It emerged that Umalusi would like a special dedicated Matric for adults that would be distinct to the currently Matric for learners. This kind of Matric would be flexible and it will be based on the model of distance learning where adults would not be required to attend classes and will write exams at suitable times. The committee was interested in this new idea and wanted an explanation as to where would this kind of Matric fit in the current further education and training system. Umalusi indicated that the Matric for adults would fit well in the FET college system and this would assist in the improvement of the adult education system. The committee was of the opinion that education is meant for a particular function and adults should go through a special discipline such that they should attend classes and sit for exams. The committee was informed that the needs of fundamental adult learners varied differently from an ordinary learner and therefore it is fundamentally important to look at adult learners differently. Adults have vast responsibilities and hence Umalusi is proposing this new form of Matric for adults that will assist them in balancing their priorities. Umalusi further proposed the creation of a seamless adult education that is not tied to different levels of the NQF. It emerged that the ALN supported most of the amendments in the HETLA Bill. However, the main concern with this Bill was with the term 'adult centres' as it did not give recognition to the youth who also form part of adult education as well as the definition of an educator. It was proposed that community education learning centres should be the new name for adult education and training centres to accommodate young people that are part of the system. The committee commended the good work that is done by ALN in the adult education field. It was noted that the ALN should not be too prescriptive with the definition of an educator since this would have severe implications on the employability of educators. The committee was deeply concerned that there were no clear norms and standards for adult education educators and that their basic conditions of employment were still poor. It was noted that an educator is a specialized professional person and in the past there were universities which offered special training for adult education educators, and these programmes can be redeveloped for those interested in the field. The committee commended the presentation by the student from UCT. It was explained that political heads cannot be part of administration of educators and there is a clear distinction between the roles played by Ministers and administrators. The IIE was of the opinion that foreign providers should be accredited swiftly in the NQF without prolonging the process due to their standards and recognition. The committee highlighted the fact that the Bill aims to ensure that foreign providers register in the NQF as stipulated in the NQF Act and perhaps the accreditation period should be reviewed. The other aim of this Bill is to protect the public from unscrupulous providers who are making wealth at the expense of ordinary citizens. The IIE proposed that there should be discussion with the private education providers sector in addressing the challenge of unscrupulous providers and at the moment there is no such conversation. The department should in future consult the sector when initiating policy changes unlike what happened with this Bill. The IIE proposed that that accreditation process for foreign providers in the NQF be sped up as the current process was insufficient and could have a pessimistic factor on the contribution of foreign providers to the national agenda. It was noted that private providers contribute positively to the education and training sector since the public sector is overwhelmed with demand for learning. The representatives from HESA concerned with the proposed speeding up of the accreditation process as proposed by the IIE and indicated that all institutions are subject to the NQF Act and should follow the same routine.