New Zealand’s Vocational Education System: The 2026 Vocational Education Reform

In my previous article, I explained the New Zealand vocational education system prior to 2019, and the Reform of Vocational Education (RoVE) which took place between 2020-2023, with the reform having been active since then. A new government was elected in October 2023, in December 2023 they announced that they would be undertaking consultation to change the RoVE model, and in April 2025 they announced that there would be a new significant reform, which would be implemented 1 January 2026.

Another “Once-in-a-Generation” Reform

On April 24, 2025, New Zealand’s government announced a fundamental restructuring of the country’s vocational education system. Coming just two years after the full implementation of the previous Reform of Vocational Education (RoVE), this announcement marked a significant shift in direction—away from the centralised model of Te Pūkenga towards a more industry-led approach.

Vocational Education Minister Penny Simmonds stated during the announcement that the current model had become “overly centralised” and “disconnected from the realities of the jobs [learners] are working towards”.

The Independent Work-Based Learning Model: Key Features

There are two key components that define this new vocational education reform:

1. Disestablishment of Te Pūkenga: The government will amend the Education and Training Act 2020 to disestablish the mega-polytech Te Pūkenga and establish industry-led private providers, and polytechnics as autonomous entities. Financially viable ITPs will be established during a two-year transition period with work-based learning being able to be offered by any provider that meets the requirements. These providers will manage all aspects of apprenticeships or traineeships, including the pastoral care for learners.
2. Industry Skills Boards: These will be established on 1 January 2026 and replace the current Workforce Development Councils (WDCs). ISBs will be statutory standard-setting bodies with majority industry governance, responsible for developing qualifications, endorsing programmes, and moderating assessments over particular industry sectors.

Deep Dive

Vocational Education Minister Simmonds has said that “the redesigned system will better meet the needs of learners, industry, and the economy. It includes re-establishing regional polytechnics that are financially sustainable”. Decisions on which polytechnics will be established, and in which form, will be taken in the first half of 2025, considering the needs of local communities, learners, and industry. Whether there will be some groupings or collaborations, or what will happen to those who may not be able to survive on their own, are questions that are yet to be answered.

The Industry Skills Boards (ISBs) that are replacing the WDC’s will be structured around industry groupings, with between seven and ten boards anticipated, (there are six WDC’s). With governance dominated by industry representatives, ISBs are there to ensure that qualification standards and training content remain relevant to workplace needs. The industry-led structure is intended to strengthen the industry voice in qualification design while maintaining some sector-wide coordination. There are still questions that need to answered around their make-up, and how education expertise will be embedded within each of the ISBs.

There is some anger already, as the subject areas for each ISB are being determined on whether those industries have existing, traditional apprenticeships. The government want to focus on increasing and supporting work-based learning, which is a great goal in and of itself, but, they are only understanding work-based learning from an apprenticeship model perspective. To that end, the creative and tech sectors, which are currently represented in one of the WDC’s, will not be represented in an ISB, instead the intention is that they will be under the New Zealand Qualifications Authority, as will any industry that doesn’t fit into one of the ISBs. It is being criticised by many who are seeing the decision as being short sighted and old fashioned when, especially with the creative sector, New Zealand is home of a big film industry, and yet the chance for the industry to be in a position to strengthen itself and its educational pathways could now be very much diminished.  

Transition Strategy: Managing the Change

Recognising the complexity of this shift, particularly coming so soon after the previous reform, the government has outlined a transition process:

The initial transfer on January 1, 2026, will see Te Pūkenga’s work-based learning divisions, including their existing apprentices and trainees, transfer to an ISB for up to two years. During this period, it is expected that industry-led private providers, polytechnics, and Wānanga will take over delivery from the work-based learning divisions.

Employers, apprentices, and trainees will be able to continue to work with and enrol the same people they currently work with. Although there will be changes to the reporting lines for the work-based learning divisions in Te Pūkenga. Courses and qualifications will continue to be delivered, and every effort will be made to ensure that training is not disrupted.

The Politicisation of Vocational Education

Before I finish this article, I did want to talk about the timing of all of this change. When the current government were in opposition, they excoriated the then-government about the delivery of RoVE: that there hadn’t been enough thought made about transitioning to the new system, that the strategy and design weren’t robust enough, as well as the high costs during both the transition period and during their first years in operation, and to be fair, they had a point. With RoVE there didn’t seem to have been enough time to make sure that the new system would be in a good place from the start, a lot of it seemed to have been waiting for when the new system began. This newly announced reform then, is just the irony of ironies.

The current government campaigned at the last election that if they got into power, they would stop the Polytech centralisation. New Zealand elections are every three years, with the next general election scheduled for September/October this year. So them being able to say that they have made, or are working towards the execution of these changes, and have done that in their first term, is potentially one reason why there is such a short timeline for this implementation.

RoVE had three years to be strategised, designed and ready to go on day 1, and yet even with that amount of time, there were as mentioned, a lot of issues and costs and it ideally needed longer to get to something workable, cut to now, and the changes were announced at the end of April, and it needs to be implemented 1 January 2026. Eight months to design, strategise, and create an entirely new vocational education structure, with a general election in the middle as well, it’s quite farcical.

Some will argue that the two-year implementation period will support this new structure and gives it time to do what it needs to do. In my opinion, it is madness to just throw a new system together in eight months and then use this two-year period as a blanket excuse for any issues that may occur and to try and fix or make this new structure work. During all of this there will still be learners needing to be taught, apprentices and industry needing support, as well as an entirely new industry-led standard-setting body structure to be created and somehow, make consistent.  

I don’t disagree that there were many problems with RoVE and with its implementation, but far from learning those lessons, this government seem to be willfully ignoring them. If the government really wanted to make a change, they could have just focused on breaking up Te Pūkenga, the polytechnic centralisation which they were so against, and just done incremental change as and when needed for the rest. This doesn’t need to happen in the way that it’s happening.

Both of the major political parties in New Zealand have now made massive structural changes to the vocational sector, and are still not seeing eye to eye at all in how its design or function. Education should not be politicised, but right now it is, and it needs to stop. It’s tragic that pre-2020, there had been a long-standing vocational education system in New Zealand, it may not have been perfect, but it was respected, and it was understood. Educational system change can and should happen, but over time. Massive structural system change- twice in five years, helps no one.

Next up in Article 3 of this series will be an exploration of the implications, benefits, and challenges of the proposed 2026 model.

By Stuart G A Martin, Founder of George Angus Consulting.