Pulling the scheme hasn’t insulated the Government

Bryndal says:

10:21am | 22/02/10

Foil insulation is used more widely in QLD as it better suits humid climate. What you also point out is correct - there is some responsibility on the purchaser to make sure they are getting what they have paid for.

Mr. Grey says:

10:42am | 22/02/10

Steve the electrical deaths were in Queensland, because of the extreme and continuous heat the insulation used up there was foil and not fibre bats. (This foil has a history and was banned in New Zealand for this type of job.)
Although because of the untrained placement of both foil and fibre bats there is a problem in all states with electrical shorts and over heating of electrical equipment that has been covered.
Garrett should go for not listening and not acting on the continuous warnings but this disaster only goes to highlight the problem we have with government,  whichever one is in power, listening to the peoples wishes is something they are not good at. There are countless stories of pig headed government departments telling us we are going to get what they want us to have and using media spin to shove it down our throats.

T. Chong says:

07:43am | 22/02/10

About as long as Howard and Downer hid behind everyone in the AWB scandal, or SIEV X lies.

Adam Diver says:

10:28am | 22/02/10

So past indescretions are enough for a current government to repeat the mistakes of the past. How your allegience to a politcal party takes precedence over the inhabitants of this country simply baffles me.

Jen from Nana glen says:

11:07am | 22/02/10

Agree Andy.  But the wheels are becoming very loose on the Labor bandwagon.  We’ll be paying for their mistakes for many years to come! How is this fiscal conservative Rudd & co going to cope when their is no more vote buying money, ie our tax dollars, to through out to the masses. Sometimes you’d be better off being a homeless refugee!

James says:

01:35pm | 22/02/10

Who lead the then opposition’s attack on howard over AWB? None other than Kevin Rudd.

Jason says:

03:15pm | 22/02/10

C’mon Andy. If the employer hasn’t taken all the necessary precautions how can you blame Garrett? Has anyone noted the condition of the wiring in these homes? When I bought my house it needed a complete re-wire. It had no earth wires, the protected coating on some of the active wires had worn away, it was a mess. Even an house inspector didn’t pick it up. It wasn’t until I tried to get an alarm installed that it got picked up. The installer let me know that he would install an alarm until the ceiling space was safe. I think that some insulation installers have seen a pot of gold and couldn’t care less whether the electrics were safe or not.

danj says:

08:06am | 22/02/10

Yeah but Garrett ignored reports that said this could happen. Lindsay Tanner also said ‘we didn’t have time to dot the i’s and cross the t’s’. On a $2.4billion scheme where people’s lives are at risk? That’s incredulous.

Derek says:

08:26am | 22/02/10

Evan, that is a total joke.  The government essentially employed these installers, they paid directly for it, it was their guidelines and regulations (or lack of) that allowed these shonky employers to rort the scheme in the first place.  It doesn’t require a great intellect to understand if you throw billions of dollars into one sector of the economy with little or no controls you will have these shonky operators take advantage of it.

Garret FAILED to implement this scheme properly, he and his government were more concerned with buying popularity than implementing good and sensible public policy.  That is why the blame lies squarely with Rudd & Garrett.

This by no means excuses the shonky operators, however if the scheme had been implemented properly there would have been allot less rorting of the system.

John A Neve says:

08:48am | 22/02/10

Derek,

You could not be more wrong. The home owner employed the contractor, the government paid on the home owners say so.

Building regulations are a state government issue.

There is nothing wrong with the insulation.

These four unfortunates died by their own hand, no one elses.

The scheme failed, due to your fellow Australians ripping of their countrymen.

Who’s to say the “scheme had (not) been implemented properly”?

Sorry Derek, but your post is based on assumptions.

Tim says:

08:55am | 22/02/10

No Derek,
the government didn’t essentially employ these workers.
They are completely private companies.
There were work regulations in place, there was accreditation in place, there are OHS regulations in place.
All of these were ignored by dodgy operators. That is why those 4 people died. 
The only thing Garrett can be blamed for is a lack of foresight and poor management of a scheme that was forced on him by the economic conditions at the time.

EJ says:

09:09am | 22/02/10

Garrett & Rudd were warned that there were shonky installers ripping off the government but were so in love with themselves they did nothing about it. This government is an exact replica of the inept Whitlam government & they lasted only one term. The shame I feel for voting for them makes me feel angry because I was sucked in by the soft voiced “Mr Nice Guy Who Really Really Cares For The Electorate” act!

DG says:

09:13am | 22/02/10

I have to agree -  it takes a special kind of stupid to hammer a nail through a wire that they have just covered up - especially when plastic fasteners are available.

As for Derek - these employers and workers are subject to OH and S legislation. Mr Garret is no more responsible for this than the homeowners that contracted for the work to be done. Are you willing to put the responsibility on the person who pays the contractor in every instance?

Essentially there are laws about safe work environments and safe work practices. The Minister for the Environment should not have to hold the hand of every person working in the industry any more than the Minister for roads should be holding the hand of each driver, the Minister for Education should be holding the hand of each teacher or the Minister for Health should be holding the hand of each surgeon.

Yes, pouring money into an area will increase interest - it does nothing to absolve people from their responsibilities. A reasonable person should be able to rely on contractors who to do work are do so in accordance with the law - you make that assumption every time you contract someone to do work for you (whether it be installing air conditioning, laying your driveway, building your house, fixing your car,  getting a lawyer to prepare your will or having a tax agent prepare your return).

Evan Findlay says:

09:35am | 22/02/10

So Derek by your comments you lead me to believe that Mr Garrett and Mr Rudd visited every home that had insulation put in their roof and gave quotes and facilitated the work. 
The government implemented the scheme based on advice given to it by many interested parties. On further recommendations it took action such as the banning the use of metal fasteners. The employment of insulation companies is the sole responsibility of the home owner. It is at their discretion as to who quoted and performed the work. If it had been me, I would have checked for relevant accreditation, how long had this company been installing insulation, a minimum of five years would have been a prerequisite, and eventually I would have probably settled on a company that is well known such as Bradford, Insulco or Higgins.I certainly would not have used cold callers or letterbox drops.
The government employed no-one. The government set guidelines and supplied rebates towards the overall costs. The scheme was rushed, I don’t think any one could argue against that, but the reasoning was justified.
The shonky operators that you talk of are still required by law to abide by WH&S guidelines. Just because their intentions are greedy and self centered does not absolve them of their legal duty of care. Why was the last worker to die still using metal fasteners? This had been outlawed by Garrett but you still believe Garrett is responsible which furthers points to your lack of understanding on the matter. In law, his employer is responsible and should be treated as such.

Had Enough says:

10:49am | 22/02/10

There is absolutely no doubt both Peter Garrett and Kevin Rudd need to be held accountable for this deplorable state of affairs. Those who say they are not responsible are totally wrong. Clearly they do not understand vicarious liability. The failed minister is incompetent and guilty of negligence. He has to go.

DG says:

11:31am | 22/02/10

Had Enough:

“vicarious liability” - a stretch at best. As I understand it vicarious liability is basically a way of holding a person responsible for a thing which was done on their behalf (such as employers responsible for employees). You are assuming that Garrett employed someone to do this work, I would suggest that he did not. He is so far removed from the actual work the suggestion is preposterous. The chain goes something like this:

Employee - responsible for the action
Contracting Firm - vicariously liable for certain things done by thee employee in the course of his or her work.
Home Owner - there may be some liability in some instances- but generally they would not be by liable to injury to the employee as they have no control over the employee.
Minister - pays the bill incurred by the Home Owner directly to the Contracting Firm. Has no responsibility in respect of the contracting or carrying out of the work. Liability limited to the paying of the contract amount and, possibly but highly unlikely, for interest in instances where payment is unduly delayed.

I understand that vicarious liability only applies where the person doing the act has the authority or apparent authority of another person or is acting at the direction of another person (or are participating in a joint venture such as a partnership, where partners are jointly and severally liable for the debts of the partnership). That other person can be vicariously liable.

How does this extend to the Minister?

No person did any work on the authority of the Minister personally on on the Government generally - all work was carried out at the request of the home owner under the control and direction of the parties to the contract. The employees were not working at the direction of the government nor were they directly under the control of the government further at no stage did they appear to be working on behalf of the government. It was always clear that these people were private contractors, working with home owners and lodging applications for rebates with the approval of the home owners.

I should be interested to hear you alternative understanding of vicarious liability.

Derek says:

11:37am | 22/02/10

My point is that the situation that allowed this state of affairs to happen was solely the responsibility of the Government.  MOST people if they have no out of pocket expense will not scrutinise a tradeperson to the same extent as when they are actually paying for it out of pocket.  This is basic human nature.  This is why I stated the government is essentially responsible as the representation by them was they were handling it. Be it true or not that was the case.  It was only the good effort of the media that highlighted the issues and dangers to consumers when in fact the government should have made that clear.

It is only basic common sense to realise that if you pump $2.4B into one industry group you are going to get inundated with shonky fly by night operators.  This should have been properly identified and more stringent protections, certifications and requirements should have been required and enforced.  In addition better consumer education on the scheme could have been performed.  This is not an assumption it is FACT, it was so easy to get in on this cash cow you did not have to have any experience just go to a 1 day training course.

In relation to the State government, go speak to them and they want nothing to do with it, so go and pass the buck.

in relation to safe work practices etc.  OH&S and other safe work practices DO NOT guarantee a job will be done right.  People are maimed and killed all the time OH&S is an evolutionary process to minimise risks not remove them.  If you are going to have thousands of new entries to the industry in a matter of months it is purely a lack of experience that will cause most of the issues, they should never have been allowed to cash in on this scheme.

The GFC IS NOT AN EXCUSE, it was badly planned and implemented government policies (or lack thereof, particularly in the US) that allowed the GFC to happen in the first place.  So Tim, are you saying incompetence is justified by the GFC, what a crock.

Tim says:

12:25pm | 22/02/10

Derek,
I never said the GFC was an excuse (thanks for trying to put words into my mouth).
What I said is that there is no way a minister can be held liable for individual private companies breaking regulations. The GFC provides the background as to why they wanted to inject the money so quickly.
The scheme was poorly managed and should have been changed to a rebate scheme earlier. For this Garrett can be held accountable but i personally don’t think it warrants a sacking.
If you want to hold a minister responsible for the individual actions of private companies that receive government funding then the front bench will be empty in a very short space of time.

Willy K says:

03:12pm | 22/02/10

Evan based on your and (the ALP’s new) logic it all comes down to individual responsibility.  We don’t need Unions anymore now according to you.

As in Garrett’s own song ‘Blue Sky Mine’  “...who’s gonna save us?...”  Answer: no one.  The ALP and the Unions have said it is now an individuals responsibilty for for their own actions and job.

InsulationGate has shown us all the crystal clear hypocrisy and self-serving deceit of the ALP.  A party so corrupt and diseased they could not care less about even the lives of the poor b*stards that vote for the so-called ‘workers party’.

Sack Garrett you coward.

craig says:

08:47pm | 22/02/10

the scheme should of had regulations and conditions to ensure that the installers were trained and quailified, an ohs regulations in place ,a mediation system in place and a gauratnee and defect sysytem in place. Accordingly it is fair to say the scheme was misconceived , poorly administerted and an overall diaster waiting to happen.

if you cant manage and administer an installation scheme how are you going to take over the health sysem ,

Tim says:

09:05am | 23/02/10

The thing i find funny is that in coming years the same people who are complaining about the mismanagement of this scheme are going to be the same people complaining about too much government regulation in the future.

Fog Badger says:

08:45am | 22/02/10

Sorry, fehowarth. Were you trying to be sarcastic?!

EJ says:

09:19am | 22/02/10

So why is that twice weekly I had operatives from the Indian sub-continent banging on my front door asking me if I wanted them insulate my home? I’d say “No. It’s already insulated!” The reply was “We can do it again…it will make house much cooler!” I’ve also been gettiing calls from the Indian sub-continent about getting insulation. My landlord who speaks very poor English finally gave in & gave permission to them to re-insulate my ceiling. A bunch of turban clad men turned up who spoke very little English & proceeded to put this second layer of insulation in my ceiling. It took them about 40 minutes to do a 2 hour job. I can only guess at the dangerous mess in my ceiling considering there are downlights in this house.

Tim says:

10:16am | 22/02/10

EJ,
Are you saying that your landlord willingly hired a bunch of dodgy cold-callers to do a crap job in installing insulation.
Hmmm,
must be the government’s fault right?

stevem says:

11:56am | 22/02/10

Exactly what kind of wiring do believe is resistant to somebody hammering a nail into it? There is no suggestion that the down lights were incorrectly installed and electricians go to great length to ensure they are not covered by insulation - only to have somebody with no training to slap a batt on top of them.
The problem is with a scheme that encouraged fly-by-night operators to install whatever they wanted in whatever fashion they felt like and bill the government $1600, no questions asked. It was obvious that these shonky operators would rort the system and the scheme should have had controls to ensure we, the taxpayers, were getting value for money and that the work was safe.

Tim says:

12:31pm | 22/02/10

Stevem,
part of the problem is electricians placing electrical wiring on the top of the joists in the roof space and not on the sides as is required by australian standard.
The insulation installers then didn’t check where they were firing their staple guns.

Evan Findlay says:

10:05am | 22/02/10

Problem is Punter, this is coalition policy. Mr Rudd took the idea off Malcolm Turnbull. The reason for it’s implementation was that it was “Shovel ready” It kept people employed during a recession whilst having the added bonus of having “green” credentials and making people’s houses cooler. The problem is we have too many in this community who have no pride in their work, who absolve themselves of responsibility in the pursuit of a quick dollar. Now they have stuffed up the industry, left people worried about their insulation, ignore WH&S regulations and they walk away without a care in the world. These same people will next week be calling at your house to try and con you into letting them paint your roof, or for “$800 I can paint your whole house, and they’ll guarantee it will be a professional job”

I am acutely aware of supply and demand being influenced by government policy. We only have to look at the previous governments short sighted and ridiculous First Home Owners grant to see what ill effects government intervention can do to a market.

But Punter you seem to miss my point. My point was not about the scheme. Had the GFC not arrived at our door I doubt that the government would had introduced this policy, but it had, and this policy is designed to stimulate. My point was simply that calls for the minister to be held accountable for other people’s incompentencies, people’s ignorance and flouting of the laws, is beyond belief. I reiterate that people need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack there of. We continually argue that our rights and freedoms are being whittled away by interfering governments, the church and associated do-gooders but no-one seems to want to stand on their own two feet and take charge of their own lives. When ever they fail they are quick to blame anyone or everyone else except those they should.

Ricky says:

02:07pm | 22/02/10

Me to Robert, me to.Our street is going to have a party(no joke) when Rudd gets booted.We see him for a huge liability to Australias future.

Evan Findlay says:

10:39am | 22/02/10

But Geoff if you had bothered to do your research you would also have stated that Mr Howard left Bronwyn in that portfolio till after the election, or did you conveniently withhold that part. Mr Howard was determined not to give Labor a ministerial head in an election year. After the election he replaced her but she was never sacked and she never resigned. But as you are bringing up this point, why would Mr Abbott bring her back to the front bench when she has demonstrated on a number of occasions her lack of political judgement? Why bring back a tired and broken politician, one with baggage? It’s just not a vote winner.

Cuppa says:

02:11pm | 22/02/10

But Rudd doesnt care about warnings or danger to the Australian people.He cares about throwing money at voters to buy their loyalty. Luckily it seems many are starting to see him for the narcistic liar that he is.He is the most useless prime minister i have seen in 60 years.

Had Enough says:

12:01pm | 22/02/10

Bill, you can put me in the F category. Being interested in social justice and accountability issues I have come to regret my 07 vote. I was appalled with Howard and am now equally disgusted with Rudd but for different reasons.

Any objective analysis of the current government would conclude that they are incompetent, sneaky, unaccountable and devoid of any semblance of decency. A horrible choice confronts us at the election - the incompetents vs the zealots.

Ricky says:

02:14pm | 22/02/10

I am ashamed to admit i also voted for dudd.Its a mistake i wont be making twice.He is useless & a complete failure.

Mark G says:

04:41pm | 22/02/10

I voted Labor in the last election Bill, and I will be voting for them next time around. I have no confidence at in in Tony Abbotts ability to tell us the truth and I believe work choice will be back under another guise. I actually had more confidence in Malcom Turnbull, I feel his honesty is not to be doubted now since he stepped forward in what he belived in concerning the ETS. I am an adult 48 years old and male , hope thats of help to you

Fog Badger says:

08:04pm | 22/02/10

What happened to G, Bill?

Bill says:

02:54pm | 22/02/10

E,

Probably “none of the above”. Congratulations.

Seriously, there are many people who use these comment facilities to add considered and thoughtful views to any discussion. They tend to be outnumbered by those who prefer to sling insults and abuse. I may have been a little unkind, as the comments so far are not the worst I have seen on this site.

Fog Badger says:

08:11pm | 22/02/10

I’m sure there are many As, Bs and Cs.

It’s commonplace to observe a rash of comments from these rat-bags. One of the stories today had group B banging on against Howard etc. from around 6am.

There is very little discussion in many of the stories at the punch. Same applies to Crickey, but the punch is ultimately more balanced, I believe.

I probably fall into group E, but I have learned to blog and tug at the same time.

Timmo says:

05:43am | 23/02/10

Alex, Don’t be silly. Go and see your federal Member and put your case and I’m sure he or she will help you. Test the Water. If it is a labor Member even better or if Liberal it can be put also. I don’t know whether you are fair dinkum with the suicide threat or not, this is not the right way and is of concern to me, but I’m saying it’s not worth it over money. Others will understand and re-adjust i’m sure. Phone the Mangager of Centerlink or go in. They will help your workers. No one will suffer if you go and seek help. Phone the Bat company and ask if you can return your stock for refund. If you explain your difficult situation and how you feel as you have written here people will come forward and help you. Don’t Worry. Good luck.

dub says:

07:20pm | 22/02/10

Y2k?  I am actually an enviromentalist at heart.. its about not wasting future resources.. anyway.. i think Y2K was a good rort.. haha