Who is impacted?

Independent Registered Training Organisations (RTOs) are a vital part of Australia’s vocational education and training (VET) sector. They deliver high-quality, flexible, and industry-aligned training to millions of students nationwide, including in remote, regional, and underserved communities. Many private RTOs also cater to niche industries and adult learners who require more personalised and adaptable delivery than traditional TAFE institutions can offer. However, the Australian Government’s current focus on Fee-Free TAFE—while well-meaning—has unintentionally marginalised independent RTOs. Without access to equivalent funding, these providers are at serious risk, putting jobs, training opportunities, and community support services in jeopardy.

What is at stake?

Private RTOs consistently outperform public TAFEs in key areas of quality and outcomes. According to the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER), completion rates for Certificate II qualifications sit at 50.8% for private RTOs, compared to just 33.8% for TAFE. Overall completion across independent providers is higher too—54.2% versus TAFE’s 43.0%. Student satisfaction is also stronger, with 90.7% of students expressing overall satisfaction with their private training, compared to 88.9% for TAFE. Employers rate independent providers highly for their responsiveness, industry alignment, and skills relevance. Yet despite these results, private RTOs are excluded from most government initiatives offering fee-free education. This entrenched funding imbalance threatens to reduce diversity, competition, and innovation in the VET sector—ultimately impacting learners who deserve a choice in how, when, and where they train.

Why is now the time to act?

The Federal Government has announced legislation to make Fee-Free TAFE a permanent policy, with 100,000 free places to be funded annually from 2027. This is a major structural reform that will further shift public funds away from private providers—despite independent RTOs educating over 70% of VET students nationally. If the Government moves forward without addressing this imbalance, hundreds of reputable, high-performing RTOs could close their doors. Learners in regional areas, specialised fields, and flexible delivery modes will be left behind. We must act now to ensure that vocational education in Australia remains fair, student-centred, and outcome-driven.

We call on the Australian Government to:

Implement equitable funding models:

• Extend access to funding and fee-free initiatives to include high-quality RTOs, not just public TAFE providers.
• Recognise the proven performance of independent RTOs: Acknowledge that completion rates, employer satisfaction, and student outcomes are often higher in independent training settings.
• Protect learner choice and sector diversity: Avoid a monopoly model by ensuring all reputable providers can participate in publicly funded training schemes.

Conclusion:

A healthy and competitive VET sector depends on diversity, accessibility, and quality outcomes. Independent RTOs are essential to achieving these goals. We urge the Government to adopt a funding approach that reflects evidence, fairness, and student needs—not just political ideology. Support equity in vocational education. Support private RTOs.