A point we shall return to in our discussion of outcomes is that any training program for women must be judged on its impact on the quality of employment for women. In order to be judged successful, federal training initiatives must demonstrably diminish the occupational stratification of women and contribute to a narrowing of the gender-based wage gap. In this regard, the fact that under Canadian Jobs Strategy to date, 87% of Re-Entry and 58% of Job Development programs have been in traditional areas; Skills Shortages has very little provision for training in skills relevant to emerging areas; and there is no ongoing provision for support for bridging programs provides some cause for alarm. While it is important to recognize the good intent of Canadian Jobs Strategy programs and to acknowledge ongoing improvements in administration, it is essential that efforts continue to advocate on behalf of women for improvements in structure, design, and quality control.

The concerns which CCLOW and other groups have about privatization of training appear to be falling on systematically deaf ears. Governments appear to be fully committed to privatization, under a number of labels and are unwilling to engage in anything more than cursory discussion about its possible shortcomings. Recommendations regarding the desirability of preserving a prominent role for training sponsored by the voluntary sector are being generally ignored. It seems that, if voluntary organizations wish to have an effective impact in this area, they will need to develop a very clear and focused position which in some way moves past the private-public argument into a concern with the content, process and outcomes of training.

It may be of some assistance in the debate regarding the appropriate role for voluntary organizations in training, to consider adopting a position which holds that privately-sponsored training should emphasize job- specific technical training while voluntary and public sector groups provide basic education and generic 'learning to learn' skills. For community colleges and some voluntary organizations this would mean major changes in orientation and the development of a whole new set of working relationships based on contracted arrangements with employers and governments. Failing this division of responsibilities, we may well see in Canada the kind of unfortunate situation which has developed in Britain and much of the United States (41). There, private, voluntary and public organizations compete directly for scarce training funds. One result is a lack of cooperation among training organizations across the public, private and voluntary sectors. More important however is the result that those public and voluntary organizations which survive best are those which learn to compete with private sector groups on their own terms. Unfortunately, the long-term needs of the trainee -- which should be the priority of voluntary and public sector groups -- are frequently submerged in the rush to serve the immediate needs of the labour market.