correspondence between their high schools and the vocational sector, which is something we do not really have in our country. These are some of the good examples that we must look at.
Their vocational education training system is driven strongly by research and development. Experts chosen by organised labour, industry and the state decide on the institutions that would be responsible for determining suitable vocational programmes. These are some of the examples that we hope to emulate. I think the current appointment of research chairs bodes well for our efforts to go in this direction.
The private sector in Germany injects massive resources into the dual system and it is interesting that there it is done without any legislative compulsion. In our country, we do get levies from companies, yet when we request the company to train our youth, there is reluctance to do so. We should try to engage German companies which are in our country.
In Germany they also have a programme for the retraining of retrenched workers and unemployed graduates to update and augment their skills and competencies and enable these people to be integrated into the economy.
The standard-setting and quality-assurance measures are the same in the 16 "lnders" or provinces, as we call them here. The details are in the report. We recommend that the House adopt this report. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
There was no debate.
Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move:
That the Report be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.