Formation Continue du Supérieur

By Vandana Ramnani, Hindustan Times, New Delhi. About 1221 new campuses are being built, stress is being laid on pushing forward to the forefront of pathbreaking technologies... French minister of higher education and research Laurent Wauquiez elaborates on the changes. Why was there a need to reform the French higher education system?
These are the biggest reforms that we’ve ever undertaken. Till date we had a system based on duality between universities on one side and grandes ecoles on the other. The second point was that each university in France was specialised. You had a university for history and human sciences, law, sciences, mathematics, medicine and everyone was working in his own field and in his own discipline. That was the second weak point. The third weak point was that there was no connection between the world of research and higher education and the world of enterprise/companies. These two worlds were not connected with regard to funds and how to train the French youth. The fourth point was that there were universities that were too small to be able to sustain real research. We’ve changed everything.
How much investment has gone in to ensure that the reforms are a success?
We put in a lot of money on the table to ensure that research and higher education grew faster. We put in €22billion as investment to ensure that our reform process is a success. Earlier, when a university wanted to introduce a new course, they had to come to the ministry, they had no autonomy. We’ve given them teeth now. We have given them a budget and we expect targets from them. Everything has now changed. Presidents of universities are now managers with their budgets and projects - all are trying to find their own way and find what is appropriate for them. That’s the first change.
The second change is that universities are now coming together. We now have the capacity to compete with the biggest universities in this world. Under the Initiative d’excellence (Idex) scheme, most Parisian universities and many grandes ecoles have united to create world class universities. We now have 25 poles de recherche et d’enseignement superieur (PRES - research and higher education clusters) and grand ecoles and research institutes all working together.
The third change has been that universities have opened up to the world of economy and business. Now you have partnerships, foundations, you have bank networks, local communities, you have support for business creation, and companies are funding universities … which is a huge change.
The fourth change is that we are investing in the process of building 1221 new campuses to replace ones that had no learning centres and no sport facilities. We are positioning France so that it can be on the forefront of pathbreaking technologies like nuclear physics and electronics. We are also investing in synthetic biology, for example, in Bordeaux. We are late but we are going to be in the frontline. The French universities, the French research is back.
How open are you to inviting international students to study in France?
France has to be open. It would be crazy at the time of globalisation to close doors. I don’t want students coming in just like that. I want students to come in through partnerships because then we can have real cooperation between foreign universities and French universities. I also want French students to go abroad. I want exchange to be on both sides. I want a France with open doors and open windows.
Are you planning to give working rights to students who graduate from French universities? What is France doing to overtake the UK in terms of foreign student intake?
Well, to overcome the UK is always a target. We decided to have a policy to regulate immigration in France. Every country tries to have a regulation to ensure that we welcome people in fields where we are sure that they can find jobs and where we have a lack of people who are well-trained. If it is a field where we have too many people, where we have unemployment, it is not possible. This is the only difference.
Is language going to be a barrier for international students?
Now you have a lot of programmes in English in France. Now you have complete programmes in English. We’ve tried to change all that although we do try to promote Francophonie. Also, it is not very expensive to study in France. My preoccupation has always been to think about the middle class. Also, I don’t want to make France the US. That’s not interesting. We have to find the way to make higher education and research represent what France is and how it is able to deal with the competition of the 21st century.
How will you convince Indian students who prefer the UK, or the US to come and study in France?
The US is so old fashioned. Everybody is going to the US. What is the difference? If you want to have something different, come to France. Let’s think Europe, let’s think something more than what others are doing. Everybody has an American diploma. What’s the point? Let’s be different. We’re planning a new agency which is going to be in charge of international partnerships as French universities are now going to be autonomous and will have to fund their own partnerships. This agency is called Campus France and it is going to promote French universities in other countries. If you want to have something different, come to France. Let’s think Europe, let’s think something more than what others are doing. Everybody has an American diploma, what’s the point? Let’s be different. Laurent Wauquiez, French minister of higher education and research

By Alex Katsomitros. Of the top 20 universities in the THE World University Rankings 2011-2012, five run a campus abroad. Although branch campuses and partnerships with foreign universities are on the rise, they require a level of investment and risk management that can be intimidating, even for universities with big endowments. But investment in online learning will allow universities to benefit from economies of scale and meet increasing demand from developing countries. A growing number of higher education institutions are taking this forward.
The University of California has launched an online programme as a part of its goal to become the first top-rated American institution to award an online bachelor’s degree. A pilot project will launch in January 2012, with the participation of academics and students, to assess whether undergraduate online courses can deliver ‘UC-quality’ instruction.
Many for-profits have built their whole business plans around online delivery. But they have been criticised for lowering academic standards and for controversial recruitment strategies. A turning point will occur when traditional universities with physical presence and academic reputations realise that the benefits of online delivery outweigh the disadvantages.
UC cites as a reason for its online initiative the forecast shortfall of college graduates. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, there will be 1m fewer graduates than needed by 2025. The Obama administration announced in 2011 the launch of a $2bn grant programme to enhance e-learning and access to learning material, with the goal of achieving the highest proportion of college graduates by 2020, from 39% in 2009 to 58-60% in 2020 (in the 25-34 age range).
This initiative comes as a response to unmet demand for e-learning in the US. According to the 2011 Survey of Online Learning, a barometer of online learning in the US conducted by Babson Survey Research Group and the College Board, a non-profit association, 6.1m students took at least one online course in autumn 2010 – 1/3 of all students in the US. Most noticeably, there was an increase of 560,000 students over the previous year. One of the authors of the report states that the rate of growth in online enrollments is ten times that of the rate in all higher education.
The developing world
A crucial benefit of online learning is that it will facilitate doing business in the developing world. It should therefore become central to the international strategies of higher education institutions. There already exist numerous free portals for lectures and coursework from top-quality institutions which are accessed from all over the world. China is also engaged in this. The next step is turning this into a degree-delivering business model for the providers – one that will be welcomed by those governments in developing countries that face enormous problems in HE participation levels.
The demand is there and there can never be enough classrooms. How is Kapil Sibal, the Indian Minister for Human Resource Development, even going to start approaching his 30% target for gross enrolment ratio by 2020 without online learning? Broadband is spreading in India and China. There were 400m internet users in China in 2009, and more people have access to the internet through cheap smartphones and tablets. The Aakash tablet developed by IIT Rajasthan and DataWind of London sells for $35. The price is subsidised and Sibal said the government aimed to distribute 10m of them to students over the next few years.
There is already a boom in online education in India. According to Bloomberg Businessweek, the online market generated $200m in revenue in 2008, and was expected to reach $1bn by 2010. Subjects that are particularly IT-friendly and crucial for India’s economy, such as computer science, engineering, marketing and business administration, are particularly popular. Online delivery is also a response to one of the main problems facing Indian higher education: the lack of quality academic staff almost everywhere.
Online learning can also address the relative lack of flexibility in Indian higher education. Shiv Nadar, an Indian billionaire who has spent $400m on education charities, including a university in Uttar Pradesh, cites as a reason for his philanthropic work his frustration with the rigid structure of the system:  ‘I was never allowed to do anything cross-disciplinary. Why can't an engineering student learn physics?’
Despite the messiness of the legal and regulatory environment in the sector, many foreign providers have managed to partner with Indian universities and grab a share of the online market. In 2007 Carnegie Mellon University tied up with Shri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering in Chennai to offer IT courses. Cornell University has partnered with South Indian service provider Easy Educate to offer courses in finance, management, and human resources.
A safe indicator of potential growth in an industry is the amount of money it attracts from venture capital funds: $74m was invested in Indian education companies in 2007. Some Indian companies are even competitive at the global stage, such as Indian Math Online, which targets secondary education students in India and the US.
As for China, it is telling that the share prices of companies specialising in online delivery are booming. Kaplan Open Learning has identified three reasons why there will be significant growth in online education in China over the next few years:  ‘the expansive and rural geography of the country, the high competition for fewer enrolment places (comparable to the UK or US, at least), and recent government-stimulated incentives to ensure compulsory learning for all’.
12.2m people used online education in 2007 according to Market Avenue, a 25% increase in one year. The size of the market quadrupled from RMB 10.6bn in 2004 to RMB 40.5bn in 2011. And there is huge potential for growth, as foreign providers have only recently entered this vast market. The University of Massachusetts became in 2008 the first foreign university approved to offer online courses and degree programmes in China.
China and India are the fastest growing markets, but are not the only ones. South Africa and Brazil are also on the rise. Universities that will manage to enter successfully the global digital market over the next few years will have an advantage over those that hesitate to take the leap. Mergers between universities are likely, particularly in Europe and the US. Leaders in the online niches might be the first institutions to dodge the consequences of technological disruption in higher education and be the first truly global universities.

By Jonathan Fanton. As a former president of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, I have worked for years to strengthen education in many countries. I have come to appreciate that the ideal education system in any nation needs to be sufficiently diverse to meet the needs of students from many backgrounds and with varying aspirations for both their lives and future careers.
Here in the United States, the framework for education has slowly evolved to meet the changing needs of American students. Today, we are moving toward an education system that, at all levels, provides a mix of private and public institutions that serve an array of students. By increasing opportunities for students at all levels of education, we can provide them with the ability to pursue the education that is the best fit for them. Some students attend secondary institutions with low graduation and college-acceptance rates. Instead of acting as though those students have no desire for postsecondary education, we should encourage them to attend institutions of higher education that focus on helping nontraditional students.
Today, for many in our nation, the road to a career does not involve a traditional four-year college. Students from a range of backgrounds are electing to pursue higher education at for-profit colleges, some of them online. More than 3 million students attended accredited colleges and universities in the for-profit private sector in 2008-09. Of those, 40 percent were students of color, and 61 percent were women, according to the U.S. Department of Education, and more than 80 percent of students in for-profit colleges are the first in their families to attend college.
Education has always been a critical source of opportunity, and data show that a college education can dramatically affect an individual's ability to find a good job to support a family and contribute to the community. This is especially true for students coming from high schools that do not traditionally send large numbers of students to postsecondary institutions.
As the number of students who seek education at for-profit colleges grows, so do controversies. Although the end goal of these institutions is honorable, not all of these schools have operated in an equally honorable manner. It should also be noted that many of the issues that exist at for-profit colleges exist at other institutions of higher education as well. To encourage appropriate and responsible conduct across all of higher education, there needs to be a higher standard of conduct for institutional operations and accountability among all colleges and universities.
Earlier this year, I joined the board of advisers to the Foundation for Educational Success. One of our charges was to create a single high standard for all institutions of higher education. I joined this effort along with Thomas H. Kean, the former governor of New Jersey; former Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell; Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, a professor of education at Harvard University; and Elizabeth Molina Morgan, the executive director of Grad Nation, an initiative of the America's Promise Alliance.
We recently released standards of responsible conduct and transparency, a set of enforceable principles that not only address public concerns, but also ensure that all students have access to high-quality educational opportunities. The standards define new guidelines, as agreed to by their signatories, which include the Kaplan Higher Education Corp., the Career Education Corp., and Vatterott Educational Centers Inc. The signatories are required to obtain an independent audit of their practices to comply with the standards' enforcement mechanism.
The standards include provisions for providing information about tuition costs and fees, and graduation and job-placement rates, as well as student debt obligations. The foundation will create a website where students can read about best practices around disclosure, transparency, and academic-readiness counseling.
What is most needed is for colleges to create transparent and enforceable standards of conduct that exceed the existing requirements of academic accreditation bodies, state regulators, and the federal Education Department. Drawing on my experience as a former college president, I believe that these standards will improve the educational experience for the 3 million students currently enrolled in for-profit colleges, as well as the millions of students who will attend these schools in the years to come. Ultimately, I am confident that these standards can serve as a model for all institutions of higher education.
For-profit colleges play an essential role in educating millions of men and women and helping them enter or return to the workforce. And they help our nation become more competitive in the global economy by equipping students with skills that match job opportunities. The effort to establish standards of best practices deserves our support.
Jonathan Fanton was the president of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and of the New School for Social Research. He serves on the board of advisers of the Foundation for Educational Success, in Washington.

Looking behind the metaphors: How to build stairways to excellence in EU regions? Brussels, Belgium (29 November 2011)
This workshop, jointly organised by the national university representations from Poland, Germany and Austria under the patronage of MEP Danuta Hübner, aims at contributing to the debate on future EU cohesion policy with a special focus on innovation and research.
It will bring together decision-makers on EU, national and regional level as well as stakeholders from science and research, regional development and the business community. For more information, please download the invitation here.
Please note the registration deadline is actually 21 November 2011 (and not the date noted in the invitation).

IREG-6 Conference: Academic Rankings  and Advancement of Higher Education Lessons from Asia and other Regions
Background and context
IREG-6 Conference will be an important venue for representatives of the ranking organizations, experts on quality assurance and academic excellence as well as stakeholders and interested parties to meet and discuss various topics concerning the academic rankings and other type of assessment of performance of higher education institutions.
On previous occasions, IREG conferences met in Warsaw, Washington, Berlin, Shanghai, Astana, and again in Berlin, demonstrating a growing interest and relevance of a relatively new phenomenon which is academic rankings. As already indicated by title of the meeting, without neglecting relevant developments in other regions, the IREG-6 conference will concentrate on higher education in Asia Region. This region made tremendous progress in expanding access to higher education and as observes, Richard C. Levin, President of Yale University:
“The leading countries of Asia are focused on an even more challenging goal: building universities that can compete with the finest in the world. The governments of China, India, Singapore and South Korea are explicitly seeking to elevate some of their universities to this exalted status because they recognise the important role that university-based scientific research has played in driving economic growth in the United States, Europe and Japan.”
It is also a region in which university rankings found acceptance and became important for governments, universities, students and other stake holders. The reason seems to be that rankings, with all due limitations, are perceived as “mirror” of their performance. Like in other parts of the world, Asian countries hope that a funding concentration policy will lead to creation of several top ranked institutions. In fact, there has been continuous debate over the direct and indirect effects of these policies. Reflection of these discussions will surely resonate during this meeting.
Like the previous meetings, IREG-6 will discuss new developments in university rankings with a special attention to their reliability and quality enhancement. In April 2011, IREG Observatory on Ranking and Excellence has adopted the rules and procedures that will be used in assessing the quality of rankings. The purpose of an audit, conducted by independent academic teams, will be to verify if a ranking under review was done professionally, and observes good practices, providing students, their parents and employers with information allowing them to compare and assess programs offered by higher education institutions (more information can be accessed at www.ireg-observatory.org). At present, the audit process is ongoing, but it starts to have an impact on the development of existing ranking systems, and successfully drive rankers to make a self-examination according to these principles.
This two-day conference, will provide the participants not only a good insight into recent developments in academic rankings but will give an opportunity to interact directly with rankers of leading international and national rankings, researchers, university leaders, policy makers and other stake-holders from various regions to discuss major developments related directly and indirectly to higher education. Those who are interested are invited to take part in the event and are advised to register early due to the limited availability.
Last but not least, IREG-6 Conference and post conference (optional) programs will provide a great opportunity to experience the beauty, dynamism, history, exquisite cuisine and hospitality of Taiwan and its people.
See also on the blog: IREG-5: National University Rankings on the Rise, Rapport sur les classements mondiaux d'universités et leur impact, Examining The World Bank’s Papers on Higher Education Since 1994, IREG-Ranking Audit: Purpose, Criteria and Procedure, Les classements d'universités pointés du doigt, IREG Ranking Audit Rules adopted, Conference on university rankings, IREG-5:The Academic Rankings: From Popularity to Reliability and Relevance.

Blog Educpros de Pierre Dubois. La Loi Libertés et Responsabilités des Universités d’août 2007 a rendu obligatoire la présentation d’un bilan de la politique sociale de l’établissement au Comité technique paritaire (devenu Comité technique depuis la loi du 5 juillet 2010 sur la rénovation du dialogue social dans la fonction publique); ce bilan est également un outil de dialogue dans les instances de l’université.
Les directions des ressources humaines ont donc élaboré ces bilans sociaux. Il faut les en féliciter. Il s’agit en effet d’un travail complexe parce que les données sont issues de plusieurs applications informatiques, rigoureux (données “fiabilisées et harmonisées”), fort long à réaliser et très utile. Cette chronique explore les usages possibles du bilan social dans une université, celle de Strasbourg. Le premier bilan social de l’université unifiée vient en effet de paraître: le document de 171 pages porte sur la situation au 1er janvier 2010: 5.212 agents employés à cette date.
Autres bilans sociaux. Les 10 premières propositions de Google: Haute-Alsace Mulhouse Haute-Alsace Mulhouse (bilan 2010), Lille 3 (bilans 2008, 2009, 2010), Franche-Comté (bilan 2007 et 2009), Cergy-Pontoise (bilan 2009-2011), Pierre Mendès France Grenoble (bilan 2007), Versailles Saint-Quentin (bilans 2010 et 2011), Rouen (bilan 2009), Rennes 2 (bilans 2007 et 2009), Bordeaux 4 Montesquieu (bilan 2008-2009), Aix-Marseille 2 Méditerranée (bilans 2004 à 2010).
Il faut rappeler un point tout à fait important. Les universités ne sont pas des entreprises qui décident de leur nombre d’emplois et de leur masse salariale. Elle n’ont qu’une autonomie fort relative. La loi LRU précise en effet: “les montants affectés à la masse salariale au sein de la dotation annuelle de l’Etat sont limitatifs et assortis du plafond des emplois que l’établissement est autorisé à rémunérer. Le contrat pluriannuel d’établissement fixe le pourcentage maximum de cette masse salariale que l’établissement peut consacrer au recrutement des agents contractuels mentionnés à l’article L. 954-3. L’établissement assure l’information régulière du ministre chargé de l’enseignement supérieur et se dote d’instruments d’audit interne et de pilotage financier et patrimonial selon des modalités précisées par décret. Les comptes de l’université font l’objet d’une certification annuelle par un commissaire aux comptes” (Code de l’éducation, article 712-9).
Autrement dit, les effectifs d’enseignants et de BIATOSS fonctionnaires et une partie des effectifs de non-fonctionnaires sont limités par des plafonds d’emploi, dictés par la tutelle et contrôlés par des commissaires aux comptes. Pas question de laisser exploser la masse salariale : pour ne pas crever le plafond dû par exemple à l’impact du GVT, il faut donc, en cas de besoin, geler des postes de fonctionnaires, ne pas les remplacer. Avec les responsabilités et compétences élargies (RCE), les universités n’ont guère de libertés financières ; elles ont surtout des responsabilités (chronique : “Acte de décès de la LRU“).
Contenu des bilans sociaux. Le paragraphe précédent explique pourquoi le bilan social distingue d’abord les emplois (plafonds d’emplois autorisés) et les effectifs réels (ils ne peuvent être qu’inférieurs aux emplois autorisés). Tenue par ses plafonds d’emplois, l’université de Strasbourg a fort judicieusement ajouté, tant pour les enseignants que pour les personnesl contractuels non-enseignants, une catégorie qui est en même temps un objectif: personnels non fonctionnaires exerçant une mission permanente reconnue par le Conseil d’administration.
Autres chapitres du bilan social, introduits par une note bienvenue: “les clés pour comprendre” les mouvements de personnel (promotions et mobilités), les absences et les congés, les rémunérations (dont les heures complémentaires) et les régimes indemnitaires (primes), l’hygiène et la sécurité, les services de santé au travail, la formation continue des personnels, les relations professionnelles, l’action culturelle et sociale.
Quelques observations brutes de décoffrage. Une très grande complexité: 7 catégories de personnels enseignants (elles-mêmes subdivisées en plusieurs catégories), 10 catégories de personnels BIATOSS (elles-mêmes subdivisées en plusieurs corps), 24 types de primes pour un montant total de 14,4 Millions d’€ (7 pour les enseignants, 14 pour les BIATOSS, 3 “autres” ; y ajouter les indemnités pour les activités de formation continue). Des masses impressionnantes: une charge d’enseignement de 636.000 heures, près de 250.000 heures complémentaires. Les personnels, titulaires et non titulaires, sont classés par composante, par âge, par sexe, par grade: ce qui donne lieu à des présentations classiques (pyramides des âges, histogrammes, parts de “camembert”).
Quel est l’intérêt indéniable du bilan social? Le regroupement en un document unique de toutes les informations concernant les ressources humaines. Celui de l’université de Strasbourg fait montre de plusieurs autres qualités: “clés indispensables pour comprendre” les notions utilisées ; consultation possible par tous, et donc transparence; mise à disposition de données brutes permettant de construire telle ou telle analyse, tel ou tel indicateur (une des prochaines chroniques du blog s’y emploiera: elle concernera les PRAG/PRCE, les 3 IUT de l’université). Un point faible temporaire du bilan 2010: c’est le premier de l’université unifiée; le bilan au 1er janvier 2011 est attendu avec impatience car il produira des données plus récentes et car il permettra d’analyser les évolutions dans le temps.
Qu’attendent du bilan social les dirigeants de l’université? Avant-propos du bilan social de l’UdS (page 3): “le bilan social est l’un des outils de diagnostic qui nous permettra dorénavant de mieux connaître nos forces et nos faiblesses. Ainsi, il nous aidera à anticiper l’évolution des besoins à venir et à prendre en connaissance de cause, les décisions adéquates pour orienter les principaux chantiers dans les domaines des ressources humaines et financières. Le bilan social, reflet de notre politique de ressources humaines, est également un outil favorisant le dialogue social“. Ce programme reste général: on peut espérer que le bilan 2011 fasse mention d’une dizaine de priorités de l’université, en précise le délai souhaité de réalisation et l’état d’avancement.

Opportunité de carrière par la formation tout au long de la vie: Comment devenir ingénieur d’une grande école par la VAE ou la formation continue?
Peut-on encore devenir ingénieur diplômé d’une grande école quand on a débuté sa carrière avec un DUT ou un BTS? Peut-on se former à distance ou en alternance pour devenir ingénieur? Comment devenir ingénieur par la VAE? Comment optimiser l’utilisation du DIF? Comment structurer et rendre cohérent un projet de formation sur plusieurs années?
Telles sont quelques-unes des questions posées lors du séminaire d’automne organisé par l’INP formation continue de Toulouse sur la Formation Tout au Long de la Vie et le diplôme d’ingénieur.
Le public présent était constitué essentiellement de techniciens, ayant bac + 2, bac + 3 ou bac + 4 avec comme point commun un vrai désir d’évolution professionnelle vers un diplôme d’ingénieur d’école reconnu. Mais en revanche, une méconnaissance presque totale des dispositifs et des outils permettant d’y parvenir.
En effet, force est de constater que dans les esprits, l’idée demeure encore fortement ancrée qu’il n’y a qu’une voie royale pour intégrer une grande école d’ingénieur; celle de la formation initiale, sur concours après les classes prépa.
Malgré la loi de 2004, malgré l’ouverture des grandes écoles à de nouveaux publics de techniciens ayant une expérience professionnelle d’au moins trois ans, malgré la mise en place de la validation des acquis de l’expérience, malgré des possibilités de financements nouvelles, les efforts d’information et de communication de ces nouveaux dispositifs sont encore bien insuffisants.
Pourtant un établissement universitaire comme l’Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse a mis en place des dispositifs pour toutes ses formations d’ingénieur (VAE, e-Learning, alternance) qui permettent la reprise d’étude. Une attention toute particulière est portée aux candidatures en formation continue qui permettent l’ouverture des grandes écoles à de nouveaux publics et favorisent les relations avec les entreprises. D’ailleurs, de grandes entreprises sont partenaires des dispositifs qu’elles intègrent dans leur GPEC, envoient leur techniciens et favorisent ainsi leur évolution professionnelle.
Toutes les écoles de l’INP de Toulouse: l’ENSAT, l’AgroToulouse, l’ENSEEIHT, l’ENSIACET, l’ENI de Tarbes, l’EIP, l’Ecole de la Météo sont partie prenantes dans ces différents dispositifs permettant ainsi de couvrir de nombreux secteurs industriels. Tous ceux qui souhaitent plus d’information peuvent me contacter directement par mail: olivier.delahaye@inp-toulouse.fr ou se rendre sur le site : http://www.formation-continue.inp-toulouse.fr.

Mardi 15 novembre 2011 - Présidence de M. Claude Jeannerot, vice-président - Loi de finances pour 2012 - Audition de M. Xavier Bertrand, ministre du travail, de l'emploi et de la santé.
M. Claude Jeannerot, président, rapporteur pour avis pour la mission « Travail et emploi ». L'an dernier, le Gouvernement avait justifié le prélèvement de 300 millions sur le fonds paritaire de sécurisation des parcours professionnels (FPSPP) en expliquant que la montée en charge du fonds était progressive et qu'il disposait donc de ressources inemployées. Comment justifiez-vous le prélèvement proposé cette année?
M. Xavier Bertrand, ministre. Au sujet du FPSPP, je dirai simplement qu'il n'est pas utile, dans la situation budgétaire actuelle, de laisser subsister d'importantes trésoreries dormantes. Je salue le sens des responsabilités des partenaires sociaux qui jouent le jeu, alors qu'ils auraient pu claquer la porte pour marquer leur mauvaise humeur. J'ajoute que les partenaires sociaux ont décidé d'appeler un taux de contribution de 10 % en 2012, soit un niveau inférieur au maximum prévu par la loi.
S'agissant de l'Afpa, je rappelle qu'un marché public a été passé avec l'Etat pour la mise en oeuvre de prestations d'accompagnement de publics ciblés (travailleurs handicapés ressortissants d'outre mer, détenus, militaires en reconversion). L'Afpa reste compétente pour l'activité de certification et elle touche, à ce titre, une contribution de 50 millions d'euros versée par le FPSPP. Des baux emphytéotiques vont être signés avec l'Afpa pour l'aider à gérer dans la durée son patrimoine immobilier. Je n'ignore pas les inquiétudes des personnels mais je pense que la situation évolue positivement, étant entendu que ce sont désormais les régions qui financent la plus grande partie des achats de formation.
Loi de finances pour 2012 - Mission Travail et emploi - Examen du rapport pour avis
La commission procède à l'examen du rapport pour avis de M. Claude Jeannerot, sur le projet de loi de finances pour 2012 (mission « Travail et emploi » et les articles 62 à 63 quater rattachés).
M. Claude Jeannerot, rapporteur pour avis.
En outre, des dépenses de formation qui devraient normalement être financées par l'Etat vont être mises à la charge du fonds paritaire de sécurisation des parcours professionnels (FPSPP). Le Gouvernement propose en effet de prélever l'an prochain 300 millions d'euros sur les ressources de ce fonds et de les affecter:
- à l'association pour la formation professionnelle des adultes (Afpa), à hauteur de 75 millions, au titre de sa participation au service public de l'emploi et pour le financement de la mise en oeuvre des titres professionnels délivrés par le ministère de l'emploi;
- à l'agence de services et de paiement (ASP), à hauteur de 200 millions, pour le financement de la rémunération des stagiaires de la formation professionnelle;
- à Pôle emploi, à hauteur de 25 millions, pour le financement de l'allocation en faveur des demandeurs d'emploi en formation (Afdef).
Je signale que le projet de loi de finances comporte, pour la première fois, un compte d'affectation spéciale « Financement national du développement et de la modernisation de l'apprentissage », qui rassemble 360 millions d'euros de crédits destinés au financement des nouveaux contrats d'objectifs et de moyens passés avec les régions et 15 millions destinés à la mise en oeuvre du dispositif de bonus-malus qui a été créé pour inciter les entreprises à recruter des jeunes en alternance.
En conclusion, vous l'aurez compris, je ne suis pas favorable à ce projet de budget, qui ne me paraît pas à la hauteur des enjeux, et je vous proposerai, en conséquence, d'en rejeter les crédits.
Mme Odette Duriez. - Je tiens à m'élever contre le prélèvement de 300 millions d'euros envisagé sur le FPSPP. Une telle mesure empêcherait le fonds d'assumer convenablement ses missions.
EXAMEN DES AMENDEMENTS
Article 63
M. Claude Jeannerot, rapporteur pour avis. - Cet amendement de suppression de l'article vise à éviter que l'Etat ponctionne le FPSPP.
La commission adopte l'amendement n° 2.