The Next VET Cycle: Where Are We Heading?
Artificial intelligence, automation and changing workplaces are reshaping the demand for skills. For private RTOs, the next opportunities will come from understanding industry and staying ahead of change.
Introduction
For many private RTO owners, the last few years have involved a difficult balancing act. Staff still need to be paid, students and employers expect commitments to be met, and operating costs are rising. Meanwhile, enquiry numbers are down, funded training opportunities and employers’ willingness to commit can be difficult to come by.
These challenges are not peculiar to vocational education and training. Most small to medium sized businesses are experiencing difficult operating conditions as the economy has worsened. Having worked as a consultant in the sector for more than 25 years, and as a private business operator myself, I have seen several periods of economic upheaval come and go. These include the GFC, the slowdown following Australia’s mining investment boom and the disruption of COVID. Each period has affected employers; training demand and the decisions RTO owners have had to make. The pressures we are experiencing today are part of a much wider squeeze on Australian businesses, particularly smaller operators with limited capacity to absorb prolonged contraction.
I know that many private RTO owners have invested years of effort, considerable financial resources and personal commitment into building their businesses. Some are now confronting difficult conditions despite having established operations, experienced staff and longstanding relationships with employers. These circumstances deserve to be understood in the context of the wider changes affecting our economy, rather than simply as challenges confronting individual training organisations. I think it is useful right now to think about where we are in the cycle and where things are heading.
When economic conditions improve, we naturally expect demand to recover. But what if the next period of growth creates different jobs, different skill requirements and different purchasing decisions from the businesses we have traditionally relied upon? What if some familiar training markets recover, while others continue to change or become less accessible? This raises an important question. Are we simply experiencing another difficult economic cycle, or are we entering a period in which demand for vocational education and training will look quite different?
I believe there are reasons to take both possibilities seriously. Some of the pressures facing private RTOs may ease as economic conditions improve. Others reflect changes in government funding priorities, technology, employment and the way businesses develop their workforces. Importantly, those changes may also create opportunities. Private RTOs possess industry knowledge, practical training capabilities and employer relationships that could become increasingly valuable as workforce needs evolve. Investment in workforce skills also remains an important lever for governments seeking to reduce unemployment and improve productivity, and private RTOs have an important role to play in achieving these objectives. In this article, I want to examine where these changes may be taking us over the next few years, what they could mean for private RTOs and where opportunities for future growth may emerge.
1. The Pressure is real
Recent economic data provides important context for the difficulties facing Australian businesses. NAB’s September 2026 Business Survey recorded business confidence at -13, placing it among the lowest 5% of readings in the survey’s history. NAB observed that confidence at this level had rarely been seen outside major economic disruptions such as the GFC and COVID pandemic. Business conditions remained weak, while the survey’s employment index fell to its lowest level in five years.[1] Although the Australian economy has continued to grow, these findings suggest that many businesses are approaching decisions about recruitment, investment and expansion with considerable caution. For smaller businesses, prolonged uncertainty can be particularly difficult when operating costs continue to rise regardless of whether customer demand improves.
Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics provide another perspective on the pressures facing business owners. During 2025–26, the number of actively trading Australian businesses increased by 85,130. This was widely reported in the media and claimed as a success story by the Treasurer. However, almost all that growth came from businesses without employees. Non-employing businesses increased by 83,105, while the number of employing businesses increased by just 2,025. The ABS also recorded a net movement of 28,127 surviving businesses from employing staff to operating without employees.[2] This does not necessarily mean those businesses were failing, but it illustrates an important distinction between growth in business numbers and growth in businesses providing employment. ASIC’s figures provide further context, with 14,153 companies entering external administration for the first time in 2025–26. Although this was slightly below the previous year’s figure, corporate insolvencies remain elevated compared with several years earlier.[3] Taken together, these indicators suggest that the wider business environment remains highly challenging, even though economic activity continues.
For private RTOs, difficult trading conditions can be particularly demanding because of the commitments involved in maintaining a training organisation. An established provider generally carries ongoing costs associated with employees, premises, insurance, advertising, training resources, and regulatory compliance. RTOs delivering practical training may also have substantial equipment and maintenance expenses, while those servicing regional communities or employer workplaces must account for increasing travel costs. Many of these commitments cannot be reduced quickly when enrolments decline or an expected training contract does not materialise. An RTO may be operating responsibly, maintaining the quality of its services and meeting its obligations, yet still find that reduced revenue leaves very little capacity to absorb unexpected expenses or prolonged uncertainty. This is the real pressure many private RTOs owners are experiencing right now.
Behind these commercial pressures are the personal circumstances of the people who own and operate these organisations. Having worked closely with private RTO owners for many years, I recognise how difficult these periods can become. Some owners reduce their own income, draw upon personal savings or defer investment in their businesses to protect employees and continue providing services to students. Others face more difficult decisions about staffing, facilities or withdrawing from areas of training that are no longer commercially sustainable. These decisions are rarely made lightly, particularly where they affect longstanding employees, established employer relationships and services that have taken years to develop. It is also important to recognise that financial difficulties do not necessarily reflect poor management or a failure to identify opportunities. Sometimes the circumstances facing a business change faster than its costs and commitments can reasonably be adjusted. The last four years have seen a gradual decline in the operating environment for private RTOs.
The immediate challenge for many private RTOs is therefore understandable. They need sufficient revenue to meet their existing obligations while retaining the people, resources and capabilities that give their businesses value. For owners who have invested considerable time and money into establishing their organisations, maintaining that balance can become an exhausting exercise. Improving economic conditions would undoubtedly provide welcome relief, particularly if employers regain confidence and become more willing to invest in training. However, an important uncertainty remains. How much of the current pressure reflects the economic conditions we are experiencing, and how much reflects changes to the training markets themselves? An economic recovery may not necessarily restore every source of demand on which private RTOs have traditionally relied.
2. Economic recovery does not always restore old markets
Looking back over previous periods of economic difficulty, there has often been an important relationship between government intervention and investment in vocational education. When businesses reduce recruitment, unemployment rises and economic activity weakens, governments have frequently responded with measures designed to support employment and help people develop new skills. During the GFC, these measures included additional training opportunities and support for apprentices and workers affected by the downturn.[4] We saw a similar response during COVID, when the JobTrainer Fund provided free or low-fee training places and apprenticeship wage subsidies helped employers retain existing apprentices and engage new apprentices.[5] For private RTOs, these interventions sometimes created opportunities at a time when demand from employers and individual students was otherwise uncertain. However, the scale of government investment, its intended beneficiaries and the providers permitted to deliver subsidised training have varied considerably between economic cycles.
Historical training data also demonstrates how closely some parts of the VET market are connected to changes in employment. Research published by NCVER following the GFC found that apprenticeship commencements were particularly sensitive to changes in economic conditions, although the subsequent recovery in commencements was relatively rapid.[6] Government-funded VET activity also changed substantially in the years that followed. National program enrolments increased to approximately 1.89 million in 2012 before declining to around 1.31 million by 2018.[7] Changes in funding arrangements, training entitlements and reporting practices all need to be considered when interpreting these figures. Nevertheless, they illustrate that participation in government-funded training can change significantly over time, even during periods when the broader Australian economy continues to expand.
More recent developments reinforce this distinction. NCVER reported that government-funded VET program enrolments declined by 9.2% in 2025, while the number of students participating in government-funded training fell by 6.7%.[8] These are different measures, but both indicate a contraction in activity. The decline occurred despite continued growth in the Australian economy. According to the ABS, Australia’s gross domestic product increased by 2.1% over the year to June 2026, although GDP per person grew by just 0.7%.[9] However, that growth was not necessarily experienced evenly across the economy. The national accounts identified stronger coal exports and significant investment activity associated with data centres, mining and renewable energy projects, while household spending remained cautious. These developments can contribute to national economic growth without necessarily producing a corresponding improvement in trading conditions for smaller and medium-sized businesses. This distinction helps explain why an expanding economy can coexist with difficult conditions for many businesses, and why stronger economic activity may not automatically translate into increased enrolments or a recovery in government-funded training.
Importantly, the picture is not one of declining demand across every training market. NCVER’s broader national data shows that approximately 5.1 million students undertook nationally recognised VET in 2025. While the number of students undertaking qualifications declined, participation in short courses and stand-alone subjects increased. The number of domestic fee-for-service students also rose by 1.4% compared with the previous year.[10] These figures do not establish that private RTOs are becoming more profitable, nor do they mean that every provider can readily access the areas experiencing growth. They do, however, suggest that the mix of training Australians are undertaking is changing. A provider experiencing declining qualification enrolments may therefore be operating in a market that is behaving quite differently from other parts of the sector.
This presents a more complicated outlook than simply waiting for economic conditions to improve. Some established training markets may recover as employers regain confidence and become more willing to invest in their own development. Others may remain constrained by government purchasing decisions, changing workforce requirements or different approaches to training. At the same time, new areas of demand may emerge as industries invest, expand and adapt their operations. Understanding these differences will be increasingly important when considering the future of a private RTO. One of the most significant changes already influencing that future is the direction of government funding policy, particularly the extent to which private providers are being excluded from participating in the publicly funded training market.
3. The rules of the publicly funded market have changed
While economic conditions influence demand for vocational education, government policy plays an equally important role in determining which organisations can participate in the publicly funded training market. For much of the previous decade, Australian vocational education policy placed considerable emphasis on student choice and competition between providers. The 2012 National Partnership Agreement on Skills Reform encouraged greater contestability, allowing eligible students to access government-subsidised training through approved public or private RTOs.[11] Although arrangements differed between states and territories, the general policy direction was towards opening more of the market to competition. For private RTOs, this created opportunities to expand their services, respond to local industry requirements and compete for students who might otherwise have undertaken their training through public institutions. Access was never unrestricted, but the policy environment recognised competition and provider choice as important features of the vocational education system.
Following the election of the Albanese Labor Government in May 2022, the direction of Commonwealth vocational education and training policy shifted aggressively towards greater support for public training providers. The National Skills Agreement 2024–2028, which came into effect in January 2024, reflects the government’s commitment to strengthening TAFE and rebuilding public training capacity. Under clause A47(d), states accessing the agreement’s initial allocation of flexible Commonwealth funding must direct at least 70% of the relevant Commonwealth funding for VET delivery and capital to TAFE and other public training providers, including dual-sector universities.[12] This requirement applies to a defined funding arrangement rather than 70% of all government expenditure on vocational education. Nevertheless, it represents a significant commitment to public provision and illustrates how government priorities have shifted. The distinction matters because an increase in public investment does not necessarily mean that a greater share of funded training will become available to private RTOs.
For an individual training organisation, the practical consequences are often determined by government contracting arrangements. An RTO may have experienced trainers, appropriate facilities, qualifications on scope which are in demand and strong relationships with employers, yet still be unable to access subsidised enrolments because it does not hold the necessary funding contract. Victoria provides a clear example, with the government confirming that existing Skills First contracting arrangements will continue in 2027 without inviting applications from new providers. New South Wales has similarly restricted access. Over the last decade, the NSW funding contract has been open only twice. This was in 2016 and again in 2023-2024 for the Smart and Skilled application round. Since then, the NSW Government has not reopened general applications and has confirmed there will be no open round for 2026–27. Instead, selected RTOs may be invited to apply where specific training gaps or government priorities are identified.[13] The 2023 application round saw many private RTOs receive significant cuts to their funding caps to redirect this funding to TAFE NSW. These arrangements prevent capable private RTOs from accessing subsidised training markets despite their existing capabilities and local demand, while providers holding contracts remain subject to government decisions about approved qualifications and funding allocations.
These restrictions are not uniform across Australia. Queensland, for example, opened a Skills Assure Supplier contracting round on 12 October 2026, providing limited opportunities for eligible RTOs to obtain new agreements or expand their existing approved delivery.[14] However, the round was directed towards selected qualifications and locations where the government had identified a need for additional training capacity, rather than representing a general opening of the subsidised training market. This illustrates an important development in the way governments purchase vocational education. Funding access is increasingly influenced by decisions about where training should occur, which qualifications should receive support and how many providers are required to meet the identified demand. For smaller private RTOs, these decisions can have considerable commercial consequences. A provider may be well positioned to serve local employers, but the availability of government funding can depend on policy decisions that are largely outside its control.
The latest national expenditure figures provide further evidence of this changing environment. NCVER’s Government funding of VET 2025, released on 23 October 2026, reported that government expenditure on VET delivery and capital totalled approximately $7.3 billion in 2025. Within this category, payments to public providers increased by $319 million, or 6.0%, to approximately $5.6 billion. Payments to private providers moved in the opposite direction, declining by $124.1 million, or 9.2%, to approximately $1.2 billion.[15] These figures relate specifically to expenditure on delivery and capital, rather than total government spending on vocational education, and some expenditure cannot be attributed to a particular provider type. Nevertheless, the contrast is significant. Overall spending in this category increased, but private providers received less funding than in the previous year. For RTO owners, this reinforces the importance of distinguishing between government announcements about investment in skills and the funding that may actually become accessible to their organisations.
There are legitimate reasons for governments to invest in public training institutions. TAFE carries important responsibilities associated with specialist facilities, expensive technical programs and supporting students who may otherwise face barriers to participation. Maintaining this capacity requires substantial and sustained investment. The expansion of Free TAFE has also provided genuine benefits by removing tuition fees for eligible students and increasing participation in training identified as a priority. However, recognising these benefits does not remove the need to examine whether public funding is being allocated effectively, particularly where capable private providers may be able to meet the same training requirements. The question is not simply whether governments should support TAFE, but whether their purchasing arrangements make the best possible use of the training capacity available across the wider VET sector.
An independent assessment by the Victorian Auditor-General in May 2026 raises some important questions in this regard. The audit found that Free TAFE had increased participation in priority courses and provided substantial tuition fee savings for students. However, because the government reimbursed the waived tuition fees, it paid 94.2% more per eligible Free TAFE enrolment in 2024 than it would otherwise have paid without the initiative.[16] This was an increase in government funding per enrolment, not necessarily an increase in the underlying cost of teaching. The audit also found that students undertaking Free TAFE courses generally achieved similar reported outcomes to students undertaking equivalent courses at private providers. These findings do not establish that private RTOs are universally more efficient or effective, but they provide reasonable grounds for questioning whether funding decisions place sufficient emphasis on demonstrated student outcomes, training requirements and value for money.
In my view, capable private RTOs should continue to be recognised as important contributors to Australia’s workforce development needs. Many have invested heavily in specialised training capabilities, developed longstanding relationships with employers and established services that respond directly to the requirements of particular industries and communities. Where funding arrangements restrict their participation, governments is limiting access to training capacity that already exists. For the owners of these organisations, however, the immediate concern is commercial. An RTO cannot necessarily rely on improved economic conditions or additional government investment to restore subsidised training opportunities that have become less accessible through policy and contracting decisions. Publicly funded training may remain an important part of its business, but future access will depend on more than the quality of its services or the demand for the qualifications it delivers.
This represents a significant structural change that private RTOs cannot afford to ignore. The Commonwealth Government’s preference for public provision, combined with restrictive state contracting arrangements, has progressively limited the ability of capable private RTOs to access government-funded training. There is little reason to expect these barriers to disappear simply because economic conditions improve. Without a substantial change in government policy, including a reconsideration of the National Skills Agreement and the reopening of state funding contracts, I see little prospect of access improving significantly in the foreseeable future. In my view, private RTOs, particularly those without access to funding contracts, would be unwise to base their future on the expectation that government-funded training opportunities will return. Greater priority needs to be given to understanding how employment and industry requirements are changing, and identifying opportunities to deliver training that employers and individual learners are prepared to purchase directly.
4. Productivity and the changing workforce
The changes to government funding arrangements are significant, but they are only one part of the environment that will influence the future of vocational education. We also need to consider how Australian businesses are responding to economic pressures and what this means for the people they employ. One of Australia’s most persistent economic challenges has been weak productivity growth. Put simply, labour productivity measures how much output is produced for each hour worked. In September 2026, the Productivity Commission reported that Australia’s labour productivity had declined by 0.2% over the preceding year, despite economic output continuing to grow. More concerning is the longer-term trend. Over the five years to June 2026, labour productivity declined by an average of 0.5% annually, representing a cumulative fall of approximately 2.5%. The Commission also observed that Australia’s overall productivity was barely 1% above its average level during 2015–2019.[17] These figures highlight how little progress Australia has made in improving the productive capacity of its workforce. Improving productivity requires more than increasing the qualifications held by employees. Businesses also need to invest in equipment, technology, systems and better ways of organising work. For vocational education, the significance of these investments lies in how they change the activities employees perform and the skills employers expect them to possess.
Artificial intelligence is becoming particularly important in this regard. Much of the public discussion has focused on whether AI will eliminate occupations and replace large numbers of employees. While there are legitimate reasons for concern, the relationship between technological change and employment is more complicated. Most occupations involve a combination of tasks, some of which may be automated while others continue to require human judgement, technical knowledge, practical experience or interpersonal skills. Consider an employee working in business administration. AI may increasingly assist with preparing correspondence, processing information, producing reports and maintaining records. However, that employee may still be responsible for resolving unusual problems, communicating with customers, exercising judgement and ensuring the accuracy of information. The occupation may continue to exist, but the work expected of the person performing it could change substantially. For training providers, this distinction matters because employers may begin looking for different capabilities within occupations that remain.
We already have useful Australian evidence about how employers are approaching these developments. In November 2025, the Reserve Bank of Australia published research based on interviews with 105 predominantly medium and large businesses about their technology investments and workforce expectations. Many anticipated that artificial intelligence and automation would improve productivity and reduce staffing requirements in some areas, particularly routine finance, administrative, clerical and customer service functions. However, the research also found that employees affected by earlier technology investments had often been retrained and redeployed into other roles rather than made redundant. Looking ahead, employers expected to manage workforce changes through a combination of retraining, natural attrition, reduced recruitment and, in some circumstances, redundancies.[18] Although the businesses surveyed were generally larger than the employers served by many private RTOs, their experiences provide an indication of how technology may influence workforce decisions over the next few years.
One of the more important implications is that employment patterns can change without substantial numbers of people losing their jobs. An employer introducing more efficient systems may decide not to replace employees who leave, reduce the number of entry-level positions or allocate additional responsibilities to existing staff. Over time, these decisions can change the composition of a workforce, even if the organisation continues to expand. This is particularly relevant to vocational education because some qualifications have traditionally supported entry into occupations involving administrative, clerical and other routine activities. If employers begin recruiting fewer people into those positions, the demand for associated training will be affected. At the same time, employees who remain may need additional capabilities to work with new systems, supervise automated processes or undertake responsibilities previously performed by other workers. The consequences for training demand could therefore be quite different depending on whether an RTO primarily prepares people for initial employment or develops the capabilities of people already in the workforce.
More recent Australian research suggests that these changes could become increasingly apparent over the next several years. In September 2026, Deloitte Access Economics identified 82 occupations that may experience softer employment demand as artificial intelligence becomes more widely adopted. It’s modelling suggested that average annual growth in white-collar employment could slow from 1.4% to 1.1% over five years when the potential effects of AI are included. This represents approximately 77,900 fewer positions than would otherwise exist under Deloitte’s scenario without those effects.[19] Importantly, this is a comparison between two employment forecasts, not a prediction that 77,900 Australians will lose their jobs. Deloitte also acknowledged that AI had not yet produced major structural changes in Australian employment. The significance of its findings is that some occupations may continue growing, but more slowly than they otherwise would have. The pace and extent of these changes will depend on how successfully businesses can introduce technology and whether the productivity benefits justify the investment.
There is also evidence that employers are beginning to seek different skills. PwC’s 2026 Global AI Jobs Barometer found that Australian job advertisements requiring AI skills more than doubled between 2024 and 2025.[20] Its research also identified substantial changes in the skills associated with occupations more exposed to artificial intelligence. Although job advertisements do not establish how many people have been employed or which training programs employers will purchase, they provide an indication of changing recruitment expectations. International research offers a similar perspective. Boston Consulting Group estimated that between 50% and 55% of jobs in the United States could be substantially reshaped by AI within two to three years, with many employees continuing in their occupations but performing different tasks.[21] This is an American modelling exercise rather than an Australian employment forecast, but it reinforces the distinction between changes to work and the disappearance of occupations. For private RTOs, the more immediate question may be how quickly employers begin expecting these new capabilities from people entering the workforce and those already employed. There is also a broader question about whether our national training packages can adequately respond to these changing workforce requirements. Although a small number of Jobs and Skills Councils have commenced projects addressing artificial intelligence and emerging digital skills, much of this work remains in development. In my view, there are legitimate concerns about whether the training package system can respond quickly enough to the scale and pace of change already occurring across Australian workplaces.
These developments deserve particular attention from providers delivering qualifications in business administration, accounting support, customer service and information technology. However, it would be premature to conclude that demand for these qualifications is already collapsing because of AI. NCVER’s 2025 data presents a more complicated picture. Although domestic fee-for-service qualification enrolments declined overall, enrolments in the Business Services training package increased by 4.4%, while those in Financial Services increased by 14.8%.[10] These figures do not guarantee continued growth, but they demonstrate why predictions about occupational disruption should not be confused with changes already occurring in training markets. The more important consideration is whether the skills being developed through established qualifications will continue to reflect what employers need. A qualification may remain relevant while the way its competencies are applied at work changes considerably, particularly where routine activities become increasingly automated. There may be an opportunity her for training to be customised for the employers needs with regards to the integration of AI in the workplace.
Consider what this might mean for a smaller private RTO with established relationships among local businesses. A provider delivering business qualifications may have spent years preparing students for employment in administrative and customer service roles. As those employers introduce more sophisticated systems, they may begin placing greater value on employees who can manage exceptions, check information generated by technology, communicate effectively and understand how different business processes fit together. Some employers may continue recruiting new staff, while others may prefer to develop the capabilities of existing employees. This is an illustration of how demand could evolve. It demonstrates why an RTO’s understanding of its customers’ changing operations may become increasingly valuable. The organisation may already possess much of the industry knowledge and training expertise required, even where the emphasis of the training begins to change.
Technological change is also occurring well beyond office-based employment. Australian businesses are investing in robotics, automated equipment and more sophisticated production and logistics systems. Woolworths’ automated Moorebank distribution facilities and the technical workforce supporting WITRON’s automated operations at Redbank provide useful examples.[22][23] These workplaces illustrate how automation can reduce some repetitive activities while increasing the importance of employees who operate, maintain and troubleshoot complex equipment. They also demonstrate that familiar practical competencies, including electrical and mechanical skills and workplace safety requirements, remain relevant alongside newer technical capabilities. For private RTOs specialising in industrial and practical training, this combination may be particularly important to preserve into the future. An established provider may find that employers continue to require many of the competencies it already delivers, even as those competencies are applied in increasingly sophisticated workplaces. I will examine these Australian developments and their possible commercial implications more closely later in the article.
Australia’s continuing skills shortages also need to be considered alongside these changes in the nature of work. Jobs and Skills Australia’s 2026 Occupation Shortage List identified 279 occupations in national shortage, including 127 that had experienced persistent shortages since 2021.[24] However, these shortages are not simply a matter of producing more qualified graduates. Some reflect an insufficient supply of appropriately trained workers, while others involve difficulties attracting and retaining experienced employees. For private RTOs, this distinction presents an important opportunity to consider. Rather than focusing exclusively on preparing new entrants for occupations experiencing shortages, there may be considerable value in helping employers develop the capabilities of their existing workforce. As artificial intelligence, automation and other technologies change the requirements of many occupations, employees will need additional skills to work with new systems, adapt to changing responsibilities and undertake more technically demanding roles. For established private RTOs, particularly those already working in industries experiencing persistent shortages, the opportunity may lie in identifying where these changing requirements create demand for targeted upskilling, practical assessment and continuing workforce development. Not every skills shortage will translate into a viable training market, but employers facing persistent workforce constraints may increasingly value training that helps them retain, develop and make better use of the employees they already have.
These developments suggest that the next period of economic growth may generate different training demands rather than simply restore established enrolment patterns. Persistent skills shortages, together with the growing influence of AI and automation, may create opportunities for private RTOs to help employers develop the capabilities of their existing workforce, alongside preparing new entrants for employment. The commercial question is which of these changing workforce requirements employers will be prepared to address through externally purchased training. To explore this, we need to examine what training employers are already purchasing and why they choose particular providers.
5. What employers are telling us about training
The changes taking place in Australian workplaces raise important questions about the future demand for vocational education. However, we should be careful not to overlook the substantial training activity already occurring outside traditional government-funded qualifications. Employers continue to invest in developing their workforces, and private RTOs remain important suppliers of that training. NCVER’s Employers’ use and views of the VET system 2025 found that, among employers using nationally recognised training, 49.1% identified private training providers as their main provider, compared with 26.2% who nominated TAFE.[25] These figures represent employers’ reported use of training providers, rather than the proportion of all VET students or training expenditure. Nevertheless, they demonstrate that private RTOs continue to play a substantial role in meeting the training needs of Australian businesses, even as government funding arrangements increasingly favour public institutions.
The reasons employers choose private providers are equally revealing. NCVER found that convenience of access or location, flexible training times and suitable course content were important considerations for employers using private RTOs.[25] These findings reflect commercial strengths that many smaller training organisations have developed over years of working directly with businesses. An employer needing to train a group of employees may be more concerned about scheduling around production, minimising time away from work and obtaining training that addresses an operational requirement than the broader range of qualifications available from an institution. Private RTOs that understand these priorities can offer considerable value through their industry knowledge, established relationships and capacity to respond to local circumstances. This does not mean every private provider is more responsive than every public institution, but it demonstrates that employers consider factors beyond funding and institutional size when deciding who should deliver their training.
Another important finding concerns the substantial amount of workforce development occurring outside nationally recognised training. NCVER reported that 50.9% of Australian employers provided non-accredited training in 2025. Among these employers, 63.3% indicated that comparable nationally recognised training was unavailable, while a further 13.9% chose non-accredited training despite the availability of recognised alternatives.[25] These findings suggest that many businesses need to develop capabilities associated with their particular equipment, operating systems, workplace procedures or changing responsibilities. However, an important qualification is that 54.2% of employers providing non-accredited training did not use an external training provider. Much of this activity is therefore managed internally, sometimes by experienced employees or workplace supervisors. For private RTOs, the significance is that employers have training needs extending well beyond complete qualifications, although those needs do not automatically represent opportunities to sell additional services.
The scale of nationally recognised training outside complete qualifications provides further insight into the market. NCVER recorded approximately 9.2 million stand-alone subject (unit) enrolments in 2025, an increase of 3.0% on the previous year. The three most common subjects, covering cardiopulmonary resuscitation, first aid and basic emergency life support, accounted for 51.9% of this activity.[10] These are enrolments in individual subjects, rather than a count of unique students, and they should not be confused with NCVER’s separate category of nationally recognised short courses, which includes training package skill sets and accredited courses. Nevertheless, they demonstrate the substantial volume of training undertaken to develop or demonstrate particular competencies. Private RTOs have an especially important presence in this market. In 2024, private providers delivered approximately 7.4 million stand-alone subject enrolments, representing 83.2% of the national total for that category.[26] While these figures do not tell us how much revenue providers earned, they confirm that private organisations already deliver a considerable share of Australia’s stand-alone subject training.
Looking more closely at this activity reveals why certain training markets may remain important even as technology changes the workforce. NCVER’s 2024 data recorded approximately 2.3 million enrolments in Provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 1.25 million in Provide First Aid. Other commonly undertaken subjects included construction safety induction, working safely at heights, forklift operation and entering and working in confined spaces.[26] These competencies are associated with workplace responsibilities, safe operating practices and activities that require people to demonstrate particular skills. Their assessment arrangements differ considerably, but they share an important characteristic. Employers and workers need confidence that a person can perform a task safely and appropriately in the circumstances in which it will be required. This creates a continuing role for training and assessment that cannot necessarily be replaced by providing employees with additional information or online learning materials.
First aid provides a useful example of this distinction. Artificial intelligence can assist students in understanding emergency procedures, explaining technical information and preparing for assessment. However, the assessment requirements for Provide First Aid include practical demonstration of responses to simulated first aid situations.[27] A student must still demonstrate the required physical performance. The same principle applies to many forms of practical industrial training, although the tasks, equipment, workplace conditions and assessment requirements will differ. Technology may help providers prepare learning materials, support students and improve administrative efficiency, but the need to establish that someone can perform a practical task may remain an important source of value. For private RTOs with suitable trainers, equipment and facilities, this represents an established capability that may retain its relevance even as other aspects of vocational training change. This represents an opportunity for many private RTOs as a pivot.
Some practical training markets also benefit from recurring requirements to maintain or demonstrate competency. In Queensland, for example, traffic management implementers must renew their accreditation every three years by completing renewal training with an approved training provider.[28] Other practical training areas, including working safely at heights and entering confined spaces, can also generate ongoing demand for refresher training as employers respond to workplace risks, changing equipment and industry requirements. However, these nationally recognised competencies do not have a universal expiry date, and refresher training requirements are generally determined by workplace risk assessments, industry expectations or individual employer policies.[29] For private RTOs, the opportunity lies in helping employers maintain a competent workforce through practical training, reassessment and continuing skills development, rather than relying solely on training new entrants to the industry.
For established private RTOs, the message from this evidence is that there are substantial opportunities to look beyond traditional qualification enrolments. Employers are already investing in short courses, practical competency development and training that addresses their particular workplace requirements. Rather than assuming that future growth will depend on entering new industries or introducing additional qualifications, RTOs should be examining the training needs of the employers they already serve. This means identifying which competencies employees must maintain, how workplace practices and technologies are changing, and where employers may need additional support to develop their existing workforce. Some of these requirements may be addressed through established units of competency, while others may be better suited to targeted, non-accredited training or practical workplace assessment.
The important commercial opportunity is to move beyond simply offering courses and waiting for enrolments. Private RTOs should be engaging directly with employers to identify their continuing and emerging workforce development requirements, particularly in industries where they already possess specialist knowledge, experienced trainers and established relationships. The evidence suggests that flexibility, practical expertise and responsiveness remain important reasons employers choose private providers. However, identifying a training need is only the starting point. RTOs must also establish whether employers are prepared to purchase external training and whether those services can be delivered commercially. This distinction will become increasingly important as technology changes the way businesses train their employees and as private RTOs consider how their own business models may need to evolve.
6. The changing business model of private RTOs
The evidence examined so far suggests that private RTOs will continue to play an important role in developing Australia’s workforce. However, the commercial environment in which they operate may change considerably over the next few years. The distinction between an employer needing training and being prepared to purchase that training from an external provider is particularly important. A business introducing new equipment, changing its operating procedures or developing the capabilities of existing employees may have a genuine workforce development requirement, but it also has choices about how that requirement is addressed. It may use its own experienced staff, purchase instruction from an equipment supplier or engage an external training organisation. For a private RTO, the opportunity depends on whether it can provide expertise, recognised outcomes or practical services that the employer values sufficiently to purchase. This is an important consideration because the existence of a skills shortage or a changing workplace requirement does not, by itself, establish a viable market for training providers.
The alternatives available to employers are becoming increasingly varied. As the NCVER research discussed earlier demonstrates, more than half of employers providing non-accredited training in 2025 did not use an external training provider.[25] Technology suppliers are also important participants in workforce development, particularly where employers need instruction associated with specialised machinery and proprietary systems. ABB, for example, offers robotics training directly to Australian customers through its facilities and at customer workplaces. Its programs cover the operation and programming of ABB robotic systems, drawing upon the manufacturer’s technical expertise.[30] This illustrates why investment in automation does not necessarily result in additional business for independent RTOs. In some circumstances, the equipment supplier will be best placed to provide the required instruction. However, employees operating and maintaining that equipment may also need established electrical, mechanical, safety or supervisory competencies that sit outside the manufacturer’s training arrangements. For RTOs already working in these industries, the opportunity may lie in providing those complementary services rather than attempting to compete directly with the equipment supplier or to work in partnership with the equipment supplier.
A similar development is occurring in artificial intelligence and digital workforce training. Employers seeking to introduce AI across their organisations can obtain instruction from technology vendors, develop internal training programs or engage major consulting firms. In March 2026, EY Australia launched its AI Academy, offering structured learning and implementation support tailored to different industries and occupational roles. EY reported that more than 3,600 employees in one Australian organisation had completed AI Academy training as part of an enterprise technology rollout.[31] This demonstrates the competition private RTOs may face in emerging training markets. Developing an introductory course about artificial intelligence may be relatively straightforward, but a business implementing new technology may prefer a provider that can also assist with its systems, processes and operational requirements. The commercial value of training may increasingly depend on how closely it relates to the problem the employer is trying to solve. For private RTOs, this presents an opportunity to build on existing competencies while adapting training to reflect the AI-enabled workflows and practical requirements of individual workplaces.
Artificial intelligence may also change the economics of operating a training organisation. RTOs already rely on digital systems to manage enrolments, student records, learning resources, assessments and administrative processes. AI has the potential to make some of these activities more efficient, particularly the preparation of draft learning materials, routine correspondence, documentation and aspects of student support. Used appropriately, these tools could reduce the time and cost involved in maintaining certain courses, although accuracy, assessment quality and regulatory obligations will continue to require appropriate human oversight. However, the same technology will be available to competitors. If generic learning materials become faster and less expensive to produce, the cost of developing some training products may become less of a barrier to entering a market. This could place additional pressure on prices, particularly where courses are relatively standardised and customers have numerous providers from which to choose. We do not yet have reliable Australian evidence demonstrating how AI will affect profitability across the RTO sector, but the possibility that greater efficiency will also increase competition deserves consideration.
These developments raise an important question about which capabilities will continue to distinguish one training organisation from another. Learning resources remain valuable, but they are only one component of the service an RTO provides. Practical assessment facilities, specialist equipment, experienced technical trainers, established industry knowledge and the ability to deliver training within operational workplaces can be considerably more difficult to reproduce. So too can the confidence an employer develops in a provider through years of reliable service. For some RTOs, these capabilities may become increasingly important sources of competitive advantage as information and generic learning materials become easier to obtain. However, specialisation also brings costs. Maintaining equipment, retaining competent trainers, travelling to workplaces and providing access to suitable assessment environments can require substantial ongoing investment. A service that competitors find difficult to reproduce is commercially valuable only where customers need it and are prepared to pay enough to support its delivery.
For private RTO owners, the priority should be to examine where their existing capabilities can provide greater commercial value as the training market changes. This means looking beyond the qualifications they currently deliver and engaging directly with employers to understand how technology, changing work practices and workforce shortages are affecting their training requirements. Where are employers struggling to develop the capabilities of their existing employees? What training are they currently providing internally or purchasing from equipment suppliers and other external providers? Could an established RTO offer a more effective solution through its industry expertise, practical training capabilities or partnerships with those suppliers? Importantly, which of these services would employers actually be prepared to purchase, and could they be delivered profitably? RTOs should also be examining how AI can improve their own efficiency while recognising that technology alone is unlikely to provide a lasting competitive advantage. In my view, the next phase of growth will favour providers that can translate their existing strengths into services that solve genuine workforce problems, rather than simply expanding their course offerings. The substantial investments now occurring across Australian industries provide some encouraging examples of where these opportunities may emerge.
7. Where the next opportunities may emerge
Looking towards 2031, I believe the next cycle of vocational education will look quite different from the markets that have supported many private RTOs over the past two decades. Government-funded qualifications will remain important, but the current policy environment suggests that access to these markets may remain restricted for many private providers. At the same time, technological change, persistent skills shortages and the increasing importance of workforce productivity are creating different demands for training. Rather than simply preparing people to enter occupations, I expect a growing emphasis on helping employers develop the capabilities of people already in their workforce. For established private RTOs, this may represent one of the most important commercial opportunities of the next five years.
The increasing use of automation and sophisticated technology across Australian industry is changing the skills required in many established occupations. While some routine activities are being automated, businesses still need employees who can operate, maintain and troubleshoot equipment, understand increasingly complex systems and work safely in changing environments. This creates a continuing need for established electrical, mechanical and workplace safety competencies, alongside newer technical and digital capabilities. Importantly, these changing requirements extend beyond major employers to the smaller businesses, contractors and specialist service providers that support their operations.
For private RTOs already delivering industrial, electrical, mechanical or workplace safety training, these developments suggest opportunities that may be closer to their existing operations than they realise. The businesses installing automated systems are not the only potential customers. Maintenance contractors, engineering firms and specialist service providers supporting these facilities also need appropriately trained employees. An RTO may not have the expertise or resources to deliver proprietary robotics training, but it may already be well positioned to provide complementary technical competencies, practical assessment and continuing workforce development. The opportunity is not necessarily to enter the robotics training market, but to understand how automation is changing the requirements of industries the RTO already serves.
An encouraging example comes from Australia’s advanced manufacturing sector, where employers are increasingly recognising the importance of developing workforce capabilities alongside changing production technologies. In 2026, an Australian manufacturer established a partnership with an RTO to support apprenticeship pathways, deliver practical technical training and develop the technical capabilities needed as its manufacturing operations evolve.[32] This demonstrates that opportunities are already emerging for RTOs to establish closer relationships with employers and deliver training that responds directly to their operational requirements. It also highlights how established vocational qualifications and practical competencies can remain relevant as industries adopt new technologies and more sophisticated production methods.
Not all these opportunities will involve sophisticated industrial technology. The strengthened Aged Care Quality Standards provide another example of continuing workforce development requirements. Outcome 2.9 establishes responsibilities for aged care providers to maintain effective training systems, provide regular competency-based training in specified areas and assess employee performance.[33] These requirements extend beyond recruiting newly qualified care workers. They involve ensuring that existing employees maintain the knowledge and practical capabilities necessary to deliver safe, appropriate care. Specialist RTOs may be able to support these obligations through workplace training, competency assessment and targeted professional development. Although aged care providers can undertake much of this activity internally, organisations without sufficient training resources may value the practical expertise and delivery capacity of an established external provider.
Other industries also deserve attention. The rapid expansion of household battery installations and the development of more consistent national technical requirements are changing the capabilities expected of workers involved in electrical installation, energy systems and technical compliance.[34][35] In construction, research published by BuildSkills Australia in October 2026 identified growing requirements associated with modern methods of construction, including off-site manufacturing, logistics and new production processes. Importantly, the research emphasised developing the skills of existing workers rather than creating entirely new apprenticeship pathways.[36] These examples reinforce a broader development: emerging technology does not always create entirely new occupations or training products. It frequently changes the skills required within occupations and industries that already exist.
What does this mean for the private RTO sector over the next five years? I believe we should expect greater demand for training that responds to specific workplace requirements, particularly where employers are introducing new equipment, adapting to technological change, responding to regulatory obligations or attempting to improve productivity with their existing employees. Some of this demand will continue to involve complete qualifications and nationally recognised units of competency. Other requirements may be better addressed through specialised short courses, practical assessment, workplace-specific instruction and non-accredited training. The ability to combine established vocational competencies with an understanding of how work is changing may become an increasingly valuable capability for private RTOs.
For RTO owners, I think the immediate priority should be to examine the industries and employers they already serve. Which customers are investing in new equipment or technology? Which are experiencing persistent difficulties recruiting experienced employees? Where are existing workers being expected to assume greater responsibilities or use unfamiliar systems? Are employers purchasing training from other organisations, or managing workforce development internally because suitable external services are unavailable? These are questions worth exploring directly with customers, rather than assuming that existing course offerings will continue to meet their requirements.
There is also a commercial discipline required in pursuing these opportunities. Entering an unfamiliar technical market can involve substantial investment in equipment, trainers, additional scope and industry relationships. For smaller RTOs already operating under financial pressure, that may be difficult to justify. A more realistic approach may be to identify opportunities that build upon existing capabilities, particularly where established employer relationships provide a clearer understanding of demand. Before investing in new training products or expanding into additional qualifications, RTOs should establish whether employers are willing to purchase the proposed services, what they are prepared to pay and whether delivery can be commercially sustainable.
The next VET cycle will not offer the same opportunities to every provider. Some established qualification markets will continue to perform well, while others may contract or change significantly. However, the Australian examples examined here suggest that there are credible opportunities beyond simply waiting for economic conditions to improve or government funding arrangements to reopen. My view is that private RTOs should be actively reviewing their existing training portfolios, engaging with employers about emerging workforce requirements and identifying where their specialist capabilities can be adapted to provide greater value. The organisations best positioned for the next cycle may not be those offering the greatest number of qualifications, but those that understand where their industries are heading and can develop commercially viable training services that help employers take their workforces in the same direction.
8. The next cycle is also a choice
For many private RTO owners, the past few years have involved difficult decisions and considerable personal sacrifice. Some pressures have been beyond their control, including government funding decisions, operating costs and changing employer demand. A stronger economy would be welcome, but it may not restore all the markets on which established providers have relied.
There are nonetheless credible reasons for optimism. Australian employers continue to rely extensively on private RTOs, and practical competence, technical skills and continuing workforce development remain important. We need to recognise and capitalise on these strengths. Some existing training services may become more valuable as workplaces change, while others will need to evolve. The opportunities available to individual providers will depend on their capabilities, the industries they understand and their willingness to respond to changing workforce requirements.
Looking towards 2031, I believe we are approaching a period of technological change that will fundamentally reshape how many Australians work. Artificial intelligence, automation and robotics will not simply introduce new equipment and systems. They will change workplace processes, redefine responsibilities and alter the skills employers expect from both new and existing employees. For private RTOs, preparing for this next cycle requires two things above all else. First, we need to deepen our engagement with industry. That means getting out on the road, visiting employers, understanding their challenges and actively developing new relationships rather than waiting for enrolments to arrive. Second, we need to develop our own understanding of how these technologies are changing the industries we serve. We cannot expect to identify emerging training opportunities if we do not understand how our clients’ workplaces and workforce requirements are evolving. By combining that knowledge with our existing training expertise, we can become more valuable partners in helping employers navigate the changes ahead.
On an increasingly uneven playing field, private RTOs have one powerful advantage: the close relationships they have built with industry. We need to recognise and exploit that advantage. This means getting into workplaces, strengthening existing partnerships and establishing new ones. It also means becoming early adopters of artificial intelligence, automation and emerging technologies, integrating them into our own operations and training services so that we remain at the forefront of change in the industries we serve. We should be leading conversations with employers about how these technologies will transform their workplaces, reshape existing occupations and create new training requirements. This is how we build the trust and confidence that turn industry relationships into lasting commercial partnerships. In my view, the future of private vocational education will be determined not by waiting for government funding to return, but by our willingness to embrace technological change, deepen our industry relationships and lead the development of the workforce that Australia will need in the years ahead. Private RTOs have the agility to move quickly, adapt their services and respond directly to industry. Now is the time to put that advantage to work.
Good training,
Joe Newbery
Published: 27th October 2026
Copyright © Newbery Consulting 2026. All rights reserved.
References
[1] National Australia Bank (2026), ‘Triple Squeeze Hits Business Confidence: NAB Monthly Business Survey September 2026’, NAB, 13 October 2026.
https://www.nab.com.au/news/economy-markets/triple-squeeze-hits-business-confidence—nab-monthly-business-s
[2] Australian Bureau of Statistics (2026), Counts of Australian Businesses, including Entries and Exits, July 2022 – June 2026, ABS, Canberra, 18 August 2026.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/business-indicators/counts-australian-businesses-including-entries-and-exits/latest-release
[3] Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2026), ASIC Corporate Insolvency Update, Issue 41, October 2026, ASIC, Melbourne.
https://www.asic.gov.au/about-asic/corporate-publications/newsletters/asic-corporate-insolvency-update/asic-corporate-insolvency-update-issue-41-october-2026
[4] Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (2009), Annual Report 2008–09, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, particularly Outcome 4: Vocational Education and Training, pp. 97–112.
https://www.dewr.gov.au/download/1059/annual-report-2008-09-part-1/814/document/pdf
[5] Australian Government (2021), ‘Education, Skills and Employment: Supporting Regional Recovery and Growth’, Budget 2021–22, Regional Ministerial Statement, particularly the sections on the JobTrainer Fund and apprenticeship wage subsidies.
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/about-us/corporate-reporting/budgets/budget-2021-22/regional-ministerial-statement-2021-22/education-skills-and-employment-supporting-regional-recovery-and-growth
[6] Karmel, T & Oliver, D (2011), Effect of the Downturn on Apprentices and Trainees, National Centre for Vocational Education Research, Adelaide, 26 September 2011.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/effect-of-the-downturn-on-apprentices-and-trainees
[7] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2026), Historical Time Series of Government-Funded Vocational Education and Training from 1981 to 2025, NCVER, Adelaide, 30 June 2026.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/data/all-data/historical-time-series-of-government-funded-vocational-education-and-training-from-1981-to-2025
[8] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2026), Government-Funded Students and Courses 2025, statistical report, NCVER, Adelaide, 30 June 2026.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/government-funded-students-and-courses-2025
[9] Australian Bureau of Statistics (2026), Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product, June 2026, ABS, Canberra, 2 September 2026.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/national-accounts/australian-national-accounts-national-income-expenditure-and-product/jun-2026
[10] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2026), Total VET Students and Courses 2025, statistical report, NCVER, Adelaide, 22 July 2026.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/total-vet-students-and-courses-2025
[11] Council of Australian Governments (2012), National Partnership Agreement on Skills Reform, Commonwealth of Australia and state and territory governments, commenced 13 April 2012.
https://federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/agreements/national-partnership-agreement-skills-reform
[12] Commonwealth of Australia and state and territory governments (2023), National Skills Agreement 2024–2028, particularly Part 5, Flexible Funding, clause A47(d), p. 10.
https://federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/sites/federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/files/2023-12/national-skills-agreement.pdf
[13] State government contracting arrangements:
(a) Victorian Government, Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions (2026), VET Funding Contracts, particularly Skills First training provider contracting arrangements for 2027.
https://www.vic.gov.au/vet-funding-contracts
(b) NSW Department of Education (2026), Smart and Skilled Provider Access Policy 2026–2027, Version 1.0, May 2026, particularly Section 1, Sourcing Quality Providers to Meet In-Demand Skills.
https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/noindex/2026-05/smart-and-skilled-provider-access-policy-2026-2027.pdf
[14] Queensland Government, Department of Trade, Employment and Training (2026), Skills Assure Supplier Contracting, information concerning contracting opportunities for eligible registered training organisations.
https://dtet.qld.gov.au/training/providers/sas/contracting
[15] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2026), Government Funding of VET 2025, statistical report, NCVER, Adelaide, 23 October 2026.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/government-funding-of-vet-2025
[16] Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (2026), Free TAFE, performance audit report, VAGO, Melbourne, tabled 13 May 2026, particularly Section 3: Free TAFE Funding and Outcomes.
https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/free-tafe
[17] Productivity Commission (2026), Productivity Update – September 2026, Australian Government, Canberra, 3 September 2026, and Australia’s Productivity Performance dashboard, particularly whole-economy labour productivity and the five-year average to June 2026.
https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/productivity-insights/update-september-2026/
https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/productivity-performance/
[18] Fernando, J, McLoughlin, K & Ratnayake, R (2025), ‘Technology Investment and AI: What Are Firms Telling Us?’, Reserve Bank of Australia Bulletin, November 2025, Reserve Bank of Australia, Sydney, 13 November 2025.
https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2025/nov/technology-investment-and-ai-what-are-firms-telling-us.html
[19] Rumbens, D (2026), ‘How AI Will Reshape Australia’s Workforce’, Deloitte Access Economics, 3 September 2026.
https://www.deloitte.com/au/en/services/economics/blogs/how-ai-reshape-australia-workforce.html
[20] PwC Australia (2026), ‘Two Futures for Australian Jobs in an AI Era’, 2026 Global AI Jobs Barometer: Australian Findings, PwC, 18 June 2026.
https://www.pwc.com.au/services/artificial-intelligence/ai-jobs-barometer.html
[21] Boston Consulting Group (2026), ‘AI Will Reshape More Jobs Than It Replaces’, BCG Henderson Institute, 3 April 2026.
https://www.bcg.com/publications/2026/ai-will-reshape-more-jobs-than-it-replaces
[22] Woolworths Group (2025), ‘Woolworths Opens New Regional Distribution Centre’, company media release, 13 November 2025.
https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/au/en/our-newsroom/media-releases/latest-news/2025/woolworths-opens-new-regional-distribution-centre.html
[23] WITRON Service Australia (2026), Redbank: Our Mission and Employment Opportunities, company recruitment information concerning automated logistics operations and technical maintenance roles, accessed 24 October 2026.
https://careers.witron.com/locations/redbank
[24] Jobs and Skills Australia (2026), ‘Occupation Shortages Continue to Ease, While New Analysis Reveals What’s Driving Persistent Gaps’, announcement of the 2026 Occupation Shortage List and Occupation Shortage Drivers, Australian Government, Canberra, 21 October 2026. https://www.jobsandskills.gov.au/news/occupation-shortages-continue-ease-while-new-analysis-reveals-whats-driving-persistent-gaps
[25] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2025), Employers’ Use and Views of the VET System 2025, statistical report, NCVER, Adelaide, 15 December 2025.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/research-and-statistics/publications/all-publications/employers-use-and-views-of-the-vet-system-2025
[26] National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2025), Total VET Students and Courses 2024, statistical report, NCVER, Adelaide, 22 September 2025, particularly Figure 16, p. 21.
https://www.ncver.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0042/9698334/Total-VET-students-and-courses-2024-F.pdf
[27] Commonwealth of Australia (n.d.), HLTAID011 Provide First Aid, National Training Register, including performance evidence and assessment conditions, accessed 24 October 2026.
https://training.gov.au/Training/Details/HLTAID011
[28] Queensland Government, Department of Transport and Main Roads (2026), Traffic Management Training, particularly Traffic Management Implementation accreditation and three-year renewal training requirements, updated 24 July 2026.
https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/business-industry/Business-with-us/Traffic-Management/Traffic-management-training
[29] Safe Work Australia (n.d.), Training and Supporting Your Workers to Stay Safe at Work, particularly guidance on ongoing workplace training, refresher training and the assessment of workplace training requirements, accessed 26 October 2026.
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/managing-health-and-safety/training-and-supporting-your-workers-stay-safe-work
[30] ABB Australia (n.d.), ABB Robotic Services Training Courses in Australia, company information concerning robotics operator and technical training, accessed 24 October 2026.
https://campaign-ra.abb.com/roboticstraining
[31] EY Australia (2026), ‘EY Launches AI Academy to Support Australian Businesses in Upskilling Their AI Workforce’, company media release, 17 March 2026.
https://www.ey.com/en_au/newsroom/2026/03/ey-launches-ai-academy-to-support-australian-businesses-in-upskilling-their-ai-workforce
[32] PWR Advanced Cooling Technology (2026), ‘PWR Announces Strategic Partnership with Major Training to Strengthen Future Workforce Capability’, company announcement, 1 July 2026.
https://www.pwr.com.au/news/pwr-announces-strategic-partnership-with-major-training-to-strengthen-future-workforce-capability/
[33] Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission (2026), Strengthened Aged Care Quality Standards: Outcome 2.9, Human Resource Management, particularly Actions 2.9.4–2.9.7, Australian Government, accessed 24 October 2026.
https://www.agedcarequality.gov.au/strengthened-quality-standards/organisation/human-resource-management
[34] Clean Energy Council (2026), Rooftop Solar and Storage Report: January to June 2026, Clean Energy Council, Melbourne, 29 September 2026.
https://cleanenergycouncil.org.au/news-resources/rooftop-solar-storage-report-january-june-2026
[35] Energy and Climate Change Ministerial Council (2026), Consumer Energy National Technical Regulatory Framework, Australian Government, endorsed 11 September 2026.
https://www.energy.gov.au/energy-and-climate-change-ministerial-council/working-groups/electricity-working-group/consumer-energy-resources-sub-working-group/consumer-energy-national-technical-regulatory-framework
[36] BuildSkills Australia (2026), Modern Methods of Construction: Workforce and Skills Implications, research report prepared with Manufacturing Industry Skills Alliance and Skills Insight, 12 October 2026.
https://buildskills.com.au/news/new-report-modern-methods-of-construction-workforce-and-skills-implications/