Electricians are in short supply in Australia, and demand is only climbing. As the country accelerates its energy transition and grapples with housing and infrastructure pressures, multiple forecasts point to a steep and growing shortfall in the electrical trades.

Meeting that challenge will require faster pathways into the workforce and fewer barriers to mobility.

A proposed national licensing scheme aims to do both, enabling licensed electricians to work across state and territory borders without reapplying or paying duplicate fees.

Originally announced as part of the federal budget, the reform is now entering its design phase. Treasury casts it as a practical way to cut red tape and lift labour mobility, a view the Productivity Commission has supported with early modelling. Regulators are now working through the detail, from scopes of work and licensing standards to data-sharing and enforcement.

The Powering Skills Organisation projects a national shortfall
of around 17,400 electrical workers by 2030.

A reform with economic weight

Treasury’s March announcement laid out a simple proposition: streamline licensing to allow electricians to work nationally, while maintaining public safety in a high-risk trade. 

The Productivity Commission’s interim report, released this month, estimates that improved labour mobility across licensed occupations could lift GDP by up to 0.04 per cent per year. For electrical and related trades, the benefit could be worth between $51 million and $62 million annually.

The workforce shortfall gives the policy added urgency. The Clean Energy Council estimates that an additional 32,000 electricians will be required to meet clean energy targets. The Powering Skills Organisation projects a national shortfall of around 17,400 electrical workers by 2030. While the methodologies differ, the direction is consistent: current supply is unlikely to meet future demand.

Mobility is the immediate aim, but public safety remains the anchor point.

Stakeholders signal early support, with conditions

Major industry and union stakeholders are backing the reform in principle, but many are focused on execution. 

The Electrical Trades Union (ETU) has called for the licence to become a national benchmark for safety and quality. The Australian Refrigeration Council (ARC) has argued that restricted electrical licences must be included in the model, given their importance in the HVAC&R workforce. Master Builders has supported the reform as a way to reduce duplication and improve workforce flexibility.

Mobility is the immediate aim, but public safety remains the anchor point. 

Treasury has made clear that portability cannot come at the expense of standards. The ETU has echoed that view, warning against a lowest-common-denominator approach and urging a strong compliance and enforcement framework.

For regulators, the challenge will be ensuring that mobility does not create blind spots. This includes aligning licensing scopes across jurisdictions, designing mechanisms for sanction portability and ensuring that enforcement remains practical across borders.

Restricted categories must be part of the equation

The inclusion of restricted electrical licences has become a key test of the reform’s scope. 

ARC has pointed out that many refrigeration and air conditioning technicians hold restricted licences that allow them to complete defined electrical tasks safely. Excluding these workers would limit mobility just as demand for installation and maintenance is rising. Including them, with clear task boundaries and appropriate supervision rules, could improve workforce responsiveness without weakening safety controls.

Several key design choices are now under discussion. 

One option is to begin with fully licensed electricians, then expand to other high-risk trades over time. 

This approach reflects stakeholder consensus and matches the Commission’s recommendation to start where jurisdictions already share common prerequisites.

Harmonisation of competency requirements and continuing professional development is another priority. 

Shared units of competency, clear supervised work categories and aligned CPD rules would reduce confusion for employers and licensees. The Commission has noted that while automatic mutual recognition (AMR) can improve workforce mobility, a purpose-built national scheme may be justified where the risks and market conditions warrant it.

The question of governance remains open. A national law administered by states is seen as the most viable model, but it would require integration with existing safety regulators such as Energy Safe Victoria, NSW Fair Trading and Queensland’s Electrical Safety Office. 

Effective data sharing, sanction recognition and scope dispute resolution will be essential to avoid regulatory overlap or gaps.

Digital infrastructure is also on the agenda. A national register that supports real-time verification will be necessary to maintain integrity across borders. APIs that allow interoperability between agencies may prove as important as the legislation itself.

Regulator priorities: what to prepare now

With design decisions still underway, regulators have a window to shape the model. Some of the preparatory work includes:

• Mapping existing licence classes, scopes and conditions against a proposed national standard
• Identifying inconsistencies that could hinder enforcement or supervision
• Planning for data migration to a national register, including how sanctions, CPD and restrictions will be recorded and transferred
• Drafting compliance protocols for joint inspections, cross-border complaints and scope disputes
• Budgeting for transitional surges in application processing or training queries
• Contributing risk data and economic evidence through consultation processes

Risks and lessons from past efforts

This is not the first attempt at national licensing in Australia. 

The National Occupational Licensing Scheme (NOLS), launched over a decade ago, ultimately failed due to unresolved disputes over scope, governance, and standards. That experience offers a roadmap of pitfalls to avoid rather than a reason to abandon the project.

The Commission’s current process is structured to avoid similar breakdowns. By publishing interim findings, conducting public consultations and offering options rather than prescriptions, the process aims to build consensus before legislation is drafted.

Automatic mutual recognition, introduced in 2021, has helped reduce friction, but it does not resolve deeper inconsistencies between jurisdictions. A national licence could provide a clearer and more enforceable framework, especially if it embeds common standards and includes restricted categories with appropriate safeguards.

What happens next

Two major forums will help shape the direction of the reform over the coming months. The Treasurer’s Economic Reform Roundtable, held in Canberra from 19 to 21 August, has placed workforce mobility, productivity and red tape at the centre of its agenda. 

In September, the National Construction Industry Forum will meet again to finalise its Blueprint, where licensing reform is a key theme.

The Productivity Commission’s final report is due by 31 October. Detailed consultation on legislative options is expected to follow shortly after.

Also read Licence to evolve: how Australia’s licensing reforms are redefining regulatory intent