Government still insulating itself from blame

Ben81 says:

01:52pm | 15/10/10

Looking at the cost vs benefits, yes it was a complete waste of money, and that would be the understatement of the year.

Russell says:

03:00pm | 15/10/10

Sonia must be the new name for Jack

Joolz says:

03:44pm | 15/10/10

So long as you’re happy, that’s all that matters.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

10:51pm | 15/10/10

I guess that means “I’m OK & sod the people that died due to mismanaged Labor schemes

tommy carmichael says:

11:18am | 16/10/10

i too am happy with my insulation sonia.  as expected the liberal losers are out in force condemning the scheme which rightly so had to be stopped mainly due to a greedy and incompetent few who hadnt a clue what they were doing.  there would be more happy customers than not if a vote was taken. how many liberal whingers are enjoying their free insulation as we speak.

Reg says:

10:23am | 17/10/10

Goodness, 4000 cases of potential fraud! Does that mean there are others where short-cuts are regarded as great business decisions?

It is indeed disappointing to hear that private business is so untrustworthy. I suppose for those like Ben81, who never took advantage of the scheme the cost/benefit WOULD be zero. Not for me with my solar electricity and my 5000 litre water storage.

acotrel says:

07:31am | 18/10/10

The fact that the insulation disaster ever happened speaks volumes about small business in Australia.  It shows an endemic level of incompetence - even the very basics of quality and safety management were often not addressed!  It’s imperative that manslaughter charges be brought against those GRUBS who caused workplace deaths by their GROSS NEGLIGENCE, and disregard for the state OHS laws!

Macca says:

01:48pm | 15/10/10

Just what I was thinking, why is anyone suprised by this? everything about this screams ALP spin. Another bad announcement on a friday on the same day the nightly news will be doing a round-up of the Commenwealth Games, couldn’t have planned it better….

Sue says:

03:31pm | 15/10/10

What a pipedream!!  If the media banded together and asked the hard questions about most behaviour by this government & the previous, there would not be enough airtime within news scheduling or paper to print with to cover the inadequacies.  Gillard did the same with some of her policy costings prior to the election..released some of them to the Treasury Department the night prior to the election (same time she promised no carbon tax) - but how much attention has been paid to that??  She is a careful manipulator who needs exposing bigtime.

Darren says:

06:41pm | 15/10/10

How many dodgy installers have been taken to court over botched insulation jobs that have caused fire and death!!!  These are the people who need to be disciplined.

jg says:

09:28am | 16/10/10

I have an answer. The public service makes recommendations to the Minister as to how to best run programs. It is up to the minister to approve it.

Put simply, the buck stops with the Minister, not the public servants.

Maybe you should learn how these things work before casting baseless assertions?

RT says:

01:01pm | 16/10/10

Incompetent public servantts are still incompetent, regardless of whether the Minister overseeing them catches all their mistakes or not…

Haven’t you ever wondered why there is a lot of really, really stupid people working in the public sector? If the government does not employ them, the private sector won’t either, and unemployment sky rockets…

The government has a vested interest in employing the incompetent, and that is to keep unemployment figures down as low as possible.

keith hammersmith says:

01:11pm | 15/10/10

there is a reason they were using words like ‘dodgy, botched and cover up’
because they are accurate descriptions of the dodgy program.

Robert says:

01:30pm | 15/10/10

Cause “Dodgy” “Bothched” and “Cover Up” is exactly what it has been. Why do you think there was no Government Minister to take questions,

Mac says:

01:36pm | 15/10/10

That sort of ‘today tonight’-style journalism has become all-too prevalent. This article indeed opens with the same flavour, taking a populist cheap-shot at lawyers, following which the author fails to quote any of the “non-answered questions” to back up the whole thesis of the article… Give me back my 2 minutes.

HappyCynic says:

02:14pm | 15/10/10

The problem is highlighted in the article…

Journos were not given any time to read the full report before the press conference therefore were unprepared while the dumb pollie probably had been preparing for days.

This whole pattern of announcing things unexpectedly and not giving journos enough time to gather their wits about them (what few wits they have) while pollies dance around the issue by repeating some bland non-committal statement 100 times is really starting to p*ss me off.  It demeans the professionalism of journos who might want to do a good job but don’t have any substance to work with.

And then online w**kers like ourselves have the brass balls to complain that the article has no substance.

Lame.

Roja says:

03:22pm | 15/10/10

Don’t listen to Keith and Robert, they have been reading too many newspapers and are probably unaware of a time when reporters reported the facts and allowed readers to come to their own decisions. 

Now I’m not saying it wasn’t mishandled but I would like a media that could do it’s job.  We cannot know if the government is doing it’s job if the often shiteful media in this country is a player in the game rather than observers who report the stories.

Cancan says:

01:49am | 16/10/10

Yes Ivy. For me ABC 24 has been an eye opener as it allows us to see all of a speech and all the questions. Has shown up the media as low grade, many cheap questions then later, deliberate misquotes and verbalizing.  The distortion and deliberate cheapening of our politics by media quite disturbing.

Pretty easy for Tony Abbott (former journo) to feed media easy pickings - frenzy of over the top hate, negativity and fear - it must sell.

acotrel says:

09:21am | 18/10/10

All the public servants in the world would be needed to support our incompetent small businesses, if a job is to be done properly.  Some of the insulation companies obviously started out with the clear intention to shortcut on safety, and defraud! The businessess proprietors involved in workplace deaths must be charged with manslaughter/industrial homicide!

acotrel says:

09:27am | 18/10/10

‘Haven’t you ever wondered why there is a lot of really, really stupid people working in the public sector?’‘

No, but I wonder what excuse the GRUB contractors give to avoid being charged with manslaughter!  They don’t come any stupider than ratbags who can’t even bother tro perform the simplest Job Safety Analysis?  Why is the Liberal Party protecting those criminals?

Aitch B says:

12:16pm | 18/10/10

@acotrel

Jeez, you’re really out of control on this one, mate! How is the Liberal Party protecting your so-called ‘criminal’ contractors??

It’s the governments (state/federal) who have the power to institute proceedings for workplace negligence and last time I looked, apart from WA the entire country is governed by the ALP!! Have a crack at your own side for a change and stop deflecting the blame onto anybody and everybody except your Labor mates.

I understand your concerns about OH&S - that’s fine and necessary for worker protection but don’t get me started on union abuse of work place safety laws and the hundreds of millions that it costs the construction industry every year!

Joan says:

01:14pm | 15/10/10

Windsor and Oakeshott and Greens running the show by Gillard appointment….. perhaps Gillard having her hair done…. that yelllow streak for coward is getting bigger every day when she does surface .

Jim says:

02:07pm | 15/10/10

Well said Jane. I can only recall one ALP minister facing the media and fielding the ‘tough’ questions, that was Nicola Roxon during the Swine Flu drama. KRudd was nowhere to be seen.

Dave says:

07:11pm | 15/10/10

It does not make any sense whatsoever for a government minister to be attending consultations alongside members of an independent agency which hope to deliver an unbiased report to that exact same minister. Understand?

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

10:55pm | 15/10/10

Oakeshott & the Greens are expendable, if someone will shiv a mate in the back & take his job this will come easyto shift it on to others

acotrel says:

04:36pm | 16/10/10

Don’t tell me about ‘incompetent public servants’ !  Tell me how it should have been done?  What would YOU have done if you had been responsible for the programme?  In particular what legislation would you change, and how would you harness private industry to do your bidding? You can’t have it both ways, sounds like y ou want more regulation for Australian businesses?

Aitch B says:

05:53pm | 16/10/10

@acotrel

Easy, mate….. I wouldn’t have introduced such a lame brained scheme in the first place!!

mickijo says:

11:57am | 17/10/10

Gillard said on the news that the fires ect was the reason her government shut the Insulation plan down. She did not say it was only after the deaths and fires, she said it as if her government were ministering angels. She said it with a straight face too. Hippo hypocrites

dovif says:

03:07pm | 15/10/10

Bobster

The government need to spend their tax dollar wisely, that shows that they have the ability to manage the budget and manage the economy properly.

The report showed that there was 4,000 cases of fraud and the poorly done rort will cost the taxpayer $500 million to clean up!!! That shows a complete mismanagement of the Budget and Economy, This money could have gone to health/education/Murray-Darling

This is just like the BER, where the government was able to offer a lot more school than the private sector, but a government agency found thata public school project cost 25% more than private school doing their own project .... really the government’s “Bulk buying” should have got them a 25% discount.

The BER probably wasted another $3-4 billion

This shows a complete lack of economic management of this ALP government

Richard says:

03:14pm | 15/10/10

How about you explain to me the logic that says the government needed to hastily set up a ridiculous rortable insulation scheme without first doing their due diligence, cost-benefit analysis, and risk-management planning in order to combat an American/European debt crisis that didn’t even impact Australia?

The owners of this government should be charged with surplus-slaughter.

george says:

03:23pm | 15/10/10

chain of responsibility (COR ) applies right back to the main company , in this case the labor gvernment . a private company would be heavily fined , why not rudd,gillard,and garret, as it was our fortune they wasted

Farkurnell says:

10:05pm | 15/10/10

Dovif get your facts right.The Govt has bought up all the available water rights on the market to ease the MD presures.
As for the BER theres now a lot of happy tuck-shop mums I call that money well spent.

Lisa H. says:

10:36pm | 15/10/10

If I remember rightly, established insulation businesses were warning the government that the insulation scheme was flawed, and the public service was also ringing the alarm bells.
It was more important for the government to buy those votes than it was to get the scheme right.
Now, established insulation businesses are going broke… and the cowboys who flooded into the industry to milk the cash are nowhere to be found.
Government should not play god in various industries!
My mother-in-law had her insulation done, in an old and dusty fibro house. She had an inspection - whole rooms were left undone! - but fixing up the problem was not the inspector’s problem.
He is going to write a report.
She has to fix it herself.
Nice one, Labor!

acotrel says:

04:51pm | 16/10/10

Bobster ‘Sure, they didn’t put the safeguards in place but it is not the Government with blood on its hands.’

No it’s on the hands of the Liberal Party which has pandered to those morons who pretend to be entrepreneurs.  It’s easy to blame the government, however maintaining a manslaughter charge centres around a ‘reasonable person doing what’s practicable’.. Garrett wasn’t a magician.  He’d have to undo 100 years of twisted conservative politics to get small business to react sensibly!

Aitch B says:

07:19pm | 16/10/10

Really, acotrel????

A Labor government introduces a scheme and the Liberals are to blame because it was a stuff up!!

Hehe…..........

Ben81 says:

01:57pm | 17/10/10

Wow acotrel, “No it’s on the hands of the Liberal Party” (?!)
I realise you’re all looking for desperate excuses and trying to shift the blame, but come on that’s just ridiculous!  Please tell me you’re joking.  Incredible.

acotrel says:

07:12am | 18/10/10

‘The owners of these businesses should be charged with manslaughter.’

What a heresy, the Liberal Party would never tolerate THAT! The fact that they haven’t been charged shows how much we really don’t care about industrial deaths or the GRUBS that cause them!

Jane says:

01:40pm | 15/10/10

Because they asked for the report.

Matt says:

02:59pm | 15/10/10

Um, how about to listen to the concerns of the communities that will be affected if the plan is implemented in its current form? To look rural Australians in the eye while they hear about the consequences of the proposed cuts? Hiding behind a veil of “independence” is weak.

The government, not MDBA, will be the final decision makers about the future implementation of the plan and as such they had an obligation to front up and listen - not buck pass to a poor public servant. Gutless cowardice by the PM and Burke to dodge these meetings.

acotrel says:

07:19am | 18/10/10

Ben81, The GRUBS who rorted the system were YOUR GRUBS! The Employers UNIONS have for years resisted implementation of decent OHS laws, and have only paid lip service to quality management concepts.  We are all now paying the price of their cynicism.  The whole time they were cossetted by the conservatives!

Roja says:

03:27pm | 15/10/10

The country is going great guns.  You might have noticed it went even better in that magical time when no politicians were in charge. 

I think there is a lesson in that for all of us.

Luke says:

01:50pm | 15/10/10

And that the Government take notice and adhere to warnings given prior to any mishaps.

toady says:

01:59pm | 15/10/10

So by your logic, any company can dole out funds to anyone with an ABN and no qualifications, having them do contract work on their behalf, and because that company did nothing more than dole out the payments, they bear none of the responsibility for the resultant shoddy work.  What a beautiful, risk-free way to carry out business!  As for the scheme being ‘instituted’ quickly, you would now say the BER scheme should be halted immediately, as there is now no need for the ‘stimulus’ that it provides?

Ben81 says:

01:59pm | 15/10/10

Wow, what a whitewash!  Yeah it had nothing at all to do with creating a free for all cash grab instead of handling the scheme like any other government project.  Nothing to see here, Labor can do no wrong, move along.

Matt says:

03:06pm | 15/10/10

If the government puts in place a program that is so clearly a opportunity for every spiv and chancer to cut corners, cheat and steal, then it is only fair that the government needs to wear some of the blame.for the consequences.

In the name of timeliness, the government rushed the implementation of this program. As a result, people died. End of story.

Ryan says:

03:14pm | 15/10/10

@Rob: so what exactly are you saying about the auditor general then? You don’t accept the validity of this scathing report?

Joolz says:

03:54pm | 15/10/10

I’m no Queens Counsel, but the way I see it, the Government is responsible in some way and will probably have to defend a liability claim.

The people who lost their houses could argue that had there been no stimulus package, in particular the insulation scheme, they would not have sought to have their homes insulated due to cost. They can argue then that the government’s package motivated them to undertake the work.

When they undertook the work, they were given information by either reputable installers or not-so-reputable installers which further promoted the government’s scheme which encouraged consumers to take up the product.

The Government failed to restrict access to the scheme to only installers which had been accredited. Bad business practices were paid for by the government, therefore it would appear there was ‘approval’ of these practices by payment.

So that covers the people who have lost their houses, what about the people who lost a loved one?

Well, if soldiers in Afghanistan can be brought to account for doing their jobs and getting it wrong and in the process causing death, why not the government?

And again, would the young people have been in the roof had it not been for the insulation scheme? No. Probably not.

Had the government had an accreditation process for the installing companies, would these companies have been operating? Hopefully not.

And before you all start saying I’m law suit happy, there are cases which involve local councils and roads where councils have been found liable for bad roads or unrepaired roads which have caused accidents.

James says:

04:06pm | 15/10/10

Rob - I call staffer.

Bruce says:

04:20pm | 15/10/10

Item 2: Thats not an excuse for incompetence. Any program which costs millions of dollars requires some form of due diligence to be undertaken. Quite obviously when it comes to tax payers money the labor government is prepared to spend tax payers money very very quickly. If it was about getting money out quickly they should have sent us all $2000 to spend….....quickly !!

JaneS says:

04:21pm | 15/10/10

Rob, your understanding with regards to Point 3 is somewhat lacking.

The government delegated responsibility.  It did not abrogate itself of it.  It contracted out because insulation is not its core competency.  But it is still ultimately responsible for the scheme and its execution.

acotrel says:

04:55pm | 16/10/10

And that the Government take notice and adhere to warnings given prior to any mishaps.

It’s like trying to turn the Titanic, once it’s on a collision course.  Action needed to be taken back in about 1970 when we were playing with the GATT treaty

Lisa H. says:

10:46pm | 15/10/10

If poorly laid housing insulaton is a cause of fire even in ordinary markets, why wouldn’t the government investigate some accreditation for the ‘companies’ (any spiv with an ABN) who flocked to the gravy train?
Established insulation companies warned of safety issues… they were barked down as having ‘ulterior motives’ in criticising the insulation plan.
What I want to know is… why didn’t journalists bring this disasterous failure of policy home to the previous government before the election?

taiabada says:

10:19am | 16/10/10

Brad, you must be as old as me to know what the Dreyfus Affair was.  Most of those commenting here sadly wouldn’t know to what you refer, nor would they recognise the fact that the Buck doesn’t stop anywhere until it reaches the Top!

Richard says:

04:32pm | 15/10/10

Big difference between the shadow finance minister and some lawyer bloke no-one’s ever heard of before.

But if we are going to talk about fairness, I really would love to see an independent audit of Treasuries M.M.R.T figures, then we might really get some perspective on whose figure’s have more integrity.

Mike T says:

04:47pm | 15/10/10

@ Sven

Umm….whats your post got to do with the goverrnements actions as noted in the article??

Ohh i get it….“Yes we did bad, but look at the opposition, quick over there, stop pointing out my fault, see there bad too”

Thanks for clearing it up, clearly the govenrnement has no case to answer

Sven Gali says:

06:54pm | 15/10/10

You do have to feel for perpetual fall guy, Andrew Robb. I’m sure Tony Abbott said to Joe Hockey, “Just get Andrew to front the press after the address. Sure they’ll be livid, but let them take it out on him instead. How much worse could he feel ? Besides, what are our chances of getting caught out ?”

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

06:57pm | 15/10/10

Sven :  Finding it rather difficult to defend the tragic Home Insulation farce .  ?  No defense at all.
The ultimate responsibility , including the loss of life rests with Labor ,
regardless of their efforts to duck shove the blame to the state authorities.

iansand says:

08:20pm | 15/10/10

Lawyer bloke has pissed off the “journalists”.  Go the lawyer bloke.  Maybe the “journalists” will actually do some journalising for a change.

Christian Real says:

08:28am | 18/10/10

Wayne Fehlhaber
THe buck stops with the Employers that hired the workers,not with the Government.
You should know that instead of attempting to put liberal spin and dribble on everything you write
Under the Workplace Health and Safety Act, it was up to the employers, that is the businesses that hired these workers, to ensure the safety of their workers and provide adequate training and a safe workplace.

fairsfair says:

11:55am | 16/10/10

what about the pople that died because they were not appropriately trained? You know, with a bit more money the govt could have also stimulated the job training industry in that all contractors had to complete a govt approved standard safety induction prior to setting foot into anyone’s roof. I would have prefferred they sink their half a billion into that.

I worked in insurance at the time - I had to speak to (and in some particuarly bad cases sit in a room with) some of the idiot insulation “professionals” that in many cases did not have the funds to pay the first $63 installment of their public liability policy. It created more work for less return for our industry - it was as stimulating as Drefuss’ press conference. But hey, none of my loved ones died, so I am not complaining.

Why don’t you stop with all this smoke and mirror’s shit and respect the lives and families of those affected enough to actually admit that the governement has to assume some fault? People appreciate that mistakes are made - they don’t appreciate when people refuse to admit it and roll out pathetic excuses one after the other.

If someone ran up my ass in their car and apologised profusely I would understand, exchange details and move on. If they did so and then let fly about all the contributing factors that lead to their involvement in this event and how it essentially wan’t their fault - I would take to them with a car jack.

I got my roof insulated. I went with a company that were insulating for years - I was lucky. I know I got benefit for this. But I would rip that insulation out of my ceiling myself - or pay the whopping $1300 that it cost to do my tiny house (that I would never have had done otherwise) if it brought back those kids that died and rebuild those houses.

Carl Palmer says:

10:37am | 18/10/10

When the rebate was $1600 I got 3 quotes (from reputable & recommended suppliers) and all came in at – you guessed it $1600. When it went to $1200 I got another 3 quotes (from reputable & recommended suppliers) and all came in at – you guessed it $1200. Even if the AG came up with a report that said it was a perfectly run program, my first hand experience told me that it was a 1st class sham and a rip off of public monies.

Who got ripped off, we all did and who was incompetent & inept – the government of the day. The report only confirmed the bloody obvious.