Audit office probes Access
By
PETER LUKE
in Wellington
An Audit Office report claimed yesterday that General Access courses were over-priced, and that Access targeting was not working. The report also said that the $3lO million Access scheme might be attempting more than it could achieve, and questioned the way in which the results of training were monitored. No details were given in the report of those training providers or courses visited. But the Minister of Employment, Mr Goff, said later that Canterbury was the area studied most closely by the audit team. Mr Goff claimed that
the report itself was inaccurate, outdated, and lacking in adequate analysis on several counts. The Audit Office review had taken place more than eight months ago, since when many of the concerns raised had been addressed.
The report did not doubt that Access courses benefited trainees, but it contained strong criticism of its administation.
The report said that one training provider had a yearly profit of $350,000 after paying salaries, training costs and overheads. This amounted to 28 per cent of this provider’s total (M) Access (Maori and General) income and could have funded about 50 extra
trainees. Common sense dictated that the more trainees on a course, the lower the price per trainee should be, the report said. But this was not the case on average in five of the seven General Access regions visited.
But while General Access course prices were excessive, resulting in inefficiencies, most Maori Access courses were under-funded, which affected the quality of training or the viability of the providers, said the report.
But Mr Goff said the report provided only anecdotal evidence, not detailed analysis; nor did it set a benchmark for an appropriate price. The Labour Department
said that prices had been decreasing in many regions, as R.E.A.C.S had developed experience in establishing course prices. The report said the scheme’s targeting system was unsuccessful because it did not select the most disadvantaged job-seek-ers, and was riddled with anomalies.
Among the anomalies identified was that providers were judged on the number of jobs trainees got, yet were also expected to train the most disadvantaged at gaining employment.
Mr Goff said these criticisms were "confused and inaccurate,” and that Access did not aim to cater for only the most heavily disadvantaged.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19890726.2.52
Bibliographic details
Press, 26 July 1989, Page 8
Word Count
383Audit office probes Access Press, 26 July 1989, Page 8
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Copyright in all Footrot Flats cartoons is owned by Diogenes Designs Ltd. The National Library has been granted permission to digitise these cartoons and make them available online as part of this digitised version of the Press. You can search, browse, and print Footrot Flats cartoons for research and personal study only. Permission must be obtained from Diogenes Designs Ltd for any other use.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.