Even Julia doesn’t trust herself with public money

Tubesteak says:

07:42am | 08/02/11

You’re right; she is damned is she does and damned if she doesn’t.

Labor appoints one of their own to the Murray-Darling Basin Water Authority and the Libs jump around saying “jobs for the boys”.

They appoint a former Liberal and the Libs jump around saying “they can’t trust themselves”.

All the Libs show is that they are a bunch of whining sods who’ll say and do anything to get a cheap headline but add nothing of substance to the debate or solve the issue. Even now they could help solve the issue by being non-partisan and allow legislation to pass as they are in a position to do so.

Melissa says:

08:09am | 08/02/11

Just curious, what repeated comments would that be? ‘Moving forward’ ‘working families’ ‘Abbott is wrecking everything’ ‘There will be no tax on carbon’ - it is Labor who are spinning the slogans! Seriously, stop listening to the media and start thinking for yourself! They are hell bent on spinning the public’s focus off the government’s incompetence and are blaming Abbott for everything!

I am sick to death of this idiotic government and the media who are backing them to the hilt!

How are the media working for? What is in it for them? Why don’t they care about the Australian people?

Rosie says:

08:43am | 08/02/11

Tony Abbott has to tread carefully! Bullshit he doesn’t have to do such a thing. After all the Gillard Govt can’t trust themselves with other people’s money so have to get a retired Liberal Premier as a member of another form of bureacracy to safeguard her and the blame put on them if there is another stuff up in the way the money will be used.

Very clever and cunning way of doing it, pushing the blame onto others if there is any “stuff ups” Once again the woman is putting herself before the Australian people.

Can’t be good for Mr Farr to write an article about it and all the “Gillard lovers” are out in full force in yet another tactless mistake which is obviously told to her by those hiding behind the curtains, pulling the strings.

Hey you guys,  Persephone, acotrel Chongy & Christrian R should be fighting for the “real Julia” to stand up and govern the way she wants. If she fails she would have at least stood by what she believes in. She may then get on with some real governing for the country and its people instead of just being there for her survial and those of Oakeshott, Windsor and Bob Browne’s Greens.

So soon to the Liberal Party’s “kafuffel” this is another “biggy” to the kind of governance we are getting from Julia Gillard and her merry men. The kind that hands out her “dirty work” so that the blame if there is a stuff up is not directed at her.

Stand up and stand alone, do it your way and show us leadership Julia Gillard.

Faz says:

08:44am | 08/02/11

@ Melissa

Seriously. I didn’t say that Labor was slogan free. What I said was that this situation will need more than slogans.

I’m thinking of ‘mates don’t tax mates’ when, for far less urgent programs, TA was talking about levies and still is.

I’m also thinking of ‘stop the waste’ when Julia can now say we’ve appointed one of your blokes to do just that.

Steve Woy Woy says:

11:54am | 08/02/11

Yet again whenever there is a conversation on finances or government monies or management of finances the not so well informed lemmings of those lost times for Australia the Dumbing Down Of The Nation Programme come running out on cue!!! salivating from the triggers of the Pavlov’s dog experiment from those times of the failed treasurer who governs the yes man treasurer. Well now the curtains are drawn back take a look folks then tell me that the great financial wizards of that time were right and had the best interest of all at heart… I think not!! To take over with the biggest resources boom this country has ever known at the time $3.3 bil then have a ten year negative growth for the country take our national debt from $700 bil in 1996 to $3.2 trillion in 2007 steer us on track like the rest of the liberal republican right wing agenda governments around the globe to crash out of sight… Interestingly Labor’s stimulus package comes in at about 1% of that total that’s the one which saved us from the GFC and I’m sure not many really understand that either… or don’t wish to..I’ve just come back from a ten day tour of what could have been called the Howard and Costello future visions of Australia tour… USA, UK and Ireland tour… I particularly like the way they begged at the windows… http://youtu.be/koY6kXhQDQo the link will help you save some face and gain some insight into how you were duped. Protection from public monies and management of .... you jest of course!!

acotrel says:

04:43pm | 08/02/11

Snowy says:09:30am | 08/02/11

Grrr, the only time Liberals are concerned with industrial deaths is when there’s political mileage to be made from them. They have nothing good to say about unions who are are always concerned by the number of industrial deaths, and who constantly strive to prevent them. Abbott and his self promotion on backs of tragedies is a disgrace.

ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON,SNOWY!!

Northern Steve says:

11:34pm | 08/02/11

At the moment, Acotrel, the SDA seems a lot more concerned in stopping gay marriage than industrial issues.  Not because they believe it is right or wrong, or becuase of ethics or rights.  The SDA want to stop discussion of human rights because they are concerned it will cost Labor votes.  How back to front is that.  You want people who are in government to do the rigtht thing and show leadership, not be concerned primarily about being in government.  Do you wonder that union membership is dropping?
PS I am a union member myself, although sometimes I wonder why.

Liz says:

06:45am | 08/02/11

I recall Matthew Fuller’s uncle telling a reporter outside Gillard’s Brisbane pre-election speech venue that he hoped Australians would throw the government out. He was referring to the pink batt electrocution of his nephew and as someone closely associated with the inside story I felt there would be no more informed observer of the Rudd-Gillard government’s performance on the issue.  Was that a media beat-up? Were 3 further deaths following Matthew’s family’s written warnings to the Rudd-Gillard government a media beat-up?
Orgill?  He supplied a conveniently incomplete interim BER report during Gillard’s election mode, and referred committee findings are as yet unknown. I don’t believe the media has beaten up the Orgill appointment - but wish they would get onto it.

persephone says:

07:35am | 08/02/11

The media beat up was that somehow it was more dangerous to install insulation under the pink batts program.

It wasn’t. Deaths had occured before in the industry, and will again (but we won’t hear about them, because workplace deaths aren’t news unless there’s a political angle).

The evidence shows that the steps Garrett took before the program began, and during it, reduced the numbers of deaths per thousand homes insulated in the industry (and this has had ongoing benefits - the industry is still safer).

So yes, highlighting the deaths - something the media usually wouldn’t do - and connecting them all to the program, rather than examining the roles of the employers (who in some cases ignored the directives from the government about safety and in others made basic breaches of Occ Health and Safety rules) was a beat up.

I think part of the problem for the government is that it’s almost impossible to clinically examine this issue without sounding like the deaths don’t matter.

Of course they do, and that’s why the government put in a whole range of safety measues which hadn’t existed previously and continued to monitor and adapt these.

As for your wish that the media would do a beat up on Orgill, I think that makes it pretty obvious that you’re not interested in the truth, but are simply looking for ways to criticise the government.

Saint says:

07:37am | 08/02/11

persephone, we all expect you to defend this government and everything associated with and spout propaganda for page after page, no matter what the reality.

But seriously, if you’re going to participate in a grown up conversation with grown up, you really can’t behave like a child, it just reflects so badly on you and makes everything you say seem ridiculous.

To suggest the pink batts scheme wasn’t a fiasco is the equivalent of suggesting the sky is green and is also hugely disrespectful to the people this scheme KILLED (yes, people died as a result of this non-fiasco of yours).  You should be ashamed of ourself.

And no problems with the BER? Again, you just look like a fool by saying that. And characterising the wasting of BILLIONS of dollars as a ‘a few cents’ again shows you really are just here to spruik the party line and run interference.

If you want to debate these issues, grow up and do so honestly. Start with acknowledging the facts and then defend your position. Otherwise just go away.

Ryan says:

07:44am | 08/02/11

@persephone: ah yes, play the female victim role and hope for sympathy to cover for gross incompetence. No problem with the BER huh, yet the kids are sweltering in classes that used to have aircon and now do not, lets not even get started on the mountains of evidence that shows what a waste it was. Orgill is nothing but a stooge like the rest of the Labor “born to rule” mob who have husbands, fathers, brothers, sisters all receiving special jobs in the government.

Denny Crane says:

08:08am | 08/02/11

So yet another layer of bureaucracy comes into being, so how does this work, the money now for John Fahey and his team, where does that come from.

Does it come from the money to rebuild, or does it come from the public coffers, in which means tax hike somewhere down the track or a cutback on something important.

Shouldnt the government be able to run there own program, is that not what they are elected to do, ironic, how labor government now is asking the former liberal finance minister to show them how to spend the money correctly.

Independents wake up, why bother having Labor in power now when they need the liberals to sort out the finance

persephone says:

08:11am | 08/02/11

Saint

as I made clear, the government couldn’t defend itself because of the deaths involved.

However, the statistics speak for themselves. You were safer as a worker installing insulation during and after the pink batts scheme then you were before.

For the first time, standards were imposed on the industry. These saved lives and continue to do so.

The scheme saw more than a million homes insulated. That’s a huge number. All of those insulated homes provide ongoing comfort for the people who live there, as well as cutting their electricity bills.

I’m quite happy for you to provide statistics - not ill informed thought bubbles - which contradict what I’m saying. You can’t, because they dn’t exist.

So, simple task for those who wish to prove me wrong - find stats which show that deaths increased in the industry (per number of houses insulated) under the pink batts scheme.

I expect crickets.

(BTW, I’m going against the government line here! That’s because I think they were foolish to walk away from defending this one).

No one has found evidence of BILLIONS of waste under the BER. If there had been waste to this extent, it would have been a no brainer for the Opposition to outline this. They have not been able to.

In fact, there was so little waste that the Oppo was unable to identify a cent of savings in the lead up to the election. They were unable to idenfity a single project that should not proceed.

They suggested instead that the money be allocated slightly differently, so that schools had more say over the expenditure.

There is no evidence that this would save anyone any money.

I don’t mind people criticising my arguments. I encourage it. People should always question what they’re told.

If you want to debate these issues, Saint, grow up and do so honestly. That means providing actual evidence to counter what I say, rather than just bleating, “You’re wrong! I know you are!”

That’s very childish of you.

Dash says:

08:25am | 08/02/11

Perse, are you defending the insulation scheme and suggesting there was no waste? Are you defending the BER when school principals were forced to use ALP “approved” builders. When there are findings of rorts and accusations of the ALP paying bribes to keep issues out of the media??? Surely you’re not defending this?

The ALP has wasted our money. Grocery choice, fuelwatch, 2020 summit, fixing the insulation fiasco and rorts under the BER are but a few examples which cannot be disputed even by you!

Dash says:

08:31am | 08/02/11

Perse, btw Orgill is a known ALP sympathiser. How can someone hand picked by the ALP be independent? He spent millions on consultants and was found to have ignored submissions from school principals. Enough said.

acotrel says:

08:32am | 08/02/11

Let’s have a government auditor ensconced in ever private company, to ensure rorting doesn’t happen? I’ll volunteer I’m eminently suited, I love donations in brown paper bags.

acotrel says:

08:35am | 08/02/11

Tubesteak, I loved your comment.  It gave me a good laugh.  If the libs are seen in perspective we must realise that they are so bad, that they are good.

TChong says:

08:45am | 08/02/11

Dash , at 8:13, yousuggest ALP appointments arent to be trusted, stooges etc.
Do Costello, Nelson and Fahey fall under this cloud of suspicion ?

persephone says:

09:05am | 08/02/11

Evidence, guys.

Come on, provide actual facts with links etc, rather than regurgitating whatever it is Bolta has said.

That’s the trouble with so many posters here - they just accept what the shockjocks and the rabid rightwing columnists tell them as absolute truth without ever questioning it.

So provide me with evidence for all of these sweeping assertions about waste, Orgill being dishonest, etc or don’t bother posting.

acotrel says:

09:05am | 08/02/11

@Faz - ‘I also wonder how on earth Fahey was convinced to get on board. ’
Just proves that there are still some remaining Coalition politicians who want to contribute, instead of just of just whinging, and obstructing every little ALP action through sheer malice!

Liz says:

09:12am | 08/02/11

No Persephone, I’m suggesting that the media further scrutinise the Orgill Table of Complaints.  During Gillard’s election campaign, and on release of the Orgill report, she didn’t mention the number of complaints referred for further investigation. 

Why do you think that a family member (an insider to the entire pink batt insulation death toll) would want the government thrown out?  When I see Gillard attending funerals of our fallen soldiers, I’m wondering if she spent as much time consoling the 4 families who lost their kids to a taxpayer funded, government initiated and (too late for them) failed, costly, discarded programme.  II cannot reconcile that the PM and his Deputy were told, advised in writing, and pleaded with after the first youngster was killed, but they did not halt all activities - something they did later but not before three more died. The alarm bells were ringing.  Government-funded programmes are the responsibility of the government and its administering department. They initiated it, we paid for it, so the buck should have stopped with them - sooner rather than later.

Ryan says:

09:20am | 08/02/11

@persephone: “No one has found evidence of BILLIONS of waste under the BER” and yet Julia Gillard upon announcing this basically admitted there has been waste under the BER, what did she call it oh yes (value for money).

Economist says:

09:29am | 08/02/11

Saint I suggest you re-read your contribution and see whose behaving like a child. Pers respectfully highlighted the following issues. Prior to Batts scheme South Australia was the only state to have sufficient regulation and safety measures in the Batts industry. This was expanded to the whole of Australia. Deaths per thousand did fall, primarily because installations went up ten fold. The bureaucracy had compliance plans but not enough bodies to enforce. The deaths were tragic but not a direct result of the scheme. Yes an indirect result could be claimed, but then I’m sure Saint and Liz you’re happy to say every soldier’s death in Iraq and Afghanistan is clearly John Howards fault, rather than the terrorists that threaten our freedom.

As for BER, actually read the report. Orgill is not some Labor stooge, if that’s the case every royal commission by a Liberal government can be treated with the same disdain. Yes there was waste, Orgill highlighted that this was due to systematic differences between the two State and non-government. But you can’t do a Senator Mason and apply square footage costings from independent schools to State schools and claim the difference, $2.6 billion, as waste. Common, use your head, the logistics are different. Access to materials differs from area to area. State schools and catholic schools cover areas independent schools wouldn’t consider providing services etc. Then compare this public sector with private sector waste. http://www.news.com.au/business/resource-mega-projects-hit-by-8bn-cost-blowout/story-e6frfm1i-1225984773758 . The simple fact is Large infrastructure projects are susceptible to cost blow-out precisely because of their size and inaccessibility etc

What pers is simply highlighting is the double standard in the media in that waste under Howard was highlighted but wasn’t front page news for weeks on end i.e. SES school funding an over funding of $800 million a year, 1 billion in IT outsourcing over-payments. All that middle class welfare. A structural budget deficit http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/coalition-faces-a-ruinous-record/story-e6frg7ex-1225712757155 .

Yes a Liberal government wouldn’t waste money with a BER type scheme because it’s too risky. Instead they’d say it’s a State problem then throw more money at non-government schools via a flawed SES funding model that has cost the tax payer $8 billion in over-payments, because when the formula was introduced no school could be made worse off. How does $8 billion compare with the flawed $2.6 billion calcualtion.  Your beloved Liberals are equally as good at wasting money, but smart enough not to invest in infrastructure. Do you really want me to list off further Liberal government waste and program failures?

Snowy says:

09:30am | 08/02/11

Grrr, the only time Liberals are concerned with industrial deaths is when there’s political mileage to be made from them. They have nothing good to say about unions who are are always concerned by the number of industrial deaths, and who constantly strive to prevent them. Abbott and his self promotion on backs of tragedies is a disgrace.

Bill Door says:

09:42am | 08/02/11

@persephone

Excellent post. The campaign linking the deaths to the government and in particular Garrtt is pure sleaze. Whenever someone raise the issue, I said how many people die in the year before the Government got involved? Surprise, surprise, they can never answer.

Last year there was a court case in Sydney, I thing. Where the family of a batts installer died while installing batts. The family of the deceased were suing the home own for not providing a safe working environment. Interesting how the Ray Hadley’s of the world never mentioned this case. Probably because the man’s death occurred before the Batts program began.

persephone says:

09:54am | 08/02/11

Liz

fine, so tell us what’s wrong with them, using references.

As for your comment about why a family member would want the government thrown out, I’m really not going there. A death in the family is a very emotional thing. People look for someone to blame and lash out.

Gillard wasn’t PM then, or the responsible Minister. She didn’t attend Defence force funerals then, either.

No, they didn’t halt all activities, and I don’t recall anyone asking them to. They made further changes to the program, before they realised that (some) employers couldn’t be trusted to implement these.

Industry groups repeatedly praised the Minister and the government’s swift response to their concerns.

Ryan

correct, no one has found billions in waste.

If you know otherwise, please provide the evidence.

I note that my ‘crickets’ comment still holds true.

John says:

09:55am | 08/02/11

Persephone, I’ve got to say… your post makes me sick.

What depths can one sink to in order to blindly defend this inept excuse for a government?

We’re talking about HUMAN LIVES here.  PEOPLE DIED.  And you want to trot out statistics?  “Number of deaths per thousand homes insulated”??? Excuse me whilst I clean the vomit off my keyboard.
“The media beat up was that somehow it was more dangerous to install insulation under the pink batts program.  It wasn’t.”  What a disgraceful comment.  Of course it was more dangerous – more people were engaged in this dangerous activity, and more people died!
You can’t answer everything by analysing numbers.  Who cares what statistics say?  Human lives were ended as a direct result of government policy.  They took a known dangerous industry without adequate safety standards and pumped in buckets of money, without putting in place adequate safety standards (and don’t try to say they were adequate – if they were, people wouldn’t have died).

Here’s an idea – if an industry is dangerous, and threatens lives, and can’t be made adequately safe…. don’t try to expand it rapidly and unnecessarily!

Stop reading the figures and go to some of the victim’s families and friends – see how your favourable statistics fly with them.

Sorry to finish with a cliché, but seriously… take a good hard look at yourself.

Dash says:

10:06am | 08/02/11

Perse, I have just added a post below which lists just a few examples of the ALPs waste. Should be enough evidence for you I hope. It’s not too late to renounce your membership to the ALP Perse!

Jim says:

10:07am | 08/02/11

“If you want to debate these issues, Saint, grow up and do so honestly. That means providing actual evidence to counter what I say, rather than just bleating, “You’re wrong! I know you are!”

That’s very childish of you.”

But persephone…that’s exactly what YOU do! YOU are always telling people they are wrong…smugly retorting a cry of “evidence” when someone raises a valid point. Whether it’s a point borne out of tangible evidence or perception doesn’t matter one bit. It’s still a valid point.

YOU do not debate, YOU tell. YOU dictate what people should be thinking in the most condescending and arrogant ways. Yet when faced with someone who obviously knows their facts and outlines your bullshit, you run and hide. You can make 20 replies in one thread to back your own opinions, but no response when you get caught out.

I think it is YOU that needs to grow up, be honest, stop bleating and stop being childish.

persephone says:

10:26am | 08/02/11

John

which is why the government in no longer involved.

The review into the insulation scheme found it was well targetted, value for money and delivered effectively.

It advised, however, that the government couldn’t do anything to guarantee that there would be no deaths in the industry and that any further deaths would be blamed on the government regardless.

Under those circumstances, it recommended that the program no longer proceed.

Not because it was rorted, not because it didn’t deliver value for money, not because it wasn’t a worthwhile initiative, but because the industry is an inherently risky one and no one can guarantee the safety of its workers.

There’s a lot of industries that description applies to. If we’re going to close them all down because of perceived risks, then our economy would grind to a complete halt.

Jim

thanks for that sterling contribution, complete with links to evidence, statistics, quotes from eminent….oh, hang on, none of those things.

Just personal abuse.

Honestly, if you can’t refute an argument, why get involved in it at all?

Or better still, why don’t you set an example for me, by showing how it’s done?

Ryan says:

10:52am | 08/02/11

@persephone: “In an attempt to lift Labor’s policy-delivery credentials, the Prime Minister also admitted she had learned from the waste linked to Kevin Rudd’s $42 billion economic stimulus program, including parts of her own $16.2bn Building the Education Revolution.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/julia-gillard-vows-no-repeat-of-ber-waste-over-flood-and-cyclone-recovery/story-fn59niix-1226001815174

Theres your proof, Gillard admitting to it, surely she wouldn’t be admitting to something she didn’t do, hell she normally wont take responsibility for anything. Are you calling her a liar persephone?

persephone says:

11:23am | 08/02/11

Ryan

no, but I don’t trust ‘The Australian’ further than I can throw It (maybe not even that far).

The relevant question and answer from the press conference:

‘JOURNALIST: (inaudible) under the pink batts and green loans and BER to some extent (inaudible). Is this, has your administration been informed by the difficulties in those schemes about the need for greater value for money in these schemes?

PM: As I’ve said before clearly as Prime Minister and as the Deputy Prime Minister I had learned some things by rolling out major construction projects. I of course understand that Building the Education Revolution is talked about, I see that in the media too. I would remind that in many thousands of projects, many, many thousands of projects complaint rates were at 3 per cent, but I do acknowledge that I’ve learned some things.’

http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-press-conference-canberra-4

She doesn’t say what she’s learnt. It might be to cover all her bases so that unfair criticisms don’t get air time.

Hamish says:

11:38am | 08/02/11

Hey Perse, you’re attempting to re-write history here. The fact is the government recklessly threw too much money at a (before that) very small, dangerous and under-regulated industry which predictably resulted in a huge jump in the number of shonky operators who didn’t take workplace safety (or indeed home insulation) very seriously. They’ve now essentially destroyed the industry with their reckless misallocation of resources. Garrett, Rudd and Gillard would all admit they stuffed up. They didn’t properly think through the consequences of their actions and it bit them on the bum. If they can accept it you probably should. You might use statistics to attempt to mitigate their guilt, but in reality politics is an much about perception as reality and so your position is somewhat irrelevant anyway really.

Re the BER, the report found that there was no blatant corruption, but it certainly found that government schools got very bad deals and were paying more for buildings than they would normally cost (or indeed more than private schools paid for far superior bespoke buildings). Again, you could argue that this was related to supply and demand and procedural bureaucratic issues, but if you know a system isn’t calibrated properly, then throwing craploads of money at it is unjustifiable. Also, when you’re already stimulating the construction industry with a number of major infrastructure projects, then obviously there’s going to be a supply issue with labour, especially considering our existing skill shortage problem, so you are not going to get value for money in other areas (i.e. the BER).

The funny thing is that the government are still running BER projects (what a timely stimulus) and these projects will obviously affect availability of skilled labour making Qld reconstruction efforts undoubtedly more difficult and expensive. The ALP’s problem is they just don’t realise their decisions have consequences outside of the media cycle.

Jim says:

12:40pm | 08/02/11

So pers….it is OK for you to attack, but not anyone else? It’s OK for you to just allude to the ‘several reports’ or ‘well documented cases’ or ‘majority opinions’....but everyone else needs proof? And not just proof…you need proof that has been accepted by the ALP and the Greens! It’s OK for you to tell everyone else they are wrong, but cannot accept when you are wrong?

You told a flat out lie last week, I caught you out, you suddenly stopped filling that thread with your condescending walls of text. I don’t need statistics, quotes or links to say that.

persephone says:

01:08pm | 08/02/11

Hamish

interestingly, I’d agree that my position is irrelevant. I found the flood of responses to my post intriguing.

And I know that I’m going against the ALP line here, thanks for pointing it out.

In both cases, my simple defence is that the truth is still the truth and worth telling, regardless of whether it’s relevant or not.

I note again that Abbott has confirmed that the BER is worth doing. He’s not going to cut a cent from it, only defer it.

Hamish says:

01:27pm | 08/02/11

Yes, Perse and the truth is the government, despite your protests, should have known better. They made policy on the run and stuffed up. Both with the Batts and the BER.

And you and I both know full well that just because Abbott isn’t scrapping the BER doesn’t mean he actually agrees with it.

persephone says:

01:46pm | 08/02/11

Hamish

and you and I know very well that Tony Abbott doesn’t intend to do half the things he says he will.

He lacks the ticker to make really hard decisions.

Which is an important difference - Labor got itself into trouble because it was prepared to take risks for the good of the country.

Ben81 says:

01:50pm | 08/02/11

If you think we’ve gotten any value for money out of the insulation scheme at all there’s no hope for you.

Hamish says:

02:16pm | 08/02/11

Yes Perse, and Julia Gillard believes in about half of the things she says she believes in. Labor panicked and made bad decisions on the run. They might have been wanting to help the country, but I assume most elected representatives have reasonably good intentions, the secret is to actually make good decisions. This ALP government continually makes bad (however well-intentioned) decisions.

persephone says:

04:06pm | 08/02/11

Hamish

and these decisions kept us out of recession, kept people in jobs and in their homes.

I’d rather a government that took risks and got those results than one that sat on its hands and did nothing.

Oh, or deferred spending because they were too afraid to upset someone by actually making courageous decisions.

Paul says:

04:55pm | 08/02/11

Hey Persephone, where you you during the roll out of the over-priced, over-valued and ripped off roofing insulation scheme?
My daughter signed up for the installation. A local contractor installed the silver insulation - claiming the full $1600 grant. Then people started to die. My daughter paid for an electrician to check her roof cavity, who said it was okay and safe. Three months ago a team of government employed contractors came around and said they had to rip it out. She said no..it’s fine..They said well we either rip it out or you sign this document that released the government from any responsibility. She had it ripped out (cost to the taxpayer unknown). Then I paid $800 to have local contractor come around and install pink batts.
Ergo…that was the original cost. Not the $1600 that was claimed….
A couple of cents you say. Get real, my daughter’s house alone cost the taxpayer well over $2000 for zero, zip. Would have been cheaper for the nation to hand the funds direct to the contractors and send them out to fill in roofs..Then again, the suppliers who did the deal with Rudd wouldn’t have made sooo muuuch money out of flogging insulation.

Northern Steve says:

11:48pm | 08/02/11

To put another perspective on the failure of the BER program, it was meant to provide economic stimulation in every town, that’s why schools were targetted (it was never about education).  The idea was that the money would be used to put a floor under the building industry everywhere, regardless of how small or large a town was.

I can tell you in my town, of about 15,000 people, there are two state schools and one high school.  All three schools got BER funding.  In each case, the local builders were unable to comply with the complex regulations and rules put in place with the BER, and so the big out of town boys got the jobs.  They had to pay their workers’ transport and accommodation costs, travel expenses and so on on top of actually building the projects.

The result?  Much higher costs for starters, and local builders getting none of the work, many of whom are friends of mine and still scratching for work despite the money being splashed around by the government.  It has also pushed up building costs locally as demand for materials has increased, making it even harder for our builders to provide value-for-money quotes for other local jobs.

The evidence is there if you go ask people.  Or you can be like pers and the rest and stick your head in the sand and deny it all.

TimB says:

07:51am | 08/02/11

Its also an indictment on the Government that they design the system so poorly that they leave it open to rorting.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

08:34am | 08/02/11

It is a simple lack of oversight. This Government has actually had a few good ideas, but every one of them has been subject to blowouts, rorting and the like. 
 
If Fahey can stop that, I’m all for it. And the best way to do that is to keep a lid on wages and allowances during reconstruction and make sure any tender process is above board and free of collusion. Any bidder must be willing to open the books and show how the figures were derived.

James1 says:

11:51am | 08/02/11

Tony and TimB,

Are you saying that private enterprise cannot be trusted?  And are you calling for the government to regulate private enterprise?

TimB says:

01:26pm | 08/02/11

James, I’m just saying they should put more checks on their own programs when they open them up to private tender.

You know there were holes a mile wide for peope that enabled people to rort the insulation scheme. If it’s a government scheme, they need to administer it properly.

Northern Steve says:

11:51pm | 08/02/11

And when Acotrel gets work done at his place by tradies, he just gives them his ATM card and PIN and tells them to take out what they need to do the job. No need to quote or check their work afterwards!

Macca says:

07:58am | 08/02/11

@TChong, this is the problem when the Left advocates big government.

They pledge to reduce spending and then increase the level of bureaucracy.

This appointment by JG is the political equivalent of waving the white flag on the economy.

acotrel says:

08:28am | 08/02/11

@TimB - So you want more regulation of private industry?  Sounds good to me! I suggest you’d have society operating within a legal straight jacket, it the level of legislation required was imposed!

TChong says:

08:38am | 08/02/11

Maybe Macca, but again, if the bureacracy is transparent etc as it should be, (and I know idealism and reality are often different), then an even handed, transparent accountable sysem is needed.
Thats what a bureacracy CAN do, account for decision making and allocation etc.
The alternative to bureaucracy is fraught with snap decisions and non accountability.
Think of Ros Kelly and the “white board”.
Thats what can happen when quick decisions and money meet, with no proper accountability.
Cutting red tape is well and good, as long as you dont need to account for the actions , later.

dovif says:

09:12am | 08/02/11

Agree with TChong

The problem with the BER, Insulation and Green loans was theat there was not enough bureacracy to ensure there is no waste… which is what Gillard admitted and decided to change. To spend $10 million to save $1 billion is a good investment for Gillard.

It works pretty well for the Liberals as well, if there was no waste… the Liberals can say becuase we oversaw the whole system, we were able to ensure we got value for money. If there was waste, Fehey will pick it up and ensure Australians wins out

Gillard has done really well with this and everyone wins

The Australian public gets good value for money, which Gillard has admitted they did not get
The ALP wins because they are finally able to get something on budget without cost blowouts
The Liberals wins because the ALP admits, that if you want to do something efficiently, you get a Liberal to do it

Paul says:

07:09am | 08/02/11

There has never been a levy to raise the massive funds we have sent overseas to assist other countries following a natural disaster. The many millions given to Indonesia and Thailand following the tsunami is just one that comes to mind.

TimB says:

07:58am | 08/02/11

Where is this poll Christian? The only one I’ve seen supporting the levy so far is the recent newspoll and that was at 55% support.

Link to the 73% figure please.

Faz says:

08:48am | 08/02/11

@ TimB

Not sure where the 73% figure comes from but 55% is a landslide for this government!

Tony of Poorakistan says:

08:54am | 08/02/11

Christian

If that poll included any people who don’t actually have to pay the Flood Tax, then it is flawed. I dare say I could poll any number of people and get greater than 73% approval for the idea of free beer on Fridays. If it isn’t costing anything, of course the dole bludging ALP supporters will say yes.

TimB says:

09:23am | 08/02/11

Faz, we’re pretty sure most of the affirmative respondents to that 55% poll probably aren’t liable for the levy anyway.

It’s easy to give a positive response when it’s someone else’s money you’re agreeing to give away.

Still waiting on that 73% link Christian.

You interpid reporter says:

12:50pm | 08/02/11

Reliable sources within Polling Australia have told this reporter that polls conducted in and around affected areas have overwhelmingly supported the flood levy. More than 75% of respondents were in favour of the flood levy and more than 50% believed that the coalition should contribute to the reconstruction out of their political donation bank account. In particular, they believed the money received from big tobacco and the mining companies should be directly contributed to the infrastructure fund.
- more to come

acotrel says:

08:59am | 08/02/11

C1, Keep your fingers out of the till.  Theft by employees destroys employers’ trust in all of their staff!  Society cannot work without trust.  If we work on the paranoid basis that everyone is out to get us, we’ll all end up slashing our wrists. The fundamental problem lies with promotion of individualism.  Employees should have exactly the same goals and aspirations as their employers.  Perhaps Australia should move more towards Employee Share Ownership?

C1 says:

10:56am | 08/02/11

Acotrel,

You missed my point entirely.

C1 says:

07:42am | 08/02/11

Christian,

You refer to this as it if is a big game of chess. This is Public Money- play politics elsewhere.
If this is all that you see in this episode, then you need to get out more.

TimB says:

08:30am | 08/02/11

You know all about cheerleading and catchcries don’t you Christian.

I see below you’re still on the “black hole” zombie bandwagon.

Christian Real says:

09:27am | 08/02/11

Tim B
The Liberals and their supporters have mastered the art of cheerleading and catchcries, and continue to regurgitate the diatribe their Liberal party drip-feeds them,otherwise you wouldn’t be in denial about your Liberal teams ‘black hole’ in their policy costings .
There is the fact that the Liberals also lied about their policies being fully costed by an Independent accounting firm, when in reality, that wasn’t the case.
If it wasn’t for Treasury exposing the Liberals decietful lies about costing their policies, then the Australian public would never have known that they were being dudded by the master of deception Tony Abbott.
And C1:
The only big game(and political game) is the one that Tony Abbott is playing by opposing this Flood Levy

TimB says:

09:54am | 08/02/11

Christian the only one in denial here is you.

I busted your black hole argument wide open on the weekend. You’re acting as if it never happened.

Mindless parroting and denial is all you have.

BTW still waiting on your link for your quoted poll results above. If I don’t get it soon I’m going to have to assume you were just making stuff up.

Christian Real says:

12:16pm | 08/02/11

Tim B
I could never perfect (making stuff up)  as good as you Tim B. or your Liberal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott does on a regular basis.

TimB says:

12:59pm | 08/02/11

What did I make up Christian?

Now you’re making up stuff about me making stuff up.

Is that irony?

And yep, still no link to your 73% poll. It appears you lied, plain and simple. Stop trying to deflect.

AdamC says:

09:26am | 08/02/11

Your desperation is showing, Therese. What with Gillard’s many stuff-ups, I suspect your husband is already sharpening his knives.

Just as an aside, it is unbecoming for governments to keep making the opposition the issue. Gillard and her team run the country, not Tony Abbott. It is one thing to respond to opposition criticism, but quite another to have a running commentary on the Coalition’s alleged shortcomings.

persephone says:

10:05am | 08/02/11

My husband???????????????????????

My husband is presently in hospital with a severe infection, AdamC.

Again, I can only assume you’re delving into my private life to try and avoid actually tackling the issues I raise.

I’m not the government, either, so surely it is entirely up to me whether or not I trash the Opposition or not.

I notice you can’t defend them, except by trying to change the subject.

I repeat:

this is a fiasco for the Liberals and for Abbott in particular.

Having said that the government is awash with waste and mismanagement, it has taken a fortnight for them to find the tiny weeny $1.8 billion they need.

Even then, the level of disagreement about these cuts has lead to a party room revolt, with Abbott unable to impose his ideas on his party.

This demonstrates not only the fragility of Abbott’s leadership (he has failed to make the changes to the Federal Liberal administration he repeatedly tells people he wants; he has failed to discipline anyone for adding information to his letter without his knowledge) but how difficult it is to find savings in the Budget.

And there is no mention whatsoever about the NBN in these discussions, indicating that (as I said previously) there weren’t any savings to be made.

Hamish says:

12:41pm | 08/02/11

Perse, denigrating the Liberal Party for having a plurality of views huh? Not every party can be run by backroom snakemen who think nothing of knifing elected representatives. The ALP leadership will no doubt have another parachuted-in Union-stooge very soon. Apparently Shorten’s already getting itchy. Hope Jools can turn those polls around. Well I don’t obviously. Fed Labor = NSW Labor these days.

As AdamC says Perse, it’s Jools who’s in power and she’s the one who has just proved to the Australian people that either she doesn’t trust herself or her party to spend money efficiently and/or she can’t control the public service to the extent necessary to enforce budgetary discipline. Either way, sitting there trying to turn Abbott’s leadership into the issue when everyone in Australia (even yourself) knows it’s Jools who needs to worry about her leadership position just makes you look like you’re clutching at straws. Which, of course, you are.

Keating and Hawke didn’t have problems getting the party or the public service into line, but hey, they were actually capable.

As an aside, I’m a bit of a betting man (thank you Vic Coalition victory) and I figure you should have some idea re potential successors to our dead woman walking. Who’s your tip? Shorten? What about Combet?

Tator says:

12:59pm | 08/02/11

persephone,
this debate over where the funding cuts should be made is actually a good example of democracy with both sides arguing their point, I personally would rather a party that allows this sort of public debate rather than one that insists on following the party line come hell or high water like the ALP does with it’s pledge of Caucus solidarity.  This open debate is showing that the Coalition isn’t turning into Zombie MP’s like the ALP did under Rudd.  Plus all the debate is not compromising the Coalition argument that the Flood Levy is bad policy.

persephone says:

01:52pm | 08/02/11

Not canning the debate, just saying that it shows how tight the budget is and how difficult it is to find cuts within it.

The opposite to what Tony had been telling us.

Ben81 says:

02:15pm | 08/02/11

pers “Not canning the debate, just saying that it shows how tight the budget is and how difficult it is to find cuts within it.

The opposite to what Tony had been telling us. “

He can’t magically erase spending that’s already happened, and how many times does he have to tell you he wants to dump the NBN before it gets through to you?  If it was up to him it would be given the flick immediately, problem solved.  Labor simply won’t so he’s pointed out other less urgent spending that can be deferred. 
You’re continually acting as if the public funding budgeted for it isn’t real or something and it’s a bit ridiculous.

persephone says:

04:15pm | 08/02/11

Ben

he hasn’t mentioned the NBN for several days now; I think the message has finally gotten home that there’s no savings to be made there.

And I don’t think he believes the government will accept any of his savings suggestions, so why not put the NBN out there again?

I mean, it’s not as if the savings he’s come up with are that brilliant.

Tony knew everything you’ve outlined two weeks ago, when he made the statement that it would be easy to find cuts in the budget because of all of the government’s waste and mismanagement.

He hasn’t been able to do that.

Instead, he’s deferred spending.

He’s not cutting anything.

The man’s a complete wimp.

JIm says:

07:33pm | 08/02/11

peresphone - contracts have already been awarded in the NBN waste…can’t be reneged upon now without massive costs. Don’t think we are stupid by not realising that!

He also managed to find $2bn.

Wether he cut things or deferred them is a moot point.

Ben81 says:

08:58pm | 08/02/11

pers “I think the message has finally gotten home that there’s no savings to be made there.”
Sorry but that’s the dumbest thing I’ve read all day.  Let’s just see what he has to say about it in the coming days shall we, I’m not sure he’ll suddenly support it or think of it as being funded by imaginary money as you continue to imply.
He’s putting to the government what they decided on in shadow cabinet, and the Liberals position on the NBN hasn’t changed.  It would be stupid to create a sideshow by making noise about other areas of spending that can be cut before the government even considers what they have to say.

persephone says:

07:40am | 08/02/11

Dovif

if there was wastage in any of these programs which could have been prevented, this would not mean that there was money available to fix the present problem.

All the money you refer to was borrowed money.

So any money saved would mean less money borrowed, which would make no difference to the present situation - unless, of course, you think the government should borrow more money.

Dash says:

08:17am | 08/02/11

persephone, Hi. Interesting logic!

Since you’re an ALP member, I think your attitude towards our taxes demonstrates the same disregard for taxpayers as the rest of the ALP.

Borrowed money needs to be repaid with interest. It is repaid using our taxes. Any wasted borrowed money is therefore a waste of taxpayers money. Less money borrowed is less money to be repaid.

And it’s not a question of “if”. It is a fact that under all three ALP schemes listed by dovif, there has been huge amounts of waste! The cost of the flood levy is about the same as that wasted on the insulation fiasco. There was rorting under the school halls scheme. It’s debatable how much and we’ll never know whilst the ALP stacks the inquiries.

We do know that:
$21 million was wasted on fuelwatch
$13 million was wasted on Grocery choice
The cost of the 2020 sumitt was wasted
There were about $11 billion in promises made to independents to win office
There was $26 Billion in surplus left by the Howard Government which is gone and the Future fund has been raided and spent.
There were $900 handouts paid to dead people and people overseas
It’s questionable wether the $43billion on the NBN is money well spent
It’s questionable weither the $47billion second surplus was needed however interest rate movements would suggest it wasn’t.
There was rorting under the school halls program
It cost the taxpayer millions to fix the mess created by the insulation fiasco.
The government has increased its spend on consultancies.
The Qld ALP didn’t have insurance and the cost has been passed onto taxpayers (or at least the highest taxpayers) by the federal government.

Profits tax, flood tax, carbon tax. ALP = tax tax tax.

Dovif’s point is that the ALP is wasting money. Not many would argue against that.

The ALPs issue is they over promise and under deliver and have done so for over 3 years now.

dovif says:

08:39am | 08/02/11

persephone

can you please go back to facts, rather then talking about what your paymasters want you to say

It is good that you like Gillard has admitted to the massive waste.

Every $1 billion wasted means we have to pay the interest on the borrowing every month/year, with interest rate at 5%, this would mean $50 mill a year, that would definitely help with the rebuilding from the disaster.

As for borrowing more money, every budget deficit means money had to be borrowed to meet the deficit and then the interest on the deficit…. if the ALP was able to get a surplus, then I would agree with your line of reasoning. But the ALP had never produce a surplus that it did not inherited from the Coalition, therefore any talk of the ALP borrowing less, is just hypocritical

persephone says:

09:16am | 08/02/11

Dovif

sorry, I don’t admit to any waste at all (although I’ll admit that there would be some, as there is in any sizeable project, all the indicators are that waste under the BER was minimal).

I guess the word ‘if’ is a bit too big for you to tackle with.

Dash,

yes, it is logical.

The BER used borrowed money.

If there was the potential for waste, and this waste had been prevented, then there would be savings.

This would have been savings on borrowings. They would have reduced the interest rate payments and that’s about all.

Dovif seems to think that these savings would have meant more money in the bank. No, they would have meant less borrowings, so even if they had existed and had been made, the government would still be in the same situation they are now.

In effect, Dovif is saying that we should have still borrowed the full amount of money required for the BER, regardless of the true end costs, and parked the extra in the bank for emergencies.

So under his scenario, we would have borrowed money, which we were paying interest for, sitting there unused for a couple of years.

I don’t think I’d be defending him if I were you.

I don’t defend all left wing posters here, because in some cases (like all human beings) what they’re saying is stupid.

Defending someone because they’re on ‘your side’ and ignoring the stupidity of their argument doesn’t do you any favours.

dovif says:

09:44am | 08/02/11

Persephone

Do you know what you are actually talking about?

The BER scheme is in the budget, exept the original estimate by Gillard was only about $15 billion, and the cost blowouts eventually means that it cost Australians about $24 billion

The government do not borrow and put the money in the bank, they borrow when they need to finance a govenrment deficit.

So if the blowout did not occur, the government would have just borrowed less. It would be foolish to borrow the money and put it in the bank

persephone says:

10:29am | 08/02/11

dovif

and yet that is the logical consequence of your original suggestion.

Economist says:

10:29am | 08/02/11

@Dovif
“Only a Liberal can properly manage finance to ensure there is no cost blowouts” That hysterically funny. Where’s your evidence?

“If only a Liberal was in charge, the Insulation, BER and Green Loan project would not be rorted so heavily “Again where’s your evidence? the same bureaucrats would have been managing these programs? It’s purely speculation, based in unsubstantiated view.

I think you mena to say the Liberal wouldn’t implement such schemes, but waste money in other areas.

Dash says:

10:32am | 08/02/11

@ Perse,

So you agree with my post then. Waste is waste Perse. It all needs to be repaid. Taxpayers would prefer not to repay wasted borrowings.

“Defending someone because they’re on ‘your side’ and ignoring the stupidity of their argument doesn’t do you any favours.”

That’s exactly what you do continuously on this site Perse. You defend Gillard and the ALP regardless as to how many lies they tell, how many failed policies they don’t deliver and how much taxpayers money they waste.

People who live in glass houses Perse shouldn’t throw stones!

dovif says:

11:24am | 08/02/11

Economist

That is what Gillard has admited to, I am just letting you know her message

persephone says:

01:01pm | 08/02/11

Dovif

all you’ve demonstrated is that you don’t even understand what you’ve posted.

You said that, under a Liberal government, there wouldn’t have been as much waste and that the money saved could have been used to help out now.

Except (as it was borrowed money) there wouldn’t have been money in the bank.

There would have (assuming there was massive waste, and I’ve made it clear that I disagree with you there) been less borrowings.

Are you saying the reduced interest payments would have been enough to fund the flood rebuild?

Or that it would have allowed the government to borrow more money?

Christian Real says:

07:56am | 08/02/11

So an almost $11 billion black hole in the Liberal opposition’s policy costings shows that they shouldn’t be trusted either,according to your way of thinking.
And then you have the Liberals caught out spending $300,000 of taxpayers money for their Toner cartridges,so the can print out all their diatribe.
$300,000 for Toner Cartridges is not good value for taxpayers money either, the taxpayers do not benefit from such a wasteful expenditure, only the Liberals do.
While you might continuely ramble and rant on about BER being a rort, Schools finally received overdue infastructure that the Liberal party failed to deliver in almost 12 years of government.
And exactly where did the big surpluses come from that the Liberal party eagerly boasted about, they came from ripping funds from schools, hospitals and other vital infastructure.
A waste you say of the BER?, the halls, new classroom and other infastructure built at the schools will last for a long time, and will benefit quite a few generations of children that will use them,so I can see that in the long term, these new buildings at schools will be a benefit and value for money.
Those that can’t see that are too blinded by their Liberal leanings

TimB says:

08:28am | 08/02/11

Christian, as you may recall,  I dispelled your “Black Hole” fantasy on the weekend.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/mark-kenny-sat-feb-7/#comment-330956

The only black hole here is the one between your ears.

dovif says:

08:55am | 08/02/11

Christian Real

Repeating something 100 times does not make it real.

Wasn’t it funny that Treasury said a 40% tax would raise $12 billion, while a 30% tax will raise $10.5 billion. When Swann was ask why that is, he eventually admitted to fudging the figures by massively inflating the mineral prices.

Treasury did not have much problem with that.

1 month after the election, Swann decided that the metal prices was artiicially inflated and estimated the mining tax at $6.5 billion….. treasury did not find that blackhole, I wonder why that is?

Julia has admitted that the ALP cannot do budgets and will have to relie on a Liberal… that is all you need to know about the ALP and finances

Brisbane Jack says:

09:23am | 08/02/11

Christian Real , In my opinion, schools who managed their own projects will have long lasting infracture” but I can see” in the short term,  the cookie cutter buildings will be obsolete, used for other purposes, such as storage or demolished.

Talking about rambling and rant, do you realise you are becoming very repetitious ?

persephone says:

09:27am | 08/02/11

thatmosis

again, evidence?

I agree that the insulation program has cost us more than it should have. I’ll even happily blame the government for that, because it should have defended the scheme from the start, rather than digging bigger and bigger holes for itself in an attempt to show that they were addressing all the issues.

Please provide evidence of rorting with the BER. And explain why the Opposition wasn’t able to find any savings to be made with the ongoing problem. If you were correct, they should have been able to save money whilst allowing projects already committed to to go ahead.

TimB

I think the Liberal party’s present difficulties in coming up with any acceptable cuts demonstrates how efficient the government is and how little waste there is in present programs.

Otherwise finding the $1.8 billion (which everyone keeps pointing out isn’t really that much money budget wise) in savings required to scrap the levy wouldn’t have taken this long or involved as many backflips and as much acrimony within the Shadow Ministry as it has.

I repeat: if the government is wasteful and inefficient, finding $1.8 billion should be a doddle.

TimB says:

09:51am | 08/02/11

Perse, imagine I start my day with my last 5 bucks in my pocket with the intention of using it for my lunch. Mid-morning I get accosted by a coworker asking me to donate to something (charity, child’s sports team, leaving gift, whatever). I justify my refusal as I’ve already budgeted that money for my lunch, & I tell them to go shake down Joe over in Marketing instead,

Now is the fact that I can’t cut into my budget an example of how “efficient” I’ve been managing my money?

Or is it an example of how inept at financial management seeing as I really should have access to much more than $5?

Shouldn’t have spent it on buying rounds for everyone earlier in the week I guess.

Brisbane Jack says:

10:12am | 08/02/11

dovif,  tatics of a Blog bully.

Christian Real says:

10:33am | 08/02/11

Dovif
Julia has not admitted the ALP cannot do budgets as you so falsely claim,Tony (don’t believe everything I say )abbott has taught his disciples well

persephone says:

10:43am | 08/02/11

TimB

er….what?

The Liberals said the levy was unnecessary.

They said that there was plenty of fat in the budget.

They said that they would find savings from the budget which would cover the $1.8 billion.

They said they would produce these before parliament resumed.

All facts.

Parliament has resumed.

The Liberals can’t release their cuts because they can’t agree on what should be cut.

Both Bishop and Morrison say that there should be an INCREASE in foreign aid - and apparenlty they’ve got enough support for this to roll their leader on it.

There’s no proposal to cut the NBN, but to cut things like the water buyback and the rest of the BER (ironically, most of the schools who would miss out under this are in National Party electorates).

So the Libs are unable to find the cuts, which is basically an admission that the budget is fairly tight and thus the levy is justified.

dovif says:

11:27am | 08/02/11

Christian Real

Classic example is the BER, do you know what the original estimated cost was, and the blow out cost?

I believe it was an additional 40%, if that is not a Cost blowout/badly budgeted, you will need to find another explanation for it

Seminole says:

12:42pm | 08/02/11

dovif
No dovif do you?
If you make statements like this in some lame attempt to paint Labor badly, you should try to be factual and back them up with references.
very poor effort, typical of the blind political shit stirring of the conservatives.
Nice try, but an even worse effort than Timb who can’t afford to kick in 5 cents of his lunch money to a kid who has no lunch.

TimB says:

01:34pm | 08/02/11

@ Seminole

“Nice try, but an even worse effort than Timb who can’t afford to kick in 5 cents of his lunch money to a kid who has no lunch. “

Of course I can. The example was just a hypothetical. In reality, I (unlike the government) manage my money pretty well. I know what I need to prioritise my spending on and don’t over-indulge on luxuries, whilst salting some away for emergencies.

The governments piggybank on the other hand appears to be empty.

persephone says:

01:56pm | 08/02/11

Tim B

I actually thought of that image when Abbott was doing his presser.

Doesn’t it work both ways?

You as an individual are being asked to contribute a very small amount of money in comparison to your take home pay.

If you’re a good economic manager, who cares about your fellow Australians, then surely that’s not a problem.

Seminole says:

05:22pm | 08/02/11

Timb
Tim is 12 years old and goes to heartbreak high
One day Tim takes 5 dollars to school to buy his lunch.
Things are going along well for Tim and come lunchtime, he can’t wait to see all the goodies that his $5 can buy him in the lunch line.
As he approaches the line, he sees that someone has set up a little table where they are collecting donations for Mark, who’s house burnt down in the middle of the night and doesn’t have any lunch money today. They are asking for those that can afford it to chip in 5 cents so Mark can have some lunch.
Tim walks by pretending not to notice, licking his lips at all the goodies on display. Tim doesn’t want to kick in the 5 cents they are asking for so Mark doesn’t go hungry because he’s.
A selfish prick.

TimB says:

06:18pm | 08/02/11

Alright Badger, I’m tired of the games.

Suggest you find something else to amuse yourself with fast, before I take your ball away.

Temerarious says:

09:33am | 08/02/11

Would be great to be a fly on the wall when Bill has crackers and cocktails with his mother-in-law.

“So Mum, it won’t be long now. Are you going to give me a hug and kiss when you swear me in, or just keep your distance like you did with Jules?”

Wendy says:

08:03am | 08/02/11

Mark K have you just come to the conclusion that Labor is devoid of financial talent - it has been patently obvious, to many of us,  for some years now. Julia’s only hope is to use a Liberal to help her. Swan can’t be trusted, for one thing he hardly understands any thing financial. The sooner the election comes along the better all Australians will be.

TimB says:

09:34am | 08/02/11

Wendy, you’re new here aren’t you?

MarK knows. We all know.

Problem is we can’t do anything about it at the moment. Next election though….

Thirsty says:

10:20am | 08/02/11

@MarK
Could it be that Julia couldnt appoint a Labor person because they are all too busy actually running the country? (they are in power if you didnt know…)
From my perspective, it is the Liberal side that has excess talent at the moment, why not use one of them?
John Fahey, from memory, was always competent, has the neccessary skills, and never much went in for the partisan shit that we are subjected to day after day by both sides
Its a sad bloody day when an appointment like this is subjected to whether they are left or right and what is the political ramifications, instead of the fact that John Fahey is highly qualified for the job and is pretty well respected by all sides of the political divide
He did play league for Easts though…well, no-one can be perfect

MarK says:

10:48am | 08/02/11

ROLMAO

This is gorgeous,

“Could it be that Julia couldnt appoint a Labor person because they are all too busy actually running the country? (they are in power if you didnt know…)”

Really?

So they can’t walk and chew gum? So they got into government with promises to lead the way blah blah blah….except if something bad happens then they need help. My god son, this is what governments do.

I haven’t got an issue with Fahey doing the oversight you know it will be done correctly. I do have an issue with a gutless and cowardly PM hiding behind a Liberal to shield her from her own incompetence.

That is your PM for ya Thirsty.

Leading from the front by staying at the rear. She is busy though I guess. Someone else will have to rebuild that Queensland place.

What a laugh.

Thirsty says:

03:31pm | 08/02/11

@MarK
Why is it that you try and belittle every post that doesnt fit in with what I am guessing is your right of centre views?
Firstly, if Labor is in power (and they are), then anyone with Labor leaning views that is available, and with the neccessary skills, would already be employed elsewhere within government, that is how things work, and you know it
The flood and cyclone disaster is a once off massive event. You have to engage someone outside of parliament to run/oversee it, because it is such a big task
This is the same reason why a member of parliament isnt running NBN Co, even though it is a government initiative
This is the same reason why Craig Knowles has been appointed to run the Murray Darling Water Plan….you cannot have members of parliament running these type of programs
In all of these prgrams, you not only need someone with the specific skills for the job at hand, but because it is a large government run project, you also need someone with immense political skills to navigate around the corridors if parliament
Labor could have appointed one of its own, Lindsay Tanners name springs to mind, however, the political fallout from this, from people such as yourself, would have been deafening and over-rode the actual job at hand
Labor was in opposition for 12 years, before that, they were in power for 13 years. If a disaster happenned in the early years of Howards rein, he would have found it near impossible to appoint someone from “his side” as well, mostly because anyone worth 2 bob would have been employed somewhere commercially, as there isnt much point having someone with these types of skills sitting on the benches for over a decade

Likes Joining Dots says:

05:00pm | 08/02/11

MarK, c’mon, you should know better -  it’s comments like these:

“There is not one Labor identity or person Gillard could call on the help administer this money.”

Which leads me to conclude that you don’t have a full understanding of the devastating impact on economies due to the global shortage of drunken sailors.

Dash says:

10:19am | 08/02/11

Dill Boor, shame the ALP didn’t take out insurance in Qld. Then the taxpayer wouldn’t have to be slugged yet again by Gillard!

Hardly checkmate! Doesn’t change the fact the ALP has over promised and under delivered continuously over the last three years! John Fahey wont change the fact that the ALP is incompetent and wasteful!

Smacks of desperation if you ask me! Typical ALP crap! Form a stacked committee and hold it up as expert opinion. How stupid do the ALP take the electorate?

Bill Door says:

10:31am | 08/02/11

And I was right. Ray Hadley blew a head gasket.

@Dash

You sound upset.

persephone says:

10:47am | 08/02/11

Dash

How Queensland covers its share of costs is a matter for Queensland.

They could have all the insurance in the world and the Feds would still have to come up with money, because it has an obligation to pay 75% of the costs of rebuilding.

If this wasn’t so, why are other Premiers, most notably Ted Ballieu, asking for money?

Why doesn’t he just pay for the rebuild out of his state’s insurance?

TimB says:

11:16am | 08/02/11

Perse we might as well continue our little discussion from yesterday here.

Are you seriously telling me that if they were to insure their infrastructure, they would only insure 25% of it?  Because that is insane.

Again:

Original infrastructure insured for $X.
Payout = $X.

Net cost of new Infratructure: $Y-$X payout= $Z

$Z is split between QLD and Feds 25/75. That’s how it should work.

Instead you seem to be implying QLD will only insure for a quarter of the cost of X, and only get X/4 in terms of payout. Again this is insanity.

Dash says:

11:17am | 08/02/11

Perse, the ALP runs (use the term lightly) Queensland and didn’t have appropriate insurance!

Also, you are wrong. The federal government will not pay 75% of the cost of rebuilding. Insurance companies will pick up a very significant piece of the rebuilding cost thank you very much! Individuals and donations will also pick up a significant amount of the private building costs.

The Federal government will pick up 75% of the infrustructure cost not covered! Massive difference.

If you argue the federal government picks up 75% of all costs (which you seem too) it’s easier to try to justify a flood tax to do so isn’t it Perse!

If the Qld government took out insurance, the amount left to the Federal government (ie the 75%) would be a lot less. That’s my point.

You seem to have no idea when it comes to money!!! You argue above that because the ALP wasted borrowed money, it’s not as bad as wasting taxpayers money??? How stupid is that! That only the interest would be reduced - WTF!

With people like you members of the ALP it’s no wonder they can’t seem to work out the nations finances!

Lis says:

02:52pm | 08/02/11

@ Dash and TimB
Of course, Queensland has no insurance for its infrastructure - does any State Government? Or the Federal Government? The point is, they cannot/have not (by choice or otherwise) obtained insurance in part because the premiums have been deemed so high that the impact on the day - to - day budget is prohibitive. They, as many other organisations with similar issues, therefore assume the risk that all will be good and well most of the time (= risk management)  and that when something like this happens, they will find other means to secure the $ for the rebuilt. So the question of whether insurance payouts paid to a Government would cover the rebuilt is moot.

BTW - I have no affiliation with or preference for either polical party and make this comment purely as a reader who has been following your discussions with some interest.

Yes says:

04:07pm | 08/02/11

@Lis, yes they do.  http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/cyclone-yasi/state-goes-it-alone-in-shunning-insurance/story-fn7rj0ye-1225999067129

TimB says:

04:46pm | 08/02/11

Lis, yes the other state governments do.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/cyclone-yasi/queensland-under-attack-over-its-failure-to-take-out-disaster-insurance/story-fn7rj0ye-1225999612073

Federal Government, I’m not so sure. Maybe for stuff in the territories, because obviously the States would cover infrastructure in their own jurisdiction.

Joan says:

09:46am | 08/02/11

The only ones looking incompetent are Labor ....not even Fahey can breathe life into a dead duck Government…... Faheys foley as he risks his established reputation and joins the ship of fools….the pack of misfits, Labor, Greens an Independents

MarK says:

08:39am | 08/02/11

All this would have been tested on focus groups before being released.

It is SOP for them to do so.

MarK says:

09:10am | 08/02/11

If she and the government were competent the need to protect herself would not be there.

That is the point.

Jedi_T says:

09:18am | 08/02/11

Hey nossy,

Got a proposition for you. Using your obvious high IQ, give us your unrestrained opinion of Tony Abbott, without once referencing him with something the Media has used.

Just one time.

nossy says:

09:57am | 08/02/11

@Jedi_T - I love the guy Jedi - hes the funniest Opp Leader to ever come out of the Liberal Party. Abbott reminds me of Capn Edward Smith of the RMS Titanic - the only difference being is that the SS Liberal has a lot more Lifeboats to which many in the Liberal Party are quietly moving to fill. No hes ok Jeds - a great Labor party asset - nice of you to ask fella !

Dash says:

10:46am | 08/02/11

@ Nossy, can I borrow your brain? I’m building an idiot!

nossy says:

01:49pm | 08/02/11

@Dash - humbled indeed that you asked fella but its Cryoncs you see Dash I need all my parts as am going to be frozen and come back in another 50-100 years !

Tator says:

04:39pm | 08/02/11

Dash,
it is obvious from his long list of posts that Nossy has already frozen his brain and that is the only reason you can’t use it for your idiot.

nossy says:

06:58pm | 08/02/11

@Tator - that was funny Tator - you made nossy laugh - keep em coming fella !

MarK says:

09:23am | 08/02/11

“Where is the coverage of how the investigations of the homes insulated are carried out?
My home has been inspected and the process put in placed is of the highest and most accountable system of any I have seen.  “

Ahh I see.

You rush a program you were warned by your own ministers was beyond the scope of the government department to deliver but forge ahead anyway.

You all rort upon rort and rip off upon rip off to occur.

You stand and watch as 4 people die.

You still ignore the warnings as houses burn.

You hide the evidence.

You quickly shitcan it because of mounting pressure.

You roll up your shitsleeve and march out the front of the office with a notebook to talk to legimate operators that have had their businesses ruined by your actions.

You make notes promising action.

You don’t act.

You then set up another taskforce to clean up the mess you left including necessary safety inspections because people are scared out of their brain.

You spend, what was it, half a billion? - to on this clean up and rectification.

And you think the msms should report how good the inspection process is?

OMFG - could I borrow your brain for a while. It works in weird ways.

The batt scheme will be studied as a text book case of how not to deliver programs in the future. It is a classic example of how not to do things. To defend any part of it is not even spin. It is to lie outrageously.

hermes says:

11:41am | 08/02/11

@ Dash, you need to repost these figures in as many forums as possible; people have *very* short memories, pity.

Matt says:

02:20pm | 08/02/11

If only silly naive labor voters would remove their heads from the sand, or their ass, and realise this!! 

Well done on reminding us of the Krudd/Gillard/Swan expereince.

Lis says:

03:33pm | 08/02/11

Just for the sake of making you think a bit more with respect to the idea that the concepts in themspelves were not entirely useless , Dash, not because I necessarily disagree with you, some comments:
$900 handouts to dead peopl and people overseas - dead people can’t collect money so this could be recalled, overseas people are still Australian citiczens with the same rights and responsibilities as those living here so the money to them could have been given with the obligation to spend it in Australia;
$21m on fuelwatch which delivered nothing - this matter was instigated by the outrage of us, the consumer, whom the Goverment was trying to help - maybe it would have been more successful, if the Government was legally allowed to regulate the fuel industry further (not withstanding the taxes it collects), alas Australian competition legislation would need to be changed: is that something we want, can cope with the consequences and should we push for it?
$13m on grocerychoice which delivered nothing - same issues as before only related to the ‘big’ grocery chains;
The rorting of taxpayers funds under the school halls program largely at the hands of ALP backed builders - so it’s ok to blame the Government only, but not the builders who actually inflate the cost: just becasue it’s there for the taking, doesn’t mean you should, obviously some moral backbone needs to be grown in these builders, too;
$500 million provided for a new layer of health bureaucracy in 2010-11 Budget - if it were part of a new vision that would see health, education, transport and other infrastructure matters, taxation and environmental matters assigned solely to the Federal Government and State Government done away with and remaining matters to be dealt with by the new ‘SuperCouncils’, would that make the $500M a good investement in the future of this country?
$126 million on new political advertising before the 2010 election - unfortunately, by law, political parties are allowed to secure certain tax payer funds for their political campaigns irrespective of their political orientation ....
In summary: we get who we vote for, and it appears quite obvious from the manner in which the last election proceeded that we weren’t sure either way: the frying pan or the fire?  In the meantime, we could find a legal way to oust the current Government or live with it until the next election and hope that we will get a decisive appointment of competent people. In the end, the average person is likely not swayed by one (idealistic) political conviction or another, but by giving the job to anyone else but themselves (often finding themselves thinking: who really wants to be a politician?) and always keeping in mind: what’s in it for me (just human nature)?

Dash says:

08:11am | 09/02/11

Hi Lis,

The $900 to dead people and people overseas was not recovered. So if your dad died you got two payments abd meanwhile significant tax payers got nothing!

The thing to remember is that the ALP campaigned on cheaper groceries and cheaper fuel. It was part of their pitch to be voted into government. They not only wasted taxpayers money but they didn’t deliver. In fact, cost of living expenses have risen sharply since the ALP has been in office and interest rates rose 7 times in the year after they claimed to be for working families. People feel let down and cheated because they took these promises in good faith. If your comments suggest it was never possible, why promise it! that just makes it a fraud.

The issue over the BER is that schools were not allowed to use the builders of their choice! The builders had to be “approved” by the ALP. It was a rort assisted by the ALP. It took taxpayers money and lined the pockets of ALP aligned members of the building industry! As a result, you cannot have separation between builders and the ALP in this case, they are one and the same!

The $500m “investment” is still up for debate. I personally have seen no change in the quality of healthcare here in NSW! Don’t forget the ALP promised federal ownership of hospitals by July 2009. We’re still waiting!

We do get who we vote for Lis. That’s why the sheer volume of ALP election lies are a disgrace. Leading the people on promising cheaper better childcare, to build 260 childcare centres, make our fuel cheaper, make our groceries cheaper, not to implement a carbon tax etc etc etc should not be tolerated. It is the non delivery of these things that has turned me so against this government.

This is not a Hawke Keating styled ALP. It is a socialist government who is punishing hard working family people, taking away their incentive to work hard and rewarding the wealth destroyers in our community and ALP green aligned organisations. The government has seriously over promised and under delivered time and time again. At what stage do we say enough?

Against the Man says:

12:25pm | 08/02/11

It doesn’t matter which way it ends up the fact she needed to even consider getting a Lib to help her get things right shows us all what a moron she really is. She has missed the big picture, as per usual. Sorry fake PM you are the weakest link

Greg says:

10:37am | 08/02/11

What’s this got to do with the ALPs waste and inability to manage our finances??? How much is the ALP paying you to waste our time nossy?

Concerned Citizen says:

12:03pm | 08/02/11

Nossy, I’m confused its seems you think its better we give aid to africa and tax our citizens more to help ourselves or are you just happy Rasputin got rolled again?

Craig says:

01:29pm | 08/02/11

Greg, more like Tony Abbott cant capitalise on all the free kicks the Labor failings has given him, to the point where even though many people prefer to ditch Labor, at the same time they’d prefer Jules as PM over Abbott.

When will the Libs realise that keeping Abbott is to effectively hand another election to free to Labor so that they get away with more.  Get someone that can present us with GOOD ALTERNATIVE LEADERSHIP. It’s the lack of this which lets Labor stay in power.

nossy says:

04:52pm | 08/02/11

@Craig - this is what I have been telling the Liberal fanboys for yonks Craig - Abbott is Labors biggest asset ! As soon as they get an electable leader things will hot up - in the meantime its “cruisin” time !

Thirsty says:

04:08pm | 08/02/11

@Monique
The government has just announced a $5.6 Billion new spending program
If the public service could have handled the job, it would have meant that there is present waste in the public service now…you defeat your own argument
The perception that there was waste in the home insullation and BER was a direct result of not having a specific committee, headed up by an independant person, overseeing it. The public service tried to do the job and were found out because it was too big a job for an already overworked system
If a business was successful in gaining a significant new contract, would you call it waste if they employed more people to run it?
Waste is caused by less oversight, not more

persephone says:

01:24pm | 08/02/11

Tony

1. Untrue, read transcript of press conference I provided earlier. Julia has admitted that she’s learnt from the experience.

2. Oh, the public service that is largely unchanged since Howard? She couldn’t sack all of them, you know.

And again, ‘waste’ is largely in the eyes of the beholder.

She brought Fahey in because she had learnt (see 1) how the media will hammer any suggestion that there’s any sort of problem. This is a way of providing a further check and balance to try and reassure the nervous.

3. Isn’t this 2? ‘parliamentary ranks’ - yes, it is. So you can’t even count.

Anyway,

4. Tony Abbott agrees that all government programs are worthwhile and refuses to do more than defer government spending.

persephone says:

01:34pm | 08/02/11

Oh, and, of course, deferring all this spending will keep the budget in deficit longer…..

MarK says:

01:36pm | 08/02/11

Sounding a we bit shrill pers.

Need to tone it down to actually get an effect.

You also left yourself open to the critcism that the vast majotiry of Gillards “cuts” were deferred spending as well. The only schemes she dumped were dogs anyway.

Also - and I will critique todays ramblings from you at length later - just a quick point you have stop confusing issues.

Saving money on a project, or getting value for money on a project doesn’t mean you cut spending or spend less. It means you get value for money.

I keep having to remind you of this.

Yeh yeh yeh I know. It inconveniently does not fit your narrative but making stuff up is really pointless and does you no favoures.

Slow down. Don’t try to be who you aren’t. You are sounding more desperate than just before Rudd got the axe in the back. The sharks around here will smell your blood in the water and feed on you.

Sotto voce is better particularly for you. The melodramatic doesn’t suit your style at all. It also leads you to poor conclusions like above.

persephone says:

04:31pm | 08/02/11

$1.1 billion deferred, MarK. As opposed to cuts.

No economic sense to any of it.

Water will cost more in a couple of years to buy. School buildings will cost more to build (let alone the expenses schools will incur in the meantime). Little Indonesian kids will have been forced to attend schools whose aim it is to make them into good little soldiers of Islam.

If you can get better value for money on a project, that means you can save money. So if Fred says he can build me a house for $100,000 and Jimmy says he can do it for $80,000 and I get exactly the same value for money, I save $20,000 and can spend it somewhere else.

I realise that’s a difficult concept for you to grasp and suggest taking off your socks will help.

The beauty is I’m not making up a single word. It’s all in Tony’s presser.

Not shrill, just chuckling.

Andy says:

05:28pm | 08/02/11

If Gillard wants to hold a project up to the light and see we are getting value for money and appoint an Inspectorate to oversee it, she should start with the NBN. But no Gillard and Swan have buried the whole project so that nobody can scrutinise - not the taxpayers via Parliament, not the ACCC not the Productivity Commission. Hypocrisy in full flight.

persephone says:

04:34pm | 08/02/11

Luke

I’d like you to back this up with evidence.

I do my own research and come up with my own arguments.

If it’s otherwise, you won’t have any difficulty at all proving so.

So - find a Labor press release that says what I say.

I’ll be very interested to read it.

Mal says:

06:56pm | 08/02/11

Research is not about finding an opinion piece that suits your point of view and quoting that.  If the crap that she throws up is “research” then i’ll be buggered.  Banging on and on with stupid comments then demanding evidence on a blog is for smack addicts.  Persephone - go and get a life.  But at least you make me laugh.