# Home Insulation Debacle



## roland (11 February 2010)

Garret is being raked over the coals over the 4 deaths related to bad insulation installs.

Now of course Peter cannot be held responsible for bad workmanship, but I feel that he (or at least the Government) is responsible for the lack of regulation in the whole process.

The thing that stood out most for me was the sheer number of door knocks, phone calls and letter box pamhlets promoting "free" insulation.

Not a racist comment, but most of my door knockers were young Indian girls with clipboards in hand hoping for a sign up.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that taking up the insulation offer disqualifies you from the solar program.... ?

Being a renter, I didn't really have a say in what was installed. I called the Real Estate and said they should ask the owner to take up the offer for my comfort - it wouldn't cost the owner anything. So that's how I got mine.

Mind you, my contact at the Real Estate Agent was not there any more - he left to start a business installing home insulation - go figure.

The guy that came to do ours was, until very recently, a marketing manager. The crap he put into our roof was about 6mm thick and came on a big roll with Chinese writing all over it. When quizzed on the quality, he pointed to a stamped ASA logo saying that it complies with the Government regs.

My installer had 3 young guys with him and had the job done in 40 minutes. Now it doesn't take a guru to know that the quicker you can do the job and the least you pay on the material - then the greater your profit.

When I look into the ceiling, I can see that 80% is covered and just shake my head at the poor workmanship.

2 weeks later I get a letter in the mail from the Government acknowledging that the installation was done and if I had any issues to take it up with consumer affairs. Maybe if I wasn't renting then I may have just done that.

Not sure about other's experiences, but to me it seemed that the whole thing was a rort.

Sort of like the carbon credits issued to the CFC light bulbs and shower heads companies that sprang up all over the place. I have enough shower heads for my entire street and enough CFC light globes to last 3 lifetimes!


----------



## moXJO (11 February 2010)

*Re: Home Insulation Debarcle*

I have seen some shonky stuff go on. Some of the installers are just throwing the whole bag of batts in the ceiling and not even installing them. A lot of the stuff now is being brought in from china; there is a shed down the road full of it.

 Some of the younger guys I met were making $6k in a week (working hard and long hours though). People just went hell for leather as soon as it started. It did stimulate the economy though.


----------



## Wysiwyg (11 February 2010)

*Re: Home Insulation Debarcle*

Yeah saw that story on t.v. Some Indian (country India) accented, looking dude was questioned by the reporter about the 2 quotes clause in the law. He was not aware of it. Some were apparently pocketing the full rebate of $1200.

Cowboys rorting the system.


----------



## basilio (12 February 2010)

Great idea about the free insulation. Trouble is one the main intentions was to  improve the quality of living and sustainability of the home liver and the house.

Of course the market sees *only the dollars*  and the quickest and shonkiest operators will win unless there are very good umpires (regulators) . So as a result billions of dollars have been splashed onto  sharks and fishes alike and an indeterminate number of homes have actually received a decent job.

Solution: An audit of at least 10% of the jobs. Demands of repayment if jobs have been  stuffed up  ie not done, half done, and keeping a black list of people who  ripped the taxpapers off.  

But of course that's a pipedream in today's business friendly environment.

         _________________________________________

A  simple way to do this audit ?

Set up a website called "Do it yourself home insulation check."Get householders or perhaps a friend to check the ceiling and note things like

1) Is it actually there?
2) Has it actually been put in?
3) Does it cover the whole roof ?

Put this information on the website and in the case of  shonks highlight the companies and people who were responsible.

Simple really if we actually care about how our taxpayers money is spent. Perhaps Peter Garrett should organise a consultation process, interdepartmental committee and call for a tendering process to examine the viability and appropriateness of such a process and then get a report back in say 6 months time? That should be long enough to see the horses way over the horizon and onto the next green fields of plunder.

But god help us we wouldn't want to actually do something that was clear, simple, cost effective and worked would we ?  As Sir Humphrey would say that's not the way to run a public service.


----------



## roland (12 February 2010)

Here is more fuel for the fire...

A work collegue of my wife, who does weekend insulation installations (another one) has just done the short course to become a Government Certified Inspector for Solar and Ceiling Insulation - so now he can install the roof insulation and then come back and certify it.

If the same guy that put my insulation in comes back to certify his own work - then I'll kick him out.


----------



## roland (12 February 2010)

Check out the spelling:

http://melbourne.gumtree.com.au/c-J...-GOOD-MUST-HAVE-EXPERIANCE-W0QQAdIdZ169229264



> CEILING INSULATION INSPECTOR - GOOD $$ MUST HAVE EXPERIANCE!!






> Has there been any damage to the customers ceiling? Is the customer happy? *Ext ext*.




I am glad that this is a criteria: *1.       Must have good verbal and written English communication skills*

Yep, not only will they install it, but they will check it:



> The details of this position will be as follows.
> You will be required to inspect each property after our installers have installed the insulation. You will be required to “enter” each ceiling and inspect that the insulation work has been carried out satisfactory, meeting professional standards.  You will be required to report your inspections back to the manager on a daily basis.




Another rort coming, the obvious suggestion would be to have independant inspectors, wouldn't you think??


----------



## Aussiejeff (12 February 2010)

roland said:


> Check out the spelling:
> 
> http://melbourne.gumtree.com.au/c-J...-GOOD-MUST-HAVE-EXPERIANCE-W0QQAdIdZ169229264
> 
> ...




Hopefully, all these expert inspectors remember to TURN OFF THE HOUSE POWER before attempting to enter the ceiling space!

With hundreds of homes estimated to have potentially "live" ceiling space in this fiasco, I cringe at the number of "inspectors" who might now be zapped!


----------



## xyzedarteerf (12 February 2010)

roland said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that taking up the insulation offer disqualifies you from the solar program.... ?




not to worry about missing out cause your not, the solar program they have going is actually pointless as most of the energy generated are not stored in the premises but pump back again into the grid, yeah sure they pay you the so called premium price for the electricity generated but they take it straight back by increasing the amount you pay for the electricity you use at night.

a true solar system would have battery setup so you can use the electricity generated during the day once your battery are fully charged then the excess energy is feed back in the grid reducing the amount you truly consume from the main grid.
 i read the letter that was sent to me by the so called solar companies cold calling at the moment, the POWER actually cuts out during outages even during day time for so called safety reasons yeah right again pointless. 
But hey where is the profit it that right why do you think the govt approved this crap solar program without the electric companies throwing there hands up in protest.  

sorry off topic i know theres a solar thread here some where...it just makes me laugh seeing all those solar panels on people houses with the owners thinking there doing the environment and there pockets a favor NOT :.


----------



## IFocus (12 February 2010)

Putting a highly conductive material into a ceiling space without proper precaution or a effective earthing method back to the building main earth is plain stupid.

Getting inexperienced installers to complete the work is willful negligence and that starts with the employer or supervisor.

I was surprised that the various state electrical regulators didn't object more strongly.

As for Garret he was only ever a poster boy but completely useless as a Minister. 

Only hard headed politicians that take on the environmental portfolio are any good like Liberal Robert Hill.


----------



## Buddy (12 February 2010)

IFocus said:


> Putting a highly conductive material into a ceiling space without proper precaution or a effective earthing method back to the building main earth is plain stupid.
> 
> Getting inexperienced installers to complete the work is willful negligence and that starts with the employer or supervisor.
> 
> ...




I only just found out this week that foil "insulation" is being used as part of this scheme. Now..........whilst foil insulation, including closed cell foil insulation is an excellent product, I was absolutely amazed to hear that it is being used as "ceiling insulation". I for one would NEVER do this. It is incredibly DANGEROUS, as now has been shown. It is not designed to be "celing insulation". It was always intended by the designers/manufacturers to use this between roof purlins/battens and the roofing material (either metal deck or tiles, etc). In that situation, provided it is installed correctly it is perfectly safe and is recommended. But NOT as loose fitted "ceiling insulation"!

I think the reason these people are using it is because it is far easier (quicker) to lay over a ceiling than batts, and does not have any fibres that can become loose and enter into the ceiling airspace. But who is the idiot that permitted this to be used in this manner in the first place?  It is all very well for Garrett to blame someone else but it just shows the calibre of the man. Totally out of his depth and easliy misled. How he can stand there and mouth off that he took advice just amazes me. Advice from whom? More idiots? He may have the gift of the gab (did he go to the same gab school as krudd?) but he is talking pure unadulterated crap. So, just how many people are dead now because of his ineptitude? Seems to me that he would have made a very good army general during the 1st world war.

Now he is talking about undertaking an audit of installations. How much is that going to cost? And how much is it going to cost to fix? Where are the guidelines for undertaking the audit/checks (from a safety viewpoint), and how is the faulty installation going to be fixed? Even checking this stuff is DANGEROUS. I for one would not enter a celing space where this stuff has been installed as "ceiling insulation".

How many stuff ups is this guy going to make before he is removed. This is an appalling situation totally of this government's own making. Heads must roll over this!


----------



## cornnfedd (12 February 2010)

Dont worry the Silver Toungue Krudd will come to his rescue. Who cares if Garrett ignored 13 reports, isnt it more important that we concentrate on Barnaby Joice and his inability to understand the difference between a million and a billion dollars? surely thats more important than 4 people dying people Garrett couldnt get off his butt and do something. 

/end sarcasm.

The whole insulation thing is in shambles, and its no surprise to anyone in the industry, have a talk to a few and most thought it was one big joke money making scheme!


----------



## GumbyLearner (12 February 2010)

Royal Commission coming soon. Watch this space.


----------



## bazollie (12 February 2010)

I am a Home Owner in Central Qld and have purposely left this ceiling insulation scheme alone and not taken up the installation. I am an Electrican by Trade and have reservations which have been demonstrated by the tragic fatalities ( 1 in Rockhampton district ) 

There is a huge amount of new homes that are fitted with 12v Dichroic Downlights. These light fittings have a separate 240-12v transformer that then connects to the lampholder of your recessed light fitting ( 12v ) The heat generated by these small 50w lamps is amazing. It is ideal to keep the tops of these light fittings open and vented. It is not ucommon for some houses to have 10-12 of these fittings installed. 

Along comes "A1 Ceiling Insulation Installers" who throw around the ceiling areas either wool, or fibreglass type sheets of insulation. Some operators would not be allowing all of these downlights to be vented- they merely cover everything. Imagine the heat build up and potential for disaster if these types of installations are left unchecked? 

The foil type installations are another risk altogether. If the foil sheets make contact with a mains cable ( cable that is fed from pole outside and then runs across through the ceiling space down into the switchboard) either through metal staples, or even through accidental contact with the cables with damaged sheath and insulation ( from the rodent mice and rats that chew pvc) then your ceiling space is very dangerous. 

I believe that we will see the results of this scheme for many years to come, with an increase in potential house fires and risk to homeowners via electric shock. 

Please be very careful with what you have in your ceiling, and I hope that the Authorities are pursuing the dodgy operators and make an example about the rorts they have been pushing onto the householders!

Regards
bazollie


----------



## Buddy (12 February 2010)

baz, I think your comments support what I have said. And whilst a slightly different topic, I totally agree with what you say about batts around light fittings. This whole thing has been a disaster waiting to happen right from day 1. It is fiscally stupid (as most people on this forum have pointed out) and has now been proven to be technically stupid. Talk about this government being total amatuers. Hmphh!


----------



## cornnfedd (12 February 2010)

Thats why I always turn my down lights off when im not home and try not to use them on really really hot days! They can generate quiet alot of heat in the ceiling cavaties.

Insurance Premiums set to go up on houses installed with foil insulation?? You wait... Another cost Krudd will have given the public.


----------



## Happy (12 February 2010)

cornnfedd said:


> Thats why I always turn my *down lights *off when im not home and try not to use them on really really hot days! They can generate quiet alot of heat in the ceiling cavaties.
> 
> ...





Halogen downlight lights globes can be replaced with energy efficient globes that run much cooler.

If I had any I would do that for sure!


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 February 2010)

As a licensed electrician and someone who's spend his entire adult life involved with things electrical and energy, a few observations... 

1. Insulation in itself is generally a good idea if the building is heated or cooled on a regular basis. Nothing "wrong" with insulation per se.

2. Fibreglass batts, rated R3 to R4 and made by major manufacturers in Australia (Bradford, "Pink Batts" and so on) are generally the cheapest, safest and most practical means of household roof insulation into existing buildings.

3. Cellulose (shredded newspaper) is highly flammable if not thoroughly treated with fire retardent. It also ends up blowing around and sitting on top of downlights, exhaust fans and so on. It can be done well but very often it isn't.

4. Wool might not burn when it's in the form of a jumper and you're fighting a fire (wool being a good thing to wear under such circumstances) but it sure does burn when it's very loosely packed and still greasy. Be _very_ careful with this one.

5. Polyester - nothing really wrong with it (as long as it's a quality product) but it's relatively expensive compared to fibreglass batts. But it's a pleasant product to use (you could sleep on it if you really wanted to) so it's worth considering for exposed areas such as under floors etc.

6. Foam is another idea that's good in theory but often not so good in practice. Getting the fire retardent right is one big issue since polystyrene is inherently flammable, being a hydrocarbon product. But it can be made safe, just make sure it's not a dodgy product. Foam pumped in on-site is another matter - it depends very much on the skill of the operator and there are some real horror stories. Be careful. It's often the most practical means under floors however and worth considering.

7. Foil isn't generally the best way to keep the heat in, it will often achieve around R1 (compared to R4 for fibreglass batts) but it does have uses. It's better for keeping the heat out (so it's more use in Queensland than in Vic or Tas) although it's certainly better than nothing in the walls in a cooler climate and is quite widely used. But for a retrofit to an existing building - don't bother unless you are wanting to keep heat out, rather than in.

8 - Rockwool is much the same in practical usage as fibreglass when in batt form and also comes as a blow-in material which is more commonly used. Downsides are blow-in depends very much on operator skill.

My personal opinion is that if you are going to insulate your roof then use fibreglass batts and be prepared to DIY finishing off the installation to fill any gaps unless you find a _very_ good installation contractor. Other than that it's generally the way to go in my opinion.

*For all insulation, keep it well clear of heater flues, exhaust fans and especially downlights. Otherwise you will quite likely need the fire brigade at some point over the next few years. I also strongly recommend that you get an inspection by a licensed Electrical Contractor (electrician) if you are installing any form of insulation near anything electrical - that will avoid the much publicised safety issues that have arisen recently.*

Lighting - why anyone would install halogen downlights is something I just don't understand. Poor quality lighting, high power consumption, a known fire hazard and they let ridiculous amounts of heat pass through the gaps they create in the insulation. And they're ridiculously high maintenance too. The only thing in their favour is fashion. Each to their own though... 

Get LED, CFL or even old fashioned bulbs (which these days are halogen) rather than messing about with downlights in my opinion. Unless you really do want that "commercial" look with 400 lux in the loungroom and to be forever changing blown lamps.

Solar panels - the insulation rebate is exclusive of the solar hot water rebate with only one being able to be claimed for any particular residence.  Solar PV panels, which produce electricity rather than hot water, are a separate matter and not affected by what you do with insulation or hot water. Whether or not you should install them is a matter of personal preference and finances since they will have zero impact on your day to day living. Be aware that in some states electricity utilities do everything they can to frustrate the installation of solar panels. There are exceptions, but in Victoria especially there are a LOT of horror stories. The other states it's better but it's still wise to check locally exactly what costs will be involved. 

Tasmania is the only state to my knowledge where it's simple - just get the panels installed, you will be given (free) a new meter and all rates and charges remain unchanged. Your bill simply drops by however much power your solar panels produce. That said, Tassie isn't the most profitable place to install solar since the rate you will get for power sold to the grid (the exact same rate you pay for power you take from the grid) isn't very high. Still worth looking at though and it can be worthwhile if you get a reasonable deal on the installation. 

Backup power. If you just want to keep the fridge and a couple of lights going during a power failure, get a cheap two-stroke petrol generator from the hardware store for $149 and use that. Go for a quality unit such as Honda etc if it's for more regular use such as a tradesman on building sites. Get a diesel if it's for regular use and weight isn't an issue since diesels use quite a bit less fuel than petrol.  

Don't mess about with batteries connected to solar panels unless you're not on the grid or you get a _lot_ of blackouts and want uninterrupted power without having to wait for a generator to start. It doesn't stack up economically or environmentally to have large batteries in most circumstances - keep this idea for those off the grid.

Hot water. In some states it's cheaper to go solar than to replace a failed electric HWS with a new one the same, so it's certainly worth looking at. And if solar isn't an option due to the roof direction etc then a _quality_ heat pump will still save 70% on energy consumption and attracts a $1000 rebate plus REC's. 

Just keep away from the big name, lower quality units that don't work on off-peak electricity and which use booster elements during Winter - they'll end up costing you as much or more to run than a conventional electric off-peak water heater.

Also keep away from solar HWS that rely on peak rate electrical boosting unless you live somewhere that regular boosting is not required or have no other option and would otherwise use that rate for a conventional electric water heater. Boost with gas or off-peak electricity instead - yes there are systems that can do this, don't believe salespeople saying otherwise and advocating peak rates.

My own situation? Ceiling insulated with fibreglass batts, walls with foil, nothing under the floor at pesent. Heating is wood and electric in the house, oil in the workshop / garage. Hot water is heat pump on off-peak installed 2 months ago. Have a 1kW solar PV system (grid connected) on the roof. Lighting is just conventional lights with bulbs - I don't see any real reason to change them until LED's drop in price.


----------



## perdo (13 February 2010)

has anyone thought to think that this might be the new asbestos 
mmmmm  just my  worth.....just thinking out loud


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 February 2010)

cutz said:


> This is why I refuse to put the s*** in my roof.
> 
> The other day walking down the street I noticed the scammers going about their business and the fiberglass particles were glistening in the sun, couldn't believe how far it spreads, surely sucking that stuff in can't be good ??



Primary differences between fibreglass and asbestos is (1) the particles themselves and their ability to penetrate deep into the lungs and (2) that the body can dissolve fibreglass whereas asbestos is there forever.

 I wouldn't say that fibreglass is necessarily totally safe, but all the research I've seen shows that it's dramatically lower risk assuming we're talking about a one-off exposure, since the body can deal with it over a matter of months. Glass dissolves eventually whereas asbestos is there causing damage forever. That's just what I've read however...

One thing I am worried about though is just what might actually be in some of that cheap insulation being broght in from overseas. The Australian made "pink batts" etc should be what they claim (fibreglass) but I wouldn't trust some of the unknown products from overseas. I'm not saying they do contain asbestos, but it wouldn't surprise me to find all sorts of things put in there when they're from countries with minimal safety standards, regulation etc.

Use polyester batts if you're at all concerned about fibreglass and health. They do the job just as well - only real disadvantage is they're more expensive (though that's not such an issue given the $1200 rebate should cover much of the cost for a typical house anyway).


----------



## cutz (13 February 2010)

Thanks Smurf1976,  (Sorry I deleted my rant)

Apart from the fact I'm wary about man made fibrous insulation, another reason I don't have it in my roof is I prefer to have all wiring exposed for ease of inspection and to keep the areas around my downlights clear. I have spoken to people that have come across blackened insulation around downlights, pretty frightening stuff, luckily for them it was picked up before anything major occurred.

In my case the lack of proper insulation doesn't seem to be a problem.


----------



## IFocus (13 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Use polyester batts if you're at all concerned about fibreglass and health. They do the job just as well - only real disadvantage is they're more expensive (though that's not such an issue given the $1200 rebate should cover much of the cost for a typical house anyway).




Got polyester the other month extra $400, hate fibreglass every time I get into a ceiling space with it in.



> why anyone would install halogen downlights is something I just don't understand.




Feel the same way 


As always Smurf great advice especially this "I also strongly recommend that you get an inspection by a licensed Electrical Contractor (electrician)"


----------



## IFocus (13 February 2010)

Don't you just love Barnaby I am sure the Libs do

From today's West Aust




> Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said Mr Garrett should not be allowed to get off scot-free.
> 
> "They seem to be thinking that four deaths don't matter, all that matters is the Minister's career," he said.
> 
> *But Mr Garrett received support from an unlikely source, shadow finance minister Barnaby Joyce, who said the Minister was "not personally responsible in any way, shape or form" for the deaths.*




http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/6797668/roof-insulation-blamed-for-20-house-fires-in-wa/


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 February 2010)

cutz said:


> Thanks Smurf1976,  (Sorry I deleted my rant)
> 
> Apart from the fact I'm wary about man made fibrous insulation, another reason I don't have it in my roof is I prefer to have all wiring exposed for ease of inspection and to keep the areas around my downlights clear. I have spoken to people that have come across blackened insulation around downlights, pretty frightening stuff, luckily for them it was picked up before anything major occurred.



Halogen downlights are designed to pass heat through their rear and into the roof space, thus providing a "cool beam" of light into the room below. That's what the "dichroic" you see mentioned in relation to them means - heat goes backwards, light goes forwards.

In principle, there's nothing wrong with that idea as such. It's beneficial in a warm climate to not be heating the room when the lights are on (and equally it's a waste of energy to not be using the heat given off if you're in a cool climate). And in a high intensity lighting situation or for use in display cabinets etc, not having heat with the light is a real bonus no matter what the weather outside.

The problem is simply that you have a high grade source of heat exposed in the roof. Touch one of these when they're on and, well, you won't try touching one again that's for sure. They're very hot and will readily ignite combustible materials. It's not as bad as a naked flame or a glowing element, but it's certainly hot enough to start a fire if given enough time to heat surrounding materials.

The problem with insulating over them is twofold. Firstly, some types of insulation will themselves burn if exposed to sufficiently high temperatures.

Next problem is the insulation material is intended to impede the flow of heat, that's why you install it in the first place. Now, you have a light that is intended to pass heat through the back and then you put something over it that stops the flow of heat. It's going to end up getting _very_ hot as will the surrounding materials such as timber (which is of course flammable), plasterboard and so on. This is an obvious recipe for disaster.

The situation arises by two basic means. Batts or foam are installed with inadequate clearance (or none at all) and that puts the problem there from day one. The other means is that loose fill, most commonly cellulose (shredded newspaper) blows over the lights (or is installed over them from day one) or gets moved by birds, mice or anything else that happens to be in the roof. And when you realise that roofs are infact quite windy places when there's a strong wind outside, and that shredded newspaper blows about easily, it's readily apparent how this situation can arise.

Then what happens is the heated material (insulation, timber etc) slowly chars away when it gets hot. Then at some point, it's gone too far and finally a flame starts. Then it's all over pretty quickly... 

I see someone's on to the danger at last. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/garretts-roofing-fire-admission/story-e6frg6n6-1225829880090

Also it seems my suspicions about what's in the cheap imported insulation may well be correct. http://www.news.com.au/national/peter-garrett-faces-tough-new-questions/story-e6frfkvr-1225829900441

And here's an example of what dodgy electrical wiring in the ceiling can cause. The events of 22nd September 2007 in Hobart CBD...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvTiK8TofFc&NR=1

*There's nothing wrong with insulating your roof, indeed it's generally a good idea to improve comfort and reduce energy bills. But like many things, it needs to be done properly using quality materials in order for it to be safe. That it's not being done properly, and cheap materials are being used, is the problem here.*


----------



## drsmith (13 February 2010)

It will be interesting to see how long Peter Garrett can dance to the burning of his own bed.


----------



## Julia (13 February 2010)

Buddy said:


> Now he is talking about undertaking an audit of installations. How much is that going to cost? And how much is it going to cost to fix? Where are the guidelines for undertaking the audit/checks (from a safety viewpoint), and how is the faulty installation going to be fixed?



And where are all the people going to come from to do the checking?
I suppose they too, in order to qualify for the job, will have to spend five minutes on the internet filling out a form and sit through a one day 'course'.
The additional cost of all these audits will add many millions to the all up cost of the scheme.

Btw I have had the 3.5 R batts installed and there is absolutely no difference.
House is no hotter or cooler.  On the radio news today there was a report that some of the batts imported from China contain formaldehyde.
Does this have a detectable odour?  Any way of knowing if such batts are what have been installed?

Seriously considering having them removed, to be frank.


----------



## bellenuit (14 February 2010)

Julia said:


> On the radio news today there was a report that some of the batts imported from China contain formaldehyde.
> Does this have a detectable odour?




It must have because the reports that I heard had a spokesman saying the batts "reeked" of formaldehyde.

As to what the odour is like, I can't help there.


----------



## Tink (14 February 2010)

I am always weary about the word 'free' so never even looked into it. 

I dont even know anyone that did.


----------



## Aussiejeff (14 February 2010)

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see how long Peter Garrett can dance to the burning of his own bed.




Oh, he'll just go and hide away at the Blue Sky mine and contemplate his new mantra...

_"You take what you get, you get what you please
Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees 
It's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees 

Oh, the power and the passion
Oh, the temper of the time
Oh, the power and the passion
Sometimes you've got to take the hardest line"_

Power & the Passion - Midnight Oil


----------



## kitehigh (14 February 2010)

Julia said:


> Btw I have had the 3.5 R batts installed and there is absolutely no difference.
> House is no hotter or cooler.  On the radio news today there was a report that some of the batts imported from China contain formaldehyde.
> Does this have a detectable odour?  Any way of knowing if such batts are what have been installed?
> 
> Seriously considering having them removed, to be frank.




Thanks for sharing your experience Julia, I've been skeptical about insulating my roof as well.  Also after reading comments about how the insulation actually holds the heat inside the house has me thinking.
So with insulation the house should take longer to heat up, but once it is hot than it will take a long time for the heat to escape.  Not something I would prefer in a hot climate.  I'd rather the house cool down quicker at night, when I'm going to be sleeping.

I think I will give the insulation a miss.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 February 2010)

Ole Baldy needs to go back to Midnight Oil.

At least when you stuff up with Midnight Oil you can see the flames and put the fire out quickly.

When the roof goes up its a death trap. 

Who made this galah a minister?

gg


----------



## awg (14 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Backup power. If you just want to keep the fridge and a couple of lights going during a power failure, get a cheap two-stroke petrol generator from the hardware store for $149 and use that. Go for a quality unit such as Honda etc if it's for more regular use such as a tradesman on building sites. Get a diesel if it's for regular use and weight isn't an issue since diesels use quite a bit less fuel than petrol.




Hi Smurf, 

would you happen to know roughly the start-up current that a regular family sized fridge draw when the compressor motor starts?

how well will the small 2.4kw gen units deal with a fridge kicking in?


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 February 2010)

Julia said:


> And where are all the people going to come from to do the checking?
> I suppose they too, in order to qualify for the job, will have to spend five minutes on the internet filling out a form and sit through a one day 'course'.
> The additional cost of all these audits will add many millions to the all up cost of the scheme.
> 
> ...



Fundamentally, the issue is one of electrical safety and, to the extent there is a problem, poses an immediate risk of electrocution to anyone who enters (or in some cases simply contacts from the outside) the roof space and/or metallic roof itself. That is the risk with foil products, either sheet foil, foil batts or other materials (fibreglass, foam etc) backed with foil and arises due to the electrical conductivity of aluminium foil.

The risk with non-foil products is thermal / fire. Inppropriately installed, they may cover wiring and/or light fittings which aren't suitably rated to be covered. Wiring can be suitably rated and protected (with fuses / circuit breakers) to enable it to be safely covered with insulation (this is very clearly explained (in technical terms that non-electricians won't likely understand) in AS3000 and AS3008.1 but in many cases the wiring will not be suitably rated. 

The other hazard relates to proximity to heater flues (particularly wood (or coal) burning heaters where flue gas temperatures are relatively high) and that is simply a fire hazard risk. A professional wood heater installer, building inspector or someone from your local fire brigade should be able to assess the risk. 

In the case of gas or oil heater flues, similar risks apply although clearances tend to be less due to lower flue gas temperatures and smaller diameter flues. Plumbers with a gas fitting license (or a gasfitter) are the relevant trade for questions about these. 

So who should inspect? In theory at least, the appropriate people to undertake an inspection is an electrician, electrical engineer or some other person suitably authorised by state electrical regulators (such as your electricity supplier or an Electrical Inspector - though in most cases such people are simply qualified electricians who just happen to be employed by electricity suppliers or safety authorities). They are qualified to assess any issues with wiring, lights being covered (fire risk) and  the electrical hazard of conductive (foil) insulation. They aren't really the right people to be assessing heater flues however, but that is simply a matter of clearance and should be readily visible.

Bottom line is that any of those requires extensive training and examination. There are numerous potential hazards to be aware of and in some cases proper circuit loading and protection rating calculations will be required - that's a job for an electrician or engineer, not someone who just did a one day course.

I should add that whilst I am qualified to do the above, I do not do domestic work and have no interest inspecting roofs. I'm not trying to drum up business here.

As for chemicals in the insulation, go into the roof space and see if it smells. Decent insulation doesn't really have any smell at all. Be particularly wary of anything that smells like ammonia or chicken s***. 

The quality products made locally are normally either bright pink ("Pink Batts") or bright yellow ("Bradford Gold Batts") in colour. The two products are essentially the same but are produced by rival manufacturers. There may be other local manufacturers with other batt products, but these two are certainly the most common. 

The colour is simply that - colouring added to distinguish the product from competitors. In either case they'll be over 100mm thick unless they've been squashed. 

The cheap imports I've seen however have been either white or brown and tend to be significantly thinner, sometimes supplied in a roll rather than as batts.

As for whether or not you should have insulation, it does depend on quite a few things. I'd say that anyone living in Tasmania would be outright mad to not want their roof insulated. But if you live in Queensland, don't use air-conditioning and have the windows open all day then there won't be any real benefit.


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 February 2010)

awg said:


> Hi Smurf,
> 
> would you happen to know roughly the start-up current that a regular family sized fridge draw when the compressor motor starts?
> 
> how well will the small 2.4kw gen units deal with a fridge kicking in?



Somewhere around 7 times normal running current although it does vary.

Small generators won't like this, but for occasional use they'll generally survive so that it doesn't become an issue. The mechanical inertia of the engine is enough to carry it through the motor starting up. 

A normal fridge with, say, a 140W motor will just give the generator a bit of a thump but it will work and nothing really bad will happen. But if the fridge has a 500 W motor then I wouldn't try connecting that to one of those small two-stroke generators - get a decent 2kW or larger one that's built farily well.

Also, don't connect variable loads (fridges etc) as well as electronic devices such as computers to the same generator. That's really asking for trouble unless we're talking about an inverter generator (and they're not cheap...).


----------



## Julia (14 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> The quality products made locally are normally either bright pink ("Pink Batts") or bright yellow ("Bradford Gold Batts") in colour. The two products are essentially the same but are produced by rival manufacturers. There may be other local manufacturers with other batt products, but these two are certainly the most common.



I have the bright yellow, look about 5 inches thick, no smell, so thanks Smurf, doesn't sound like the dodgy Chinese stuff.



> But if you live in Queensland, don't use air-conditioning and have the windows open all day then there won't be any real benefit.



Yes, that's my experience, but I suppose it would be quite unreasonable to expect the ceiling insulation to keep a house cool when all the doors and windows are open all day and night.

Now that it's in I'll see if it makes the house warmer in winter before having it removed.   If not, it will be gone.  Probably I'm being unreasonably wary, but it took many years before the dangers of asbestos were recognised.  For all we know there may be some crap element in the batts which could cause health problems in future.


----------



## Smurf1976 (15 February 2010)

Julia said:


> I have the bright yellow, look about 5 inches thick, no smell, so thanks Smurf, doesn't sound like the dodgy Chinese stuff.



Sounds like Bradford "Gold Batts" or another manufacturer which makes "Fat Batts", both of which are coloured yellow and (to the best of my knowledge) made in Australia. They've certainly been around for years.

As for safety, I'm not going to really argue either way there but I'll just note another unrelated example of the sort of health misinformation that is so widespread. It makes it very hard to know what to believe.

Many people would have heard the scare about not re-using PET soft drink bottles (the plastic bottles that Coca Cola etc comes in) for drinking water due to plastic chemicals leaching out if re-used. 

Well, well, well... Choice (Australian Consumers Association) has done some research into it and it seems that there's nothing really wrong with the plastic used in those bottles. But it's the plastic in the intentionally re-usable bottles popular with cyclists etc that is actually a real, serious health hazard. So it seems fine to re-use old Coke bottles, but it's not at all a good idea to buy a re-usable plastic water bottle. Plastic codes "3" and "7" are the ones to avoid for contact with food apparently - Coke etc bottles are a safer type of plastic. 

So what's safe with insulation? Well that's a damn good question but personally I would think that apart from electrical risks (easily avoidalbe if installed properly), foil couldn't really harm your health in normal use since it's just a sheet of metal sitting there. Polyester would be in the same category as other synthetic materials we fill our homes with (but probably safer since they're in the roof). As for fibreglass - your guess is as good as mine but I sure won't be eating the stuff.


----------



## roland (15 February 2010)

Talk back radio last night had an electrician call in revealing that he that had been inspecting the insulation of houses in the Marrickville area of Sydney.

Many had foil that tested to be live with 240V, some had staples penetrating the lead in to the house before the switchboard, meaning that even pulling your circuit breakers would not make the roof safe. Also meaning that there was no protection against electricution.

Additionally he found that some placement of the staples where normal expansion and contraction of the wood/staples rendered the problem intermittant. So a test could be carried out with no results only to be unsafe later on.

This guy now is refusing to send his apprentices in any roof that has foil insulation.

Amongst other remarks, he said that he had found insulation installations where the batts looked like the nice thick ones, only to find empty drinks bottles under a thin layer of the material to pad it out.

He also suggested that many houses where fitted with insulation retrieved from stolen and recycled hot water heaters.


----------



## drsmith (15 February 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Ole Baldy needs to go back to Midnight Oil.



I was thinking exile on Wedding Cake Island but he's allready there, face down.


----------



## cutz (15 February 2010)

roland said:


> He also suggested that many houses where fitted with insulation retrieved from stolen and recycled hot water heaters.




Yeah right,

That's a good one, it's cheaper to import the crap from OS.

Nothing like talkback to provide some cheap laughs.

(Personally, don't  listen to the ****e.)


----------



## roland (15 February 2010)

cutz said:


> Yeah right,
> 
> That's a good one, it's cheaper to import the crap from OS.
> 
> ...




I would have thought the same if it weren't for knowing 3 people in the same street that have had their hot water systems stolen whilst they were out - still waiting to be offered one at my local


----------



## roland (15 February 2010)

This is from the Queensland Governments website: http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/mms/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=63435




> "Make sure your installer adheres to the voluntary Australian standards for the manufacture and installation of insulation - seek this confirmation in writing as a verbal guarantee is worthless," he said.




What does *"voluntary Australian standards"* mean?

Why should the standards be voluntary and not mandatory?


----------



## roland (15 February 2010)

> Garrett attacked over insulation no-show
> February 15, 2010 - 7:19PM
> 
> AAP
> ...




source: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ked-over-insulation-noshow-20100215-nzq1.html

Garrett fiddles while Rome burns...

Not a good look for Peter to be off counting reptiles in State Forests and missing meetings on the insulation issue ... "What was he thinking"????


----------



## Julia (15 February 2010)

Incredibly stupid of him at such a sensitive time.
Likewise his defensive stance over this whole mess when he should have been falling over with sympathy for the families of the dead young people.


----------



## Smurf1976 (16 February 2010)

HWS being stolen isn't that uncommon. Generally speaking, they're stolen for use as a working HWS or, in the case of low pressure types, for the copper they contain. 

The mild steel "glass" lined tank in a mains pressure HWS and the surrounding insulation isn't particularly valuable as scrap. It's just mild steel and that's not really valuable. It's only the copper tanks that have any real scrap value in terms of $. Stainless steel tanks do exist but are not at all  common - not sure what they're worth as scrap.  

Worth noting that it was 20+ years ago that Rheem (which has a pretty large market share in the manufacture of water heaters) changed to using foam insulation in their water heaters and that is virtually impossible to recover for any useful purpose. Not sure when other manufacturers introduced it, but they all use foam these days.


----------



## Trembling Hand (17 February 2010)

*Insulation scheme a gross waste of money*

http://www.theage.com.au/national/i...aste-of-money-inquiry-told-20100217-ocfh.html



> A Senate inquiry has been told of an alleged "gross waste" of taxpayer dollars with ineffective insulation used in up to 400,000 properties under the national home insulation program.
> 
> About one million homes have taken advantage of the federal government's program in the past 10 months.
> 
> But a study of the insulation being used shows that 30 to 40 per cent is non-compliant, Tino Zuzul, an industry leader, told the Energy Efficient Home Packages Inquiry in Melbourne today.


----------



## Julia (17 February 2010)

Does anyone know if Senate enquiries are televised or transcripts made available on the web?
This one should be pretty interesting.

I should have done some enquiring before posting the above.  Have now discovered the Enquiry is not being broadcast.  A helpful staffer says a transcript will be available probably early next week.
For anyone interested, here is where it can be accessed when completed.

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/eca_ctte/eehp/hearings/index.htm


----------



## GumbyLearner (18 February 2010)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-halt-to-rollout/story-e6frg6n6-1225831571025


----------



## matty77 (18 February 2010)

> News of the warnings came as Kevin Rudd stonewalled in the face of media questions about why he pumped so much stimulus money into the sector if he knew it was not properly regulated.
> 
> The Prime Minister simply refused to answer the question. He also ignored a question from The Australian about whether the Department of Environment made similar warnings early last year, when cabinet was hammering out the details of the scheme




he is an arrogant prick isnt he??

Heard on the grape vine that a company had employed kids to help install the insulation, not sure how true that is though?


----------



## noco (18 February 2010)

Julia said:


> Does anyone know if Senate enquiries are televised or transcripts made available on the web?
> This one should be pretty interesting.
> 
> I should have done some enquiring before posting the above.  Have now discovered the Enquiry is not being broadcast.  A helpful staffer says a transcript will be available probably early next week.
> ...




Julia, I have watched it quite regularly on Austar 648. Some times it is repeated later. I recently watched Senator Joyce grill David Parker from treasury and Senator Cherry on the leaks from the Henry Tax Review which the Labor Party are refusing to release for reasons known only to the Labor Party. I thought BJ was on the ball, but the answers BJ kept getting was like "maybe, could be, purely hyperthetical, purely supposition etc,etc. Typical of Labor Party answers.


----------



## Calliope (18 February 2010)

Hardly a week passes that Rudd does not put on his sorrowing face and claim that his "thoughts and prayers go out to the loved ones'' of someone who has died in a tragic accident.

But not a sorrowful word has passed his lips on the deaths of the four young men killed in the roofing insulation balls-up.




> As for Rudd, he speaks about the program in his trademark cold bureaucratese. Nowhere, from either politician, has there been a public hint of sorrow for the tragedy of four hard-grafting young men dead. Instead, they use language to obfuscate and cloud their motives, which in this case is to evade blame - political, legal or moral - for a program ill-conceived and implemented too hastily, without adequate ministerial supervision and with little thought given to outcomes or safety.




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ant-hide-an-empty-morality-20100217-odtm.html


----------



## Julia (18 February 2010)

I don't think the lack of compassion will have been unobserved by the voting public, Calliope.

I couldn't help imagining the scene in Rudd's or Garrett's office when the news of the deaths came in.  There wouldn't have been a millisecond of sadness for the young life lost, but rather much cursing about what a bad look it was for the insulation programme.

However, to be fair, the installers surely have to bear some responsibility for not turning the mains power off before doing the installation.  It's not unreasonable for Garrett to assume such a simple precaution would have been taken.


----------



## moXJO (19 February 2010)

Julia said:


> However, to be fair, the installers surely have to bear some responsibility for not turning the mains power off before doing the installation.  It's not unreasonable for Garrett to assume such a simple precaution would have been taken.



First time installers need a lot of supervision or training. The majority of young blokes I put on have to be told consistently through the day of what not to do. If it's dangerous and they don't know the risks, then you can guarantee they will stumble over it without constant warning. Turning of the power would not have occurred to a good % of people. And the roof still would have been live.


----------



## Calliope (19 February 2010)

At least the home insulation debacle has put the spotlight fairly and squarely on the incapacity of Commonwealth bureaucrats to administer any national program, whether it be renewable energy, water conservation, aboriginal housing or just wisely spending taxpayers' money without most of it disappearing in administrative waste and graft.

God help us if the Commonwealth ever takes over the hospitals, as Rudd keeps threatening.


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 February 2010)

Calliope said:


> At least the home insulation debacle has put the spotlight fairly and squarely on the incapacity of Commonwealth bureaucrats to administer any national program,
> 
> God help us if the Commonwealth ever takes over the hospitals, as Rudd keeps threatening.




Or a 50 bil technology infrastructure project without a business case run by Labor cronies - NBN.

Scary!!


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 February 2010)

They have pulled the plug on the game. But they are rolling out mark II.



> *A new household Renewable Energy Bonus scheme*
> A new household Renewable Energy Bonus Scheme will assist households save money on power bills and reduce their carbon emissions.
> 
> This new Scheme will replace the Home Insulation Program and the Solar Hot Water Rebate Program both of which have been discontinued as of close of business today.
> ...




http://www.environment.gov.au/minister/garrett/2010/mr20100219.html


----------



## satanoperca (19 February 2010)

So they screwed up the first time, so they stop the program, dress it up under a new name and go again.

How about if pollies are incompetent they loose their pension privileges.

Seems the people of this country are happy with them consistently wasting taxpayers dollars.

Go Labor, you are great at wasting money that is not yours.

Sorry for the rant but just read the thread and are a little cheezed off at how this has come about.

Cheers & Everyone except those who voted for these fools have a good weekend.

Long live indebtedness.


----------



## awg (19 February 2010)

I am in agreement this orgy of spending is disturbingly wasteful.

Just in my own case, after getting a heat exchange hot water system, 6 months later, I still hadnt recieved a segment of the rebate,($1000) so after several calls, they decided they had lost my claim..I had to resubmit evrything in triplicate etc..fortunately, I was prepared prior and had all the docs ready in case some klutz lost them, so they sent me a cheque

Today I got a duplicate cheque, from the original 9 month ago claim.
The envelope had been handwritten and resealed with sticky tape.
Every person I spoke to was an Irish backpacker

I have decided to deposit the cheque into my CMT, and wait and see if they ask for it back, hoping they continue this slackness..(a high R/R position)

I am dismayed at the NBN, and the distorting effect it is having in telco

As to insulation, waste is obvious in many areas, everyone wants to stick there snouts into the public trough before it runs dry.

And of course its you and me must eventually pay, cause there aint no-one else


----------



## Julia (19 February 2010)

It's difficult to see how Garrett can hold his job now, with the admission of total failure in the sudden shut down of the scheme.

His ad nauseam repetition that he did everything he possibly could to ensure total safety sounded very hollow on "PM" this evening in light of his refusal to tell the interviewer how long he had held the audit result from (I think) Minter Ellison advising of massive problems and dangers in the rapid roll out of the scheme.  The interviewer said the Opposition had alleged that he had received it *six months ago.*

And now he will be the target - and rightly so - of all the perfectly decent small insulation businesses who have been working ethically, as demand completely dries up between now and June.  Obviously they will have to lay off staff, and will have considerable stockpiles of material in hand which will now have to be paid for but which will sit in the warehouse.

What a total *****   stuffup by Garrett.

The only positive out of this will be the amusement offered by next week in parliament as the Opposition milk this gift horse for all it's worth.


----------



## Macquack (19 February 2010)

Julia said:


> And now he will be the target - and rightly so - of all the *perfectly decent small insulation businesses *who have been working ethically, as demand completely dries up between now and June.  Obviously they will have to lay off staff, and will have considerable stockpiles of material in hand which will now have to be paid for but which will sit in the warehouse.




No compassion here for insulation companies, particularly the massive number of "fly by night" companies that have sprung up overnight. I am a building contractor and I am the mug compared to these cowboy insulation installers who are making filthy money for just literally "throwing" insulation into a ceiling space. The sooner they totally can this scheme the better.


----------



## GumbyLearner (20 February 2010)

*Law firm warned Garrett about dangers of insulation program *
The Australian February 20, 2010
by Nicola Berkovic

DAMNING legal advice to Peter Garrett's department last April warned that the government's $2.45 billion insulation program could lead to house fires and fraud.

The advice was released yesterday, as the embattled Environment Minister finally axed the program -- which has been linked to four deaths and 87 house fires -- declaring that the safety risks had become unmanageable.

The advice from top-tier law firm *Minter Ellison* outlined strategies to tackle serious risks in the program. *It warned that the government's timeline was too tight for the program to be delivered in a "properly controlled way" and said the Environment Department was ill-equipped to roll out such a massive program.*

Oh well, the ALP will still probably romp home while the non-cognitive Minister
doesn't acknowledge that he has made a major and deadly blunder here. 

The cognitive elites in the PM's team do know I suspect.


----------



## GumbyLearner (20 February 2010)

Does anyone on ASF know what percentage of the pink batts were imported from the USA?


----------



## zzaaxxss3401 (20 February 2010)

awg said:


> I have decided to deposit the cheque into my CMT, and wait and see if they ask for it back, hoping they continue this slackness..(a high R/R position)




It's ok to commit fraud and tell everyone on ASF but it's not ok for dodgy installers to rort the Government's Home Insulation Scheme?

I don't get it - aren't you a hypocrite and a thief?


----------



## Tink (20 February 2010)

Macquack said:


> No compassion here for insulation companies, particularly the massive number of "fly by night" companies that have sprung up overnight. I am a building contractor and I am the mug compared to these cowboy insulation installers who are making filthy money for just literally "throwing" insulation into a ceiling space. The sooner they totally can this scheme the better.




I agree Macquack.


----------



## Calliope (20 February 2010)

I posted this on another thread earlier in the year. It will be interesting to see how insurance companies will respond to ceiling fires in those houses where insulation has been installed by the "fly by nights".



> I reported the case where dozens of houses with existing roof insulation have had insulation pumped into the roof cavities.
> 
> In fact, in my street on some days the air was thick with insulation dust, and I live in a village where every house was efficiently insulated during construction.
> 
> ...


----------



## Julia (20 February 2010)

Macquack said:


> No compassion here for insulation companies, particularly the massive number of "fly by night" companies that have sprung up overnight. I am a building contractor and I am the mug compared to these cowboy insulation installers who are making filthy money for just literally "throwing" insulation into a ceiling space. The sooner they totally can this scheme the better.



Are you saying there are no ethical insulation companies who have been installing insulation appropriately since long before the government decided to fling our tax dollars around?

My point was that now even those people who would have installed insulation without any funds from the government will be put off using companies who have done nothing wrong, and that's unfair on perfectly legitimate businesses.


----------



## joeyr46 (20 February 2010)

Julia said:


> Are you saying there are no ethical insulation companies who have been installing insulation appropriately since long before the government decided to fling our tax dollars around?
> 
> My point was that now even those people who would have installed insulation without any funds from the government will be put off using companies who have done nothing wrong, and that's unfair on perfectly legitimate businesses.




Totally agree Julia but that seems to be the result everytime government gets involved and muddies the waters


----------



## Aussiejeff (20 February 2010)

Julia said:


> Are you saying there are no ethical insulation companies who have been installing insulation appropriately since long before the government decided to fling our tax dollars around?
> 
> My point was that now even those people who would have installed insulation without any funds from the government will be put off using companies who have done nothing wrong, and that's unfair on perfectly legitimate businesses.




Yes, here again we see collateral damage from a Federal Government squashing both "good" and "evil" operators in a single, mindless stroke. Bravo, Herr Garrot!

Saw some media figures which guesstimate about 7,000 jobs will instantly be lost (prolly a gross underestimation IMO)?

So much for the mighty KRudd 'n Co. trumpeting a few weeks back how many "new jobs" had been created by these schemes. ROFLMAO!!!!  


aj


----------



## drsmith (20 February 2010)

If it is better for the householder to clain the rebate instead of the installer than why was it not structured that way in the first place ?


----------



## tunrida (20 February 2010)

Trembling Hand said:


> Or a 50 bil technology infrastructure project without a business case run by Labor cronies - NBN.
> 
> Scary!!




ah the nostalgia.......... Gough Whitlam and Jim Cairns revisited


----------



## Julia (20 February 2010)

drsmith said:


> If it is better for the householder to clain the rebate instead of the installer than why was it not structured that way in the first place ?



Exactly.  And they are also claiming that the new arrangement "places control in the hands of the householder".
How does it do this any more than previously?  The householder always had the choice of material and choice of installer.

There has just been a radio news item that the government will now make available many more millions (sorry, forget the actual amount) 'to support workers who will lose their jobs through the canning of the scheme'.  They will be provided with 'intensive training assistance'.

It just keeps getting worse.


----------



## GumbyLearner (20 February 2010)

This thread has to get an A+ on the pork barrel gone wrong scale.






Here's the Al Gore version
http://torontoist.com/attachments/toronto_sarahl/20090406twitter6.jpg


----------



## tunrida (20 February 2010)

yes a few negatives from the program like deaths, half of Oz houses now electrified, and heaps of workers now unemployed.......
but hey, there are positives - like the more sophisticated insulation types (like soundproofing) becoming available again and ordinary stuff being cheap for some time as they quit the supply glut. 

and wait for the fallout from the solar panel program also - participants are already discovering that they do indeed need maintenance (operation is not free of costs) and most roof fixings used have voided the roofing warranties of the building. Oh well, its good to "feel" green


----------



## GumbyLearner (20 February 2010)

*Government to give installers an extra $10m *
AAP
February 20, 2010

THE federal government will spend $10 million to help thousands of workers affected by changes to the bungled home insulation program. 

Employment Participation Minister Mark Arbib says the government will help the 6000 workers, who risk losing their jobs, in the interim.

An additional $10 million will provide 2000 jobs training places, on top of the 4000 places announced last year, he said.
*
This policy on the run stuff reminds me of....* :dimbulb:


----------



## Aussiejeff (20 February 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> *Government to give installers an extra $10m *
> AAP
> February 20, 2010
> 
> ...





Except that naughty boy Benny knew EXACTLY what he was doing. HIS timing was GREAT. Unlike these current Labor nongs....


----------



## Julia (22 February 2010)

Did anyone see Peter Garrett in excerpts in tonight's 7.30 Report?

The first item was about the canning of the roof insulation and the second about the Green Loans.  Both have been appalling scams with now tens of thousands about to be out of work.

I almost felt sorry for Garrett who was quasi hysterical in his protestations of assiduous attention to safety throughout both programmes.

Bet he wishes he was still an idol of the rock world.  Must have been way easier than being a member of the Rudd entourage.


----------



## Whiskers (23 February 2010)

drsmith said:


> If it is better for the householder to clain the rebate instead of the installer than why was it not structured that way in the first place ?




I would speculate that they figured many people would not go for the scheme if they had to find the cash up front, given the GFC. 

Unfortunately, this way tends to induce many people into doing something that they may not have done otherwise because they think they are getting something for cheap or for nothing.

I also understand it was a whole of gov decision, not just Garret, designed first and foremost to give the economy a fast kick.  Consequently, I'd be very surprised if Garret was sacked.

While the administration of the scheme was lacking satisfactory supervision and accountability, there seems to have been some arguably reasonable (in legality) guidelines and training provision put in place. 

Early days yet, but I don't expect the suit against the gov re any deaths will be successful. Probably the main reason would be regardless of any guidelines and training provisions or lack of, the issue of stapling into electrical wiring is a fundamental due care and attention issue firstly on the part of the installer and secondly on the employer. Similar issue to carrying out renovations or working around electricity wire generally. One should either turn the power of first or take necessairy steps to know where the live wires are at all times.

I think the court would hold that any reasonable person would know that if you put a metal staple through a metal foil into a live electrical cable you would get electricuted. This is where I think the onus falls 100% back on the employer and self employed under normal Workplace Health and Safety laws and Common Law negligence. 

I also expect that from a legal perspective at least, the minister will probably be successful in arguing that his banning of the metal foil was not an admission of any negligence on his part or the scheme, but rather a necessary greater public interest issue, given the number of shonky installers operating in the scheme and that in the normal course of events industrial, building and safety inspectors are state gov juristiction. I have heard that the states didn't respond to increased demand in these areas.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 February 2010)

Why do we need states?

Because many states informed the Federal Environment Minister that his program was potentially hazardous?


----------



## Whiskers (23 February 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Why do we need states?
> 
> Because many states informed the Federal Environment Minister that his program was potentially hazardous?




Indeed!

And conflicting interests and motivation as far as this scheme was concerned.

At the end of the day I'm with those who think the money would have been better spent elsewhere, eg infrastructure or even paying private hospitals to shortern hospital/surgery waiting lists.

PS: Talking about waste of public money, I think this easily eclipses what Anna Bligh wasted on the ditched Traverston Dam.


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 February 2010)

Whiskers said:


> Indeed!
> 
> And conflicting interests and motivation as far as this scheme was concerned.
> 
> ...




Oh, this is just the tip of the iceberg ripping into HMS KRuddtanic...



> *TAXPAYERS will stump up an estimated $47 million for safety checks on homes fitted with pink batts, adding to the debacle of the Federal Government's insulation scheme.
> 
> Embattled Environment Minister Peter Garrett announced today that inspectors would visit 160,000 homes that have had pink batts installed to check that they are safe.*
> 
> ...




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...-cost-47-million/story-e6frf7jx-1225833171585

Note this estimate is for the SAFETY AUDITS ALONE. I would be very surprised if the cost to taxpayers to actually FIX this freakin' mess (skilled labour/replacement insulation/post re-installation checks?) didn't at least match this figure.

I'm not surprised Julia noted Garrot as "quasi hysterical" when shouting and pleading his case on the 7.30 Rep last night. Personally, I was more inclined to think he was almost completely "off his rocker".


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 February 2010)

The guy should resign.

How can he sleep while our batts are burning?

Go back to your record label, you power hungry muppet!


----------



## Calliope (23 February 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> I'm not surprised Julia noted Garrot as "quasi hysterical" when shouting and pleading his case on the 7.30 Rep last night. Personally, I was more inclined to think he was almost completely "off his rocker".




Garrett does a good impersonation of Sgt. Schultz.


----------



## Julia (23 February 2010)

I find this quite incredible, but it was in Radio National's "Breakfast" this morning that the safety inspections on the suspect roofs will be carried out by *the installers who did the original job!!!!*


----------



## Calliope (23 February 2010)

I think it would be best for the Coalition's electoral chances if * Mr "I Saw Nothing" Garrett* stays in the job, as a reminder of how incompetent the Rudd government is at implementing any program without graft and corruption and waste taking over.




> The opposition wants his scalp. But Garrett is the government's human pink batt, insulating Rudd and his cabinet from the heat. For no other reason he's hanging on.




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...sorbs-the-heat-20100222-orrv.html?autostart=1


----------



## Spiderbrain (23 February 2010)

Julia said:


> I find this quite incredible, but it was in Radio National's "Breakfast" this morning that the safety inspections on the suspect roofs will be carried out by *the installers who did the original job!!!!*




That blew me away too, you couldn't make up a better story of a debacle than this has turned into. It's what you get when you throw a few billion dollars into a mix of incompetance, ignorance, greed and a big bag of bull**** I guess!


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 February 2010)

Calliope said:


> At least the home insulation debacle has put the spotlight fairly and squarely on the incapacity of Commonwealth bureaucrats to administer any national program, whether it be renewable energy, water conservation, aboriginal housing or just wisely spending taxpayers' money without most of it disappearing in administrative waste and graft.
> 
> God help us if the Commonwealth ever takes over the hospitals, as Rudd keeps threatening.



A recuring theme is the "abolish the states" idea. 

Take a look at what actually happens and I'd argue that whilst the states are a long way from perfect, they aren't the problem that the Commonwealth is in terms of making a mess of things.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 February 2010)

Regarding the issue with metal foil insulation and electrical shock, it must be understood that there is a real possiblity that the outside parts of a metal roof, including painted metal such as Colorbond and including metal parts attached to the roof such as downpipes or TV antennas, may be live with mains voltage electricity due to incorrect installation of this type of insulation.

For your own safety, I recommend that you pay for your own inspection by a properly licensed electrician if you have any doubts about this issue and that you keep well away from the roof and anything attached to it in the meantime.

If you have any symptoms of electricity being where it shouldn't be, for example if anything in the house "tingles", then call your electricity supplier WITHOUT DELAY as you are at real risk if DEATH by electrocution. I can not stress this point too strongly. They might simply disconnect your power until you pay an electrician to fix the problem, but a cold shower tomorrow morning, no TV and a candlelit dinner is vastly preferable to death...

For non-metallic (foil) insulation, I recommend that you, someone you know  or someone else that you pay takes a look at it, paying particular attention to downlights (MUST NOT be covered with insulation), around heater flues, wiring and so on. Also get them to check that the insulation has actually been installed properly while they're up there. 

Personally, I wouldn't be trusting my safety to one of these "fly by night" insulation installers inspecting their own work. Check yourself or pay someone independent to check for you. (Make sure you turn the power off before going into the roof, just in case...).

Forget the politics and forget the cost - your safety and that of your family is the most urgent issue here. If you are concerned then either check yourself if you know what you're doing or pay a few $ and get someone to check for you. A nuisance and an expense maybe, but it sure beats needing a funeral...


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 February 2010)

I see that the conveniently buried cut to the solar hot water grant amongst all of this seems to have gone largely unnoticed...

Can't trust these politicians. Despite all the fuss and criticism, they still manage to hide a roughly 40% cut amongst it all. Incredible...


----------



## Trembling Hand (23 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> a candlelit dinner is vastly preferable to death...
> ...




I dunno bout that,

I've had a few where I was weighing up the two options.


----------



## moXJO (23 February 2010)

Julia said:


> I find this quite incredible, but it was in Radio National's "Breakfast" this morning that the safety inspections on the suspect roofs will be carried out by *the installers who did the original job!!!!*




Yes, apparently there is a two week course to become an inspector. Week one involves teaching the applicants how to lick their finger. Week two shows them how to apply it to metal foil insulation.


----------



## roland (23 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Regarding the issue with metal foil insulation and electrical shock, it must be understood that there is a real possiblity that the outside parts of a metal roof, including painted metal such as Colorbond and including metal parts attached to the roof such as downpipes or TV antennas, may be live with mains voltage electricity due to incorrect installation of this type of insulation.
> 
> For your own safety, I recommend that you pay for your own inspection by a properly licensed electrician if you have any doubts about this issue and that you keep well away from the roof and anything attached to it in the meantime.
> 
> ...




As an additional warning, some of the live roofs have found to be caused by staples through the main lead in from the street before the household power board. So turning off the power will not necessarily render the roof space safe.


----------



## Aussiejeff (24 February 2010)

moXJO said:


> Yes, apparently there is a two week course to become an inspector. *Week one involves teaching the applicants how to lick their finger. Week two shows them how to apply it to metal foil insulation.*




Oh.

I thought they were just going to use the tips of their tongues?


----------



## moXJO (24 February 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Oh.
> 
> I thought they were just going to use the tips of their tongues?




That’s the advanced course.


----------



## Calliope (24 February 2010)

Rudd has come clean. He has admitted that he, alone, is responsible for the insulation stuff-up.

This is not surprising. He is the common denominator in long line of stuff-ups. He is a bureaucrat, running a government of bureaucrats. It is only natural that as a manager of any national scheme calling for entrepreneurial expertise he and his gang are a complete failure.


----------



## Julia (24 February 2010)

In what context did the Dear Leader make such an admission, Calliope?

He really does have to do this.  The insulation plan would have been a whole of government decision as part of the great stimulus, and as such - incompetent though Garrett has been - it would be too much loss of face for him to back down now.  So if Rudd shares the blame, as it were, some of the heat goes out from under Garrett.  For now.


----------



## Calliope (24 February 2010)

Julia said:


> In what context did the Dear Leader make such an admission, Calliope?




*Rudd accepts ultimate responsibility for insulation debacle
*


> PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd accepts ultimate responsibility for the problems that have plagued his Government's failed insulation program.
> 
> His Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, has been fighting for his political life over the now axed insulation scheme that has been linked to four deaths and 93 house fires.
> 
> ...




http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...sulation-debacle/story-e6frfku0-1225833339398


----------



## Duckman#72 (24 February 2010)

Julia said:


> He really does have to do this.  The insulation plan would have been a whole of government decision as part of the great stimulus, and as such - incompetent though Garrett has been - it would be too much loss of face for him to back down now.  So if Rudd shares the blame, as it were, some of the heat goes out from under Garrett.  For now.




This is going to sound strange but ..........*Garrett is more important to Rudd now, than in any time over the past 2 years!!!*

I agree Julia. It is not out of any great love for Garrett that Rudd hasn't cut him. Garrett was a Latham appointment anyway. But neither is Rudd being "noble and loyal" to one of his Ministers. It is entirely a politically motivated decision (and wise on Rudd's part).Under most criteria from which to judge the performance of a Minister's department, Garrett deserves to go. 

There are two problems for Rudd - firstly his decision to "micro-manage" and control everything is very well known. It is extremely unlikely or extremely embarrassing if Rudd didn't know about the Minter Ellison report. The criticism isn't just a swipe at Garrett, it's also at Rudd. I think cutting Garrett with this as a reason would raise questions at "what did Rudd know?". 

Secondly - and more importantly, if Garrett goes the next head on the block is the PM's. Rudd needs Garrett to act as a circuit-breaker, that's his role now. Labor can now astutely move to pile all its "greenie" policy failures towards Garrett and then at the right time drop him.

It suggests to me that there is a lot more crap to hit the fan yet - and Rudd knows it!!! By dumping Garrett now, Rudd directly takes the heat for the "mop-up" over the next few months. Negative stories every week hitting the media is not what Kev is all about. Hence we have a new Minister - Peter Garrett "Minister for Heat Deflection". The Coalition don't want Garret's scalp - they want Rudd's. It's just they need to break through the armour to get to the underbelly of the PM. 

Garrett might not have been made to walk the plank by Rudd, but neither is Garrett back on the ship's deck. Rudd has effectively just told Garrett to "take a seat" on the end of the plank. 

I don't know how close Gillard and Garrett are, but for Julia's leadership aspirations, the best outcome for her would be for Garrett to resign immediately. Hence another reason for Rudd to ensure Garrett is going nowhere. 

Duckman


----------



## bellenuit (24 February 2010)

In today's The West Australian it says that so long as the installer hasn't been de-registered (or has re-registered) he/she will be allowed inspect their own work as part of the inspection program.

That is open to abuse on many fronts. If the installer has to correct the original work for free, then there is the incentive to report the original as satisfactory. If the installer gets paid for the corrective work, then there is the incentive to declare originally correct installations as faulty to generate additional work.


----------



## Julia (24 February 2010)

bellenuit said:


> In today's The West Australian it says that so long as the installer hasn't been de-registered (or has re-registered) he/she will be allowed inspect their own work as part of the inspection program.
> 
> That is open to abuse on many fronts. If the installer has to correct the original work for free, then there is the incentive to report the original as satisfactory. If the installer gets paid for the corrective work, then there is the incentive to declare originally correct installations as faulty to generate additional work.



Yep, I expressed outrage about this earlier.
It's just not credible to think that an installer, newly 'qualified' as an 'inspector', is going to go back and look at his original work and say, 'oh my goodness, I really stuffed this up"!
Ridiculous.


----------



## Trembling Hand (24 February 2010)

A good vid by Fairfax on "how to assassinate a Minister",

http://media.theage.com.au/opinion/national-times/how-to-assassinate-a-minister-1168638.html


----------



## noco (24 February 2010)

Only a ROYAL COMMISSION can possibly bring out the truth with this debacle as to who knew WHAT and WHEN.

The lies that are being told by Rudd and Garrett at question time is very obvious and a only a Royal Commission can settle the whole thing.

Just how the opposition can force this upon the Government I do not know. Perhaps an ASF member could enlighten me.


----------



## awg (24 February 2010)

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> It's ok to commit fraud and tell everyone on ASF but it's not ok for dodgy installers to rort the Government's Home Insulation Scheme?
> 
> I don't get it - aren't you a hypocrite and a thief?




The above reply to an earlier post by me has just come to my attention.


Dear conscience/zzaaxxss3401,

Fair enough I guess, I did leave myself open, as my initial post was inadequately worded at best.

Perhaps the intended irony in my own example did not come across?... and my intention was to reclaim the lost interest from the govt keeping my refund for six months...not theft or fraud as condemned.(imo)

From an administrative point of view, if I just send it back, it will be worse than cashing it and waiting for them to ask for it back..which will surely happen.(imo)

hope this makes you feel better


----------



## noco (24 February 2010)

So Rudd has taken over the HOME INSULATION DEBACLE?????????????

Obviously he has no confidence in Garrett to fix the problem, so he should sack him (Garrett).

Now lets ask ourselves, "who really created the problem in the first place"????


----------



## cornnfedd (24 February 2010)

I think self auditing is a great idea and the government should look at doing it with other industries as well, infact why not give the power back to the people? I would happily regulate my driving speed - if I go over the speed limit I PROMISE to let the government know so they can send me my fine. And think of all the money they would save not having to have all these pesky police and speed cameras around.


----------



## Julia (24 February 2010)

noco said:


> So Rudd has taken over the HOME INSULATION DEBACLE?????????????
> 
> Obviously he has no confidence in Garrett to fix the problem, so he should sack him (Garrett).
> 
> Now lets ask ourselves, "who really created the problem in the first place"????






Duckman#72 said:


> This is going to sound strange but ..........*Garrett is more important to Rudd now, than in any time over the past 2 years!!!*
> 
> I agree Julia. It is not out of any great love for Garrett that Rudd hasn't cut him. Garrett was a Latham appointment anyway. But neither is Rudd being "noble and loyal" to one of his Ministers. It is entirely a politically motivated decision (and wise on Rudd's part).Under most criteria from which to judge the performance of a Minister's department, Garrett deserves to go.
> 
> ...




Noco, Duckman has already given a good rationale for Rudd's involvement.

I'd say also that, when you are in deep ****, it's better to remove the initiative from the Opposition and just jump in with the mea culpas.
viz Mr Rudd at a meeting with installers today where he actually as Prime Minister, fergawdsake, brought out his little notebook and made a record of individual grievances!!

I don't recall a Prime Minister ever, ever doing any such thing, and it demonstrates that Mr Rudd recognises fully how much trouble he is in over this mess.

Peter Beattie, Qld Premier made this behaviour an art form.  He would throw up his hands, smile with a suitably penitent expression, and say "well, we screwed up, and are we ever going to take complete responsibility for putting it right".
It leaves the Opposition bereft of fire.


----------



## drsmith (24 February 2010)

Tony Abbott may be a secret advisor for the ALP on the squandering of taxpayer dollars.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=450541&postcount=197


----------



## Duckman#72 (25 February 2010)

drsmith said:


> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=450541&postcount=197




Nice one drsmith. Well picked up.

Once again Abbott shows how far in front of his rivals he is. Just as he states - losing billions doesn't mean you'll get the chop as a minister. As demonstrated by Kev and Pete.

I'm with Julia. As a Queenslander, I say to Australian's in other States .......please, please, please don't be sucked in by Rudd (Beattie's) smarmy "Look, we made a mistake, we get it, and we are going to make it right" routine. Qld thought it was cute to start with, and now 10 years later look where we are as a result!!! 

Anyone looking for some quality assets in a firesale??

Duckman


----------



## GumbyLearner (25 February 2010)

*Rudd's bloodied meat an anaemic meatloaf *
Tony Wright 
The Age
24 Feb, 2010

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/rudds-bloodied-meat-an-anaemic-meatloaf-20100223-p0u0.html

Paul Keating had a typically gory recipe for those times when his government got itself into headline-grabbing strife.

''Toss a chunk of bloodied meat in the opposite direction,'' he would tell his staff. It was Keatingese for diverting attention from the bothersome matter sapping the government's momentum.

I like one of the comments from a blogger on the Age website with the nick
*bitrich*

Bitrich sums it up quite succinctly

Yes, our farmers have to compete against suspect meat, but our publishers and TV stations get handouts and protection against foreign competition and evolving technology. But don't worry about that. The PM will take "reponsibility" for any bad outcomes.
bitrich - February 24, 2010, 7:14AM


----------



## c-unit (25 February 2010)

Kerry just grilled Rudd on the 7.30 Report. It's nice to know that despite Kerry's lean to the left, he is willing to hold Rudd accountable for his numerous f*ckups. 

Kev used the phrase "stepping up to the plate" at least three times in his attempt to spin out of Kerry's grasp. Pleasurable viewing for those tired of the Rudd rhetoric.

Rudd refused to talk about whether those in his department responsible for the mistakes would be held accountable, repeatedly using his "buck stops with me" line. Would love to know how Rudd handles this behind closed doors! 

Thoughts from those who saw the interview?


----------



## cornnfedd (25 February 2010)

lol @ 7:30 report.

ill say it once and ill say it again, Rudd is an arrogant PRICK!

Great viewing.

ahahaha lol When he thanks Rudd for being on the show Rudd just gave him a death stare!


----------



## Calliope (25 February 2010)

It was great to see Kerry O'Brien take that lying weasel Rudd apart. If you missed it go to;

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2830544.htm

Click "Broadband Dial-up"


----------



## REA (25 February 2010)

I  have noticed ABC has been more agressive lately interviewing the government however they are still banging the global warming drum I dont suppose it is easy to swallow pride when you back a horse so heavily.

My daughter has an investment property inner city Sydney The next door neighbour got bats installed and rang her up and asked if she was interested in also getting insulation installed at the same time, of course she agreed.  Result flickering lights and the house now has to be rewired.

I heard an electrician interviewed and he commented that any house over 40/50 years is in real danger once the wiring is disturbed which in my opinion leaves many houses with trouble still to come.   These problems will go on for years.


----------



## Buckfont (25 February 2010)

First time in a while Kerry O has really given stick to KRudd. And Rudd was basically arguing against something that he could no longer defend despite the fact that he would take responsibility from here on in. 

What a gutless wonder.

It actually reminded me of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, when, with no arms, King Arthur (K Ob) slashes his legs off leaving him totally helpless and the the only reply the Black Knight can come up with is ` Alright, well, let`s call it a draw.`!

I hope that all those that voted for him (and I`m yet to meet one) saw that interview and reappraise why they believe in his policies and reappraise the reasons why they will vote again, for the insulation, or should that be insult(ation) grilling that was on the 7.30 report tonight, Rudd had from Kerry no legs to stand on.


----------



## noco (25 February 2010)

cornnfedd said:


> lol @ 7:30 report.
> 
> ill say it once and ill say it again, Rudd is an arrogant PRICK!
> 
> ...




If looks could kill, O'Brien would be dead meat.


----------



## Macquack (25 February 2010)

Buckfont; said:
			
		

> I hope that all those that voted for him (and I`m yet to meet one)




Either the last federal election was rigged or you need to get out more Buckfont.

The $41.2 million assistance package for the insulation industry is a joke. Now the taxpayer is going to pay for insulation "throwers" to do absolutely nothing.


----------



## Buckfont (25 February 2010)

Macquack said:


> Either the last federal election was rigged or you need to get out more Buckfont.
> 
> The $41.2 million assistance package for the insulation industry is a joke. Now the taxpayer is going to pay for insulation "throwers" to do absolutely nothing.




Maquack, there`s only one thing I agree with you on and that is the 41 2 mill. assistance is a joke. 

As to getting out more, I do that in abundance across different age groups and I`ll still stick to my comment that I have yet to meet someone who voted for Rudd. Cheers.


----------



## drsmith (25 February 2010)

If  Kevin Rudd wants to accept responsibility he should remove his sword from the taxpayers rectum and fall on it.

As it is he is just giving it another twist.


----------



## Julia (25 February 2010)

c-unit said:


> Kerry just grilled Rudd on the 7.30 Report. It's nice to know that despite Kerry's lean to the left, he is willing to hold Rudd accountable for his numerous f*ckups.
> 
> Kev used the phrase "stepping up to the plate" at least three times in his attempt to spin out of Kerry's grasp. Pleasurable viewing for those tired of the Rudd rhetoric.
> 
> ...



Agree with the thoughts already expressed.  Kerry O'Brien has finally redeemed himself!

I can't remember when I've watched an interview with more fascination as Rudd, looking pretty pale, struggled to find adequate answers to O'Brien's insistent questioning.

I think he was simply shocked to find himself questioned in such a way.
Listening to him on the radio earlier today he had his usual confident tone when doing the "step up to the plate", "take it on the chin", "as Prime Minister I take full responsibility" stuff, clearly aiming to take all the wind out of the sails of the critics.

I expected the 7.30 Report to be just a further repeat of the same, but no, it was actually a genuine grilling.

There is indeed a definite sense that the media view of the government, and Mr Rudd in particular, is finally turning.


----------



## Calliope (25 February 2010)

Rudd has finally agreed to appear on the "Insiders" next Sunday after years of chickening out. But I suspect Barry Cassidy will give him a much easier passage than O"Brien. He was soft on Conroy last Sunday. Cassidy can't cut through the bullsh*t like O'Brien can.

Although O'Brien is a Leftie I get the feeling he can't stand Rudd. Many in the Labor Caucus must be feeling the same way.

Tonight Rudd tried all the weasel words in his collection except sending his "thoughts and prayers" out to those who had lost their sons or their homes in this debacle. Even hypocrites have to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## Atlas79 (26 February 2010)

I enjoy watching Rudd flop about like a fish on deck as much as anyone else. But the lesson everyone, most assuredly the ABC, is not paying attention to:

Government is not the solution to the problem, Government IS the problem. - R.Reagan

This is the perfect demonstration. Could not be more explicit. We need a drastic reduction of government at all levels. The Libs might not deliver it but you know damn well the ALP won't. Don't let the ALP statists off the hook by letting them switch "brands" to a personality to one less cringeworthy than Rudd. That's what they will do before the election, 100% guaranteed. When these people create failures they change the branding and the slogan, not the product. The product is government and we have too much of it.


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 February 2010)

Calliope said:


> It was great to see Kerry O'Brien take that lying weasel Rudd apart. If you missed it go to;
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2830544.htm
> 
> Click "Broadband Dial-up"




My wife & I had a good belly larf when the KRuddster made this doozy of a gaffe...



> KERRY O’BRIEN: Yeah, but that was another-that was another 14 months away. This has come to a very abrupt halt.
> 
> KEVIN RUDD: That is-that is correct, but I'm saying, even prior to this, the Employment Minster, for example, Mark Arbib, had in place a range of transitional training programs to take these workers from where they are now into a new set of skills and *on to long term [size=+1]unemployment[/size].*




Hahaha! So, the goal is to get all these workers onto long term UNemployment? ROFLMAO!!

I'm really surprised no-one else here has picked up on that one!!!


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 February 2010)

Atlas79 said:


> I enjoy watching Rudd flop about like a fish on deck as much as anyone else. But the lesson everyone, most assuredly the ABC, is not paying attention to:
> 
> Government is not the solution to the problem, Government IS the problem. - R.Reagan
> 
> This is the perfect demonstration. Could not be more explicit. We need a drastic reduction of government at all levels. The Libs might not deliver it but you know damn well the ALP won't. Don't let the ALP statists off the hook by letting them switch "brands" to a personality to one less cringeworthy than Rudd. That's what they will do before the election, 100% guaranteed. When these people create failures they change the branding and the slogan, not the product. *The product is government and we have too much of it*.




Well put. I'm in total agreement.


aj


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 February 2010)

noco said:


> If looks could kill, O'Brien would be dead meat.




Anyone care to take bets the ABC will suffer "significant, unexpected spending cuts" before the next election??


----------



## Calliope (26 February 2010)

Rudd last night;

"Plainly this particular program has been implemented ineffectively and you've got problems. In our system I am responsible for the lot of it."

He obviously learned this while working for Beatty. The next step is to apply a few bandaids (courtesy of the taxpayer) and move on...until the next stuff-up hits the fan.

Beatty was replaced by a woman from the Left, who turned out to be a disaster. The Caucus will have to remove Rudd. Their only alternative is Gillard also from the Left. She is the darling of the unions. If she makes decisions they don't like they will turn on her in the same way as they have turned on Bligh. Most of the Caucus are beholden to the unions for selecting them.


----------



## drsmith (26 February 2010)

I wonder whether our overall long period of economic growth has overseen a decline in the quality of government at both a federal and state level and question whether politicians have any awareness of this.


----------



## roland (26 February 2010)

Garrett just got demoted



> Peter Garrett was today demoted by the Prime Minister over the housing  insulation debacle.
> 
> The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has appointed Greg Combet as the new Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.




More info here:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/env...botched-insulation-program-20100226-p8l5.html


----------



## Happy (26 February 2010)

drsmith said:


> I wonder whether our overall long period of *economic growth has overseen a decline in the quality of government at both a federal and state level *and question whether politicians have any awareness of this.




Reminds me of comment that during bull market a lot of accidental traders think of themselves as gifted geniuses, could probably draw comparison here.

Almost irrespectively of inferior management they still manage to do something right.


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 February 2010)

roland said:


> Garrett just got demoted
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Combet just got promoted in his place, with PWong's shoulder available to cry on if necessary 

Just what's needed. A union head-basher should sort this lot out, eh? ROFLMAO.

Prepare for a full scale media assault by Mr ComBatt tonight....


----------



## Calliope (26 February 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Combet just got promoted in his place
> Just what's needed. A union head-basher should sort this lot out, eh? ROFLMAO.




Combet once said that the unions used to run this country, and it's about time they did it again. His strength is in harassing employers...not helping them to get back on their feet.

Garrett can now get back to what he does best...looking for rare animals that he can use as a weapon to stop development.


----------



## cornnfedd (26 February 2010)

Cant say Im suprised.
Cant say I feel sorry for Garrett.
Cant say the new guy will do any better.
Cant say this actually solves any issues what so ever.


----------



## Calliope (26 February 2010)

After a week of listening to Rudd saying he is rolling his sleeves up, Combet now says *he* is going to roll his sleeves up. A true follower. He will go far. Perhaps Garrett never rolled *his* sleeves up. I now foreshadow a contest between front benchers on sleeve rolling up.


----------



## Dowdy (26 February 2010)

The interesting thing about this is that the insulation industry pretty much collapsed overnight when they got rid of the funding.

I wonder how the housing market would react when they remove the grants?


----------



## Julia (26 February 2010)

What does this demotion of Garrett actually say about how Mr Rudd perceives his position?

Was he so taken aback by Kerry O'Brien's attack last night on the 7.30 Report that he figured he needed to get one of his minions in the hot seat again, rather than display his own vulnerability?

That's how I interpret Mr Combet's elevation.

I couldn't stand Garrett, but if it's possible I loathe Combet even more.  He is a union hack of the worst order.  Garrett's worst sin was his naivete and ignorance, lack of political skills really.  Mr Combet suffers from none of these problems.


----------



## Whiskers (26 February 2010)

The story from the Brisbane Times...



> Mr Garrett will be the Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts.
> 
> Mr Rudd said Mr Garrett’s passion lay with the protection of Australia’s natural resources and *his reduced range of responsibilities would be more suited to him.*
> 
> Under the changes announced by Mr Rudd, Mr Combet will be given the direct responsibility for the troubled insulation program.




I'd say Garret simply had too much responsibility for a new poly. This change should suit him to regroup for another day, maybe.

Probably Combet got thrown in there to use his contacts to 'sort out' the outspoken union criticism of the gov.


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 February 2010)

Whiskers said:


> The story from the Brisbane Times...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Of course, being a fully accountable gummint, Mr Garrot will be forced to take a substantial pay and allowances cut, having been "demoted" and now effectively just a minor employee of the KRuddCo juggernaut with greatly reduced responsibilities?

Yeah. I must be batty to even contemplate "value for taxpayer's money"!! :angry:


----------



## Smurf1976 (27 February 2010)

Dowdy said:


> The interesting thing about this is that the insulation industry pretty much collapsed overnight when they got rid of the funding.



That's the single biggest problem facing the whole renewable energy and energy efficiency industry. It's constantly being thrown from one extreme to the other by government.

Wind farms - one minute it's a goer, the next it's not, now it is again. All due to constant meddling with policy. Even stage government owned developers can't come to grips with what's going on - on again, off again, on again...

Same with solar on houses. Slow growth, then a boom, then a collapse, now it's sort of going again.

Same with insulation. A viable industry existed before, then it became a government-fuelled boom sucking in imports, now it has collapsed literally overnight.

Investors will stay well away from Australia whilst such things continue. It's the sort of risk you normally expect to find in a Third World backwater, not a supposedly developed country.


----------



## Trembling Hand (27 February 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> That's the single biggest problem facing the whole renewable energy and energy efficiency industry. It's constantly being thrown from one extreme to the other by government.
> 
> ...............
> 
> Investors will stay well away from Australia whilst such things continue. It's the sort of risk you normally expect to find in a Third World backwater, not a supposedly developed country.




Another good post there Smurf.

No wonder our smart solar thinkers are setting up in China and the US. What hope have they of getting funding from venture caps. We are already behind the 8 ball with the large physical size and small population of Oz and Govnuts luv riding in and playing the great white Knight but end up just F'ing it up.


----------



## drsmith (27 February 2010)

I would have thought that for the funding of renewable energy/energy sustainability, the logical starting point would be what gives the best bang for buck.

This is something our politicians seem to have long forgotten (or ignored).


----------



## basilio (4 March 2010)

Came across a story in Sydney Morning Herald this morning that adds some new perspectives to the home insulation "debacle".

For example one of the  big concerns we have had has been the fear that at least some of the insulation jobs will result in more ceiling fires and live roofs. Guess what ? These problems have always existed in what has been a very unregulated industry to date. Worth a read to give another perspective on the picture.



> Insulation fire risk was worse before rebate
> 
> ......So, nearly 12 months on, what did the program deliver? Surprisingly, it appears to have made insulation installation safer (thank you to blogsite Pollytics.com for detailing this and examples of misreporting).
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...sk-was-worse-before-rebate-20100303-pivv.html


----------



## moXJO (4 March 2010)

basilio said:


> Came across a story in Sydney Morning Herald this morning that adds some new perspectives to the home insulation "debacle".
> 
> For example one of the  big concerns we have had has been the fear that at least some of the insulation jobs will result in more ceiling fires and live roofs. Guess what ? These problems have always existed in what has been a very unregulated industry to date. Worth a read to give another perspective on the picture.
> 
> ...




What a big leap there in labor spin support from the article.   
By stuffing up we made the industry safer. 
The big companies that were around before the grant did have guidelines. It was in their interest to do the job right or go bust. With the introduction of the grant it was just a free for all race to make as much money as you could. Guys that have never been near the industry before were pumping the crap in. 

There has always been shonks and this whole incident brought them all out. We now have cheap Chinese crap jammed in the roof and decimated the legit guys work/supply and reputation. I'd be pi$$ed
 In 6 months we have produced how many unsafe roofs. Yeah there were shonks round before but they were lucky to get 1-2 jobs a week, and even then people cottoned on when it was there own money. They may have been doing 2-4 jobs a day after the grant along with thousands of other bodgy blokes. This program was a total stuff up.


----------



## basilio (4 March 2010)

> What a big leap there in labor spin support from the article.
> By stuffing up we made the industry safer.




I think it's worth reading the article in total and the back up information from the website that is quoted before dismissing it entirely.

No doubt there was  poor administration and the fact was that trying to get such a scheme going at the rate Cabinet demanded was a critical factor. There is no industry on the world that would not stuff up either small time or big time if there is totally insufficient time to plan or it is advanced too quickly. 

What was interesting in the article, and probably not widely understood, was that there were numerous instances of fires related to insulation before the scheme began. I suspect many were due to the new proliferation of halogen lights that are absolute nightmares as far as starting fires. And it would have been very difficult for many houseowners to inspect the insulation jobs done by tradesmen to ensure it was done properly. So in retrospect it isn't surprising to realise * there were some poor practices already in the industry*. (like most others.)

The main point of the story was  explaining that  poor jobs have always occurred in installing insulation and that, on the face of it, there doesn't seem to have been a huge extra jump in such cases caused by the insulation program. 

But Peter Costello  and co are hardly likely to accept that arn't they? Not when there is a Labour head to kick...


----------



## bellenuit (4 March 2010)

basilio said:


> But Peter Costello  and co are hardly likely to accept that arn't they? Not when there is a Labour head to kick...




Rudd too. After all, it was he who demoted Garrett. 

So if things are no worse than before and perhaps slightly better, why all the mea culpas?


----------



## Julia (4 March 2010)

basilio said:


> But Peter Costello  and co are hardly likely to accept that arn't they? Not when there is a Labour head to kick...




What has Peter Costello had to say about it?  I haven't heard any comment from him for many weeks.


----------



## McCoy Pauley (4 March 2010)

Julia said:


> What has Peter Costello had to say about it?  I haven't heard any comment from him for many weeks.




It's a bit hard for Peter to whack his boss now!


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 March 2010)

Australian Federal Police to investigate

*Rogue installers 'forged signatures'*
March 3, 2010

AAP 

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/rogue-installers-forged-signatures-20100303-pht3.html

Conmen are under investigation for allegedly forging signatures to receive the federal government's home insulation rebate without ever undertaking the work.

Could the final step be a Royal Commission to look at the rest of the iceberg?


----------



## noco (4 March 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Australian Federal Police to investigate
> 
> *Rogue installers 'forged signatures'*
> March 3, 2010
> ...




Yeah GL, I have been advocating a Royal Commission on this debacle for a while now, but how does it happen? Who forces the issue? Is it up to the opposition or a petition by the people? I'll sign one any day.


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 March 2010)

noco said:


> Yeah GL, I have been advocating a Royal Commission on this debacle for a while now, but how does it happen? Who forces the issue? Is it up to the opposition or a petition by the people? I'll sign one any day.




Hi there noco

Petition is one way the public can take action to push for a Royal Commission. It is the government of the day that must call for any inquiry or royal commission. Royal Commissions are intended to be independent from the executive arm of government and influential stakeholders usually by the appointment of a member of the judiciary to head any inquiry. The requirement of independence is not set out in Australian legislation unlike other parts of the Commonwealth.

The process for Royal Commissions is currently under review by the 
Australian Law Reform Commission. Last month, the Federal Government tabled in Parliament a report titled: Making Inquiries: A New Statutory Framework. It's the first review of the Royal Commissions Act in 107 years.

*Australia: Australian Law Reform Commission reports on its review of Royal Commissions and public inquiries 
*09 February 2010
Article by Ashley Tsacalos and Catherine Kelso 
Here's an excerpt from the link 
------> http://www.mondaq.com/australia/article.asp?articleid=93782

The ALRC's key recommendations involve the establishment of two tiers of public inquiry, with Royal Commissions being retained as the highest form of inquiry to look into matters of substantial public importance and a second tier of inquiry to be called 'Official Inquiries', established by ministers to look into matters of public importance. The amended Royal Commissions Act would be renamed the Inquiries Act.

Specific recommendations are made that distinguish between the two tiers of inquiry, while ensuring that each tier has the necessary tools to conduct investigations without inappropriately infringing on the rights of a person involved with, or affected by, inquiry processes. For example, Royal Commissions may still be able to abrogate the privilege against self-incrimination in certain circumstances while Official Inquiries, which the ALRC envisages will need less instructive investigatory powers, may not. Royal Commissions would also be able to abrogate 'client legal privilege' if stipulated in the Letters Patent, while Official Inquiries could not.

Currently, legislation does not require the tabling in Parliament of Royal Commission reports. The ALRC recommends that the current practice of governments to table reports be formalised by a statutory requirement in the Inquiries Act. If for any reason a report is not to be tabled, the Government would have to publish a statement of reasons as to why this is the case. 

If you want to read the 628 page ALRC report here's the link.
----> http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/current/royal-commissions/ALRC111/ALRC111.pdf Specifically look at page 122 of the report for *Factors for consideration before an inquiry is established.
*

Also , here's a link to the Historical role of Public Inquiries contained in the report. Each Commonwealth jurisdiction has had a different process.

-----> http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/cu...s/ALRC111/A2.HistoryRoleOfPublicInquiries.pdf

In Disorganized Crime by Richard Hall. 
St. Lucia, Qld. : University of Queensland Press, 1986.
Hall describes Australian Royal Commissions 'as Australian as a meat pie.'


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 March 2010)

Fresh off the press

*Govt seeks probe of insulation rorting*
CATHY ALEXANDER
March 4, 2010 - 7:09PM

AAP 

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...robe-of-insulation-rorting-20100304-plla.html

The federal government is set to order an urgent, high-level investigation amid new claims its botched home insulation scheme was rorted by operators possibly linked to organised crime.

Frontbencher Greg Combet, who is in charge of cleaning up the insulation mess, has written to the federal auditor-general pressing for a full, fast-tracked audit.


----------



## noco (4 March 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Fresh off the press
> 
> *Govt seeks probe of insulation rorting*
> CATHY ALEXANDER
> ...




Thanks GL for that info. 'twas most informative.

I can't see it ever happening if we wait for the Governer General to impliment a Royal Commission, considering her close political association with Rudd and Shorten.
Conbet will also protect his mates.


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 March 2010)

noco said:


> Thanks GL for that info. 'twas most informative.
> 
> I can't see it ever happening if we wait for the Governer General to impliment a Royal Commission, considering her close political association with Rudd and Shorten.
> Conbet will also protect his mates.




You got it in one there Noco.

Protecting there mates!

Hold your head up high that you are not there mates!

That's the key.

You should still voice and exercise your concerns & rights as a citizen to the network that funds all this death & **** as a taxpayer though!


----------



## Julia (4 March 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Australian Federal Police to investigate
> 
> *Rogue installers 'forged signatures'*
> March 3, 2010
> ...






noco said:


> Thanks GL for that info. 'twas most informative.
> 
> I can't see it ever happening if we wait for the Governer General to impliment a Royal Commission, considering her close political association with Rudd and Shorten.
> Conbet will also protect his mates.




Exactly right, noco.  It will not be in the government's interests to have a Royal Commission.

In the ABC Radio news report I heard about this at 6pm, Mr Combet was saying he intended to "do all he could" to find out about the possible rorting/fraud allegations.
The language (and this may have changed in subsequent bulletins) allowed him a clear out.

I can't see that there is any excuse for not investigating each and every installer who has falsely claimed for insulation having been installed.
For the complaint to be made, there must be a record of the installer and the date they claim to have installed the product.

I received one of these about six weeks ago, declaring insulation had been installed on 23 September 2009, and would I please sign the paperwork attached so they could claim from the government.  No insulation had been installed.

I forwarded it to the office of the Shadow Minister, having received no interest from the government hotline when I reported it.

Had appreciative response from the Shadow Minister's office, saying they had forwarded the complaint to Mr Garrett's office for comment and they would pass on his reply when it was received.
So far nothing further.  I expect Mr Garrett has been a bit busy until recently.
Maybe now, when taking a break from opening the odd art gallery and counting endangered fleas, he may address some of the outstanding correspondence.
Though probably not, in that everything relating to insulation will probably now land on Mr Combet's desk.


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 March 2010)

Julia said:


> Exactly right, noco.  It will not be in the government's interests to have a Royal Commission.
> 
> In the ABC Radio news report I heard about this at 6pm, Mr Combet was saying he intended to "do all he could" to find out about the possible rorting/fraud allegations.
> The language (and this may have changed in subsequent bulletins) allowed him a clear out.
> ...




Have you thought about contacting these guys Julia. 

http://www.fairtrading.qld.gov.au/contact-us.htm

Even though it is a federally administered program. Surely the business that got in touch with you is registered in Queensland. That would be a costly but worthy exercise considering the potential of hazards for public safety. All I can say is good luck!


----------



## Julia (4 March 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Have you thought about contacting these guys Julia.
> 
> http://www.fairtrading.qld.gov.au/contact-us.htm
> 
> Even though it is a federally administered program. Surely the business that got in touch with you is registered in Queensland. That would be a costly but worthy exercise considering the potential of hazards for public safety. All I can say is good luck!



Hi Gumby, No, I rather think the whole thing has rather gone beyond Fair Trading at this stage and they would probably just pass any complaints on to the government.

I actually decided to change my mind and have the insulation installed after hearing several people declare it had made their homes much more comfortable.  

The firm is one of the larger Qld wide ones.
The original quote was for $1598 (note how neatly it fitted into the then allowed government rebate amount.)

When I changed my mind the rebate had been reduced to $1200.

I suggested to them that unless they wanted to be the subject of government scrutiny for fraud, they would provide the original amount of material at not more than $1200 total cost.  They happily agreed and couldn't do it quickly enough.

I do think it's possible this may have been a clerical error because I had originally accepted the quote, made a day to have it done, then changed my mind.

I've since heard of several other householders who have also received these letters declaring installation has been completed when they have not even had a quote!


----------



## GumbyLearner (5 March 2010)

Julia said:


> I've since heard of several other householders who have also received these letters declaring installation has been completed when they have not even had a quote!




They sound like a pack of dodge merchants. A royal commission is what is required so that the public can know who is doing the ripping off, and who the government has allowed to be registered to be ripped-off. IMHO!

Hegemonic Falsified Altruism and UN brown-nosing point scoring for Mr.Non-Specificity Anti-Vocational Rudd. But he did say that the buck stops with me. Problem is the buck never started with the guy. Step into any neighbourhood shed and I'm sure he would be quick to deny any recognition of the tools to be used. Problem is most of the electorate don't look/participate in chat forums.

All hail the abnormal leader!


----------



## basilio (5 March 2010)

> What has Peter Costello had to say about it? I haven't heard any comment from him for many weeks.




The article I posted referred to a story that Peter Costello ran equating the home insulation project with running public hospitals. From now on this project is going to be used to beat up any project Labour proposes that the Opposition want to oppose. Which should be just about everything.

I think the article I posted did make some good points. The private sector has enough cowboys and sharp operators quite capable of ripping people off and killing workers through poor practices. The poor administration of the rushed insulation scheme is only part of the picture.

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opi...-health-another-batty-idea-20100302-pg6q.html


----------



## GumbyLearner (5 March 2010)

basilio said:


> The private sector has enough cowboys and sharp operators quite capable of ripping people off and killing workers through poor practices. The poor administration of the rushed insulation scheme is only part of the picture.
> 
> http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opi...-health-another-batty-idea-20100302-pg6q.html




No doubt basilio I agree. There is good and bad in every trade/profession/business etc.. But usually substandard business go under because you can only burn people enough that word gets around.  But it is quite concerning that taxpayer money has been wasted on advertising/rorting/compo claims and now bailouts for the failout. It's great to have good intentions but Garrett's office did ignore 21 consecutive safety warnings before his demotion. Now people have died and more public money has to be spent on safety audits. Also, I posted a question on this thread about how many pink batts were imported from the USA. No-one has been able to answer this yet. Not only have we not just been stimulating our own economy but enriching others and to the detriment and safety of Australian homes. It's quite disgusting if you have good think about it.

Just my


----------



## johnnyg (5 March 2010)

Speaking to a mate today who's a sparky on the Sunshine Coast. He's currently working for a guy who's got a contract to inspect the foil insulated homes. Government is paying $400 for each inspection, plus an Hourly rate if there are dramas with the job/needs extra time. Unit takes ~ 1 hour to inspect, a home anywhere upto 2-3 hours. 4 Guys working, 2 teams of 2. 

Apparently alot of elect's are turning down the work as a few home owners have tried to botch up the insulation after they've checked it and then sue them (that's why they work in teams of 2 to check on each others work/make sure everything is 100%)

Can get through ~ 10 inspections a day. Started on Monday and already has found 6 dodgy jobs, just laying the foil over the top of the downlights/ect.


----------



## cornnfedd (5 March 2010)

You wait, the next news headline will be "Dodgy auditors found" and they will have to audit the auditors by paying them even more per hour. This is going to cost us MILLIONS in tax payer funded $$


----------



## Julia (5 March 2010)

cornnfedd said:


> You wait, the next news headline will be "Dodgy auditors found" and they will have to audit the auditors by paying them even more per hour. This is going to cost us MILLIONS in tax payer funded $$



Yes, I'll be surprised if this doesn't happen.
How they can make it possible for the previous installers to become inspectors and then inspect their own earlier work is beyond reasonable comprehension.
I can't understand why the Opposition isn't screaming about this.

Btw Basilio, if you seriously think what has happened with the insulation programme isn't enough to put us off the notion of the feds taking over Health, I'm just astonished.

The batts programme is just a nothing compared to a whole of country stuff up with Health.
How can you imagine if they can't get a simple little one off programme like insulation executed efficiently they could possibly cope with the complexities of the whole hospital system, general practice, private specialist practices, private health cover, ambulance and emergency systems etc?

Why do you think mr Rudd has only released the funding aspect of his brave new concept of Health?  Is it reasonable to expect the States (or the electorate) to form an opinion about the feds taking over if they/we are not in possession of all the detail regarding how it will all work in practice, i.e. where are all the necessary beds, doctors and nurses going to come from?
What procedures will be established to prevent hospitals ratcheting up unnecessary surgical procedures just to claim the additional funding under the suggested new funding criteria?

So many questions.


----------



## Calliope (5 March 2010)

basilio said:


> The poor administration of the rushed insulation scheme is only part of the picture.




It was the catalyst that kick started the shonky operators.


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 March 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Also, I posted a question on this thread about how many pink batts were imported from the USA. No-one has been able to answer this yet.



"Pink Batts" are a specific brand of what is generically known as fibreglass batts. Pink Batts as such are manufactured in Australia (not sure if they are also manufactured elsewhere) whilst generic fibreglass batts are manufactured in numerous locations globally.

I don't know how much has been imported but I simply observe this. Prior to this scheme, I had never seen any imported fibreglass insulation batts used in an Australian house. "Pink Batts" are the best known local product, but there are others such as Bradford Gold Batts, Fat Batts and so on, all of which are locally made.

But now there's insulation from China and elsewhere being installed left, right and centre. Judge for yourself, but if we _assume_ that the Australian manufacturers wouldn't have had a large unused production capacity prior to the government scheme then it is likely that much of the additional demand was met by imports.

The great tragedy for the Australian manufacturers is that they had a viable industry on an ongoing basis before government stepped in. Now demand for their products has fallen in a hole, replaced by imports filling broght-forward demand and now there's a halted government scheme plus a loss of public confidence in insulation generally. Apart from new construction, there's basically no market for insulation now - it sure hasn't done the legitimate installers and local manufacturers any good by wrecking the industry.

It's a classic case of government meddling messing things up. It would have been hard to create a bigger mess if they'd tried...

I'm a big fan of insulating houses generally - personally I'd regard a lack of it in a climate needing heating / cooling as a building defect. But like anything, it's only good if it's done with quality products installed properly.


----------



## Aussiejeff (6 March 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Judge for yourself, but if we _assume_ that the Australian manufacturers wouldn't have had a large unused production capacity prior to the government scheme then it is likely that much of the additional demand was met by imports.
> 
> The great tragedy for the Australian manufacturers is that they had a viable industry on an ongoing basis before government stepped in. Now demand for their products has fallen in a hole, replaced by imports filling broght-forward demand and now there's a halted government scheme plus a loss of public confidence in insulation generally. *Apart from new construction, there's basically no market for insulation now - it sure hasn't done the legitimate installers and local manufacturers any good by wrecking the industry.*




But wait!

Remember the minimum 35+Million pop target The Greatest Prime Minister This Country Has Ever Seen has proposed/mandated?

Surely that will solve the current oversupply problem in time?


----------



## Julia (6 March 2010)

From "Counterpoint" on Radio National, satirist Patrick Cook's summary of Mr Garrett's performance is pretty funny.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2010/2833033.htm


----------



## GumbyLearner (6 March 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> "Pink Batts" are a specific brand of what is generically known as fibreglass batts. Pink Batts as such are manufactured in Australia (not sure if they are also manufactured elsewhere) whilst generic fibreglass batts are manufactured in numerous locations globally.
> 
> I don't know how much has been imported but I simply observe this. Prior to this scheme, I had never seen any imported fibreglass insulation batts used in an Australian house. "Pink Batts" are the best known local product, but there are others such as Bradford Gold Batts, Fat Batts and so on, all of which are locally made.
> 
> ...




Thanks for clearing that up Smurf.

Ok, I rephrase the question:

How many "insulation batts" have been imported to Australia that were made in the USA or owned by a US Manufacturer where they are made in China? 

and another question:

How much of the payments for such imports were funded by Australian taxpayers dollars?

Maybe Joe Hockey or BJ could get the stats for us? Because Combet certainly will not, he's too pro-US manufacturing! ROFLMAO


----------



## Calliope (6 March 2010)

The Rudd government has been a godsend to rorters.

*Ease of rorts shocked insulation installers*



> SOME insulation installers say they were shocked to find how easy it was to rort the government's botched $2.45 billion insulation scheme, with shonky operators claiming a $1600 or $1200 rebate for work they did not do.
> 
> There were few checks or balances built into the scheme, they say, and those making claims simply entered the details of a job into an online system without needing to lodge copies of a work order or the customer's signature.
> 
> The money just landed in their bank accounts -- whether the work was done or not.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...ation-installers/story-e6frgczf-1225837515759


----------



## Aussiejeff (6 March 2010)

Calliope said:


> The Rudd government has been a godsend to rorters.
> 
> *Ease of rorts shocked insulation installers*
> 
> ...




Fair suck of the sauce bottle, mate.

I tell you what, it's all good, mate.

And another thing, isn't that what Mr Market wanted?

Lots of people with extra stimulus to spend in this lucky country?

Your arguments gone up in smoke, mate. *poof*

Honestly, it helps working families too, mate.

Secondly, stop whingeing, mate.

and lastly, don't forget to Vote Labour.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 March 2010)

*Jobless swamp hotline after insulation rebate ends*
TOM ARUP
March 10, 2010

AT LEAST 1500 people have lost their jobs and are applying for government training programs because of the sudden suspension of the $2.45 billion insulation rebate.

And in the first day of applications being open, 200 companies have contacted a government hotline seeking information about payments to help them retain staff until the insulation rebate restarts in June.

In the first indications of the full effects of the government's snap decision to halt the $1200 rebate scheme, a spokeswoman for the Minister for Government Service Delivery, Mark Arbib, has confirmed a flood of approaches for help.

The insulation companies and retrenched workers will now apply for part of a $41.2 million package announced by the government last month, including 7000 retraining spots and $4000 payments per employee for companies willing to retain workers.

Environment Minister Peter Garrett suspended the insulation rebate on February 19 after the deaths of four people working in the program and at least 93 house fires associated with incorrect installation.

Mr Garrett was later stripped of his responsibility for the program, which was handed to Assistant Climate Change Minister Greg Combet.

Mr Combet will give a speech to Parliament today outlining how he will restart the troubled scheme on June 1.


----------



## bellenuit (18 March 2010)

There was a mention on a Perth local ABC radio channel this morning that an electrician, hired to check on the safety of a house that had foil insulation installed as part of Rudd's stimulus, received an electric shock and ended up in hospital. It didn't say how serious he was.

There were no further details, but it makes you wonder how qualified/trained could these people be if they didn't take proper precautions when entering an attic that they knew could be dangerous. It is almost like someone lighting a match to see what he is doing when looking for a gas leak.


----------



## Julia (18 March 2010)

I'm not sure if it was the same case, but as I heard it last night on ABC Radio news it was  'thermal' insulation.  Is that foil?


----------



## WaveSurfer (18 March 2010)

Holy bajeezers. I should watch a little more TV every now and then. My wife and I used the solar hot water rebate, but did get bats installed at the same time. Makes a huge difference and we're glad that we did it. They were pink bats installed by Solahart.

I think we're ok, but damn, damn, damn. How do I get this stuff checked? A qualified leccy? Kiddies in the house, so I definitely can't ignore this. :swear:


----------



## WaveSurfer (18 March 2010)

Phew..... MASSIVE sigh of relief. I reckon my heart rate hit 200bpm.

I just tore some out from the ceiling and tried to burn it. Definitely not flammable. It seems to dissipate and not melt into a liquid resin sorta substance. Down-lights are all well ventilated so I guess mine was done right. The black box thingies are all bolted to the pitch rafters so they aren't an issue.

Scared the living daylights outta me. Still going to get the leccy in, just to make sure.


----------



## bellenuit (18 March 2010)

Julia said:


> I'm not sure if it was the same case, but as I heard it last night on ABC Radio news it was  'thermal' insulation.  Is that foil?




I assumed he meant metal foil as that is the one that has been causing the shocks. I was half asleep when I heard it as I usually only listen to the radio when in bed. I think that is the same as thermal insulation, Julia, going by this ad......

http://www.wickes.co.uk/Thermal-Insulation-Foil-Roll/invt/210022


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 March 2010)

WaveSurfer said:


> Phew..... MASSIVE sigh of relief. I reckon my heart rate hit 200bpm.
> 
> I just tore some out from the ceiling and tried to burn it. Definitely not flammable. It seems to dissipate and not melt into a liquid resin sorta substance. Down-lights are all well ventilated so I guess mine was done right. The black box thingies are all bolted to the pitch rafters so they aren't an issue.
> 
> Scared the living daylights outta me. Still going to get the leccy in, just to make sure.



Sounds OK but get an electrician to have a look if you have any ongoing doubts. Better safe than sorry.

Assuming the material you have is the genuine "Pink Batts", it's a quality product that won't burn so no problems there. Just make sure it's not covering the downlights though - NOTHING should be in contact with those since even if the insulation doesn't burn, it would still cause the lights to overheat because they are designed to pass heat through their rear into the roof space.

The "black box thingies" you mention are the transformers which convert 240V mains power into 12V that runs the downlights. They should be secured but very often aren't.


----------



## Julia (19 March 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Sounds OK but get an electrician to have a look if you have any ongoing doubts. Better safe than sorry.
> 
> Assuming the material you have is the genuine "Pink Batts", it's a quality product that won't burn so no problems there.



Smurf, does this also apply to the yellow/gold batts?


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 March 2010)

bellenuit said:


> I assumed he meant metal foil as that is the one that has been causing the shocks. I was half asleep when I heard it as I usually only listen to the radio when in bed. I think that is the same as thermal insulation, Julia, going by this ad......



"Thermal insulation" can mean anything that reduces the flow of heat. Could be foil, batts, foam, loose fill etc.

Foil - this is conductive electrically and is thus an electric shock hazard if not properly installed. *It can be installed safely and is a useful product* but as with many things, it can be unsafe if not used properly. 

Batts and loose fill are also known as "bulk insulation" and are associated with fire risks if incorrectly installed and depending on the actual material used. Fibreglass, rockwool, polyester, shredded newspaper and wool are all used as materials for these - personally I don't like shredded newspaper or wool since both rely for their safety on chemical treatment which may not be properly applied.

Foam is in a somewhat different category and comes in either rigid foam boards (big pieces of polystyrene) or is sprayed on-site. Boards are OK if fire retardent and installed properly (not near downlights etc). 

Spraying on-site is OK only if you get someone who really knows what they're doing since, due to the way it expands after spraying, an incompetent operator could cause some pretty huge problems and this is not unknown to happen in practice.

My personal opinion is use batts in the roof and walls, with foil directly under the roofing material being useful in hot climates. Foam is useful if you want to insulate under floors. Obviously what is suitable does depend a lot on the building and location but properly installed batts shouldn't cause any problems under normal circumstances.


----------



## GumbyLearner (19 March 2010)

Honestly this sucks.

The Federal Government have created a great marketing scheme that has essentially destroyed the earnings of those they are meant to represent.

**** politics?


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 March 2010)

Julia said:


> Smurf, does this also apply to the yellow/gold batts?



Bradford is the best known manufacturer of yellow / gold batts - "Bradford Gold Batts" but there are others too, most notably "Insulco Fat Batts". Either is fine and both have been in the business for many years. They are made from fibreglass - not pleasant stuff to handle but this material is inherently non-flammable

Any of these products made locally (in Australia) should be fine. It's only the cheap imported ones I'd be worried about since there's some uncertainty as to exactly what's in them.

I have yellow insulation batts in my roof (not due to the government scheme) and they are fine. 

*Main issue is to make sure they're installed properly - not covering downlights, extractor fans etc or right up against a chimney or flue. The batts themselves won't burn, but they will trap heat if over the lights etc which may cause other materials (eg the lights themselves, timber etc) to catch fire*.

So in short, I wouldn't be worried as long as they're not sitting on top of downlights etc.


----------



## WaveSurfer (20 March 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Sounds OK but get an electrician to have a look if you have any ongoing doubts. Better safe than sorry.
> 
> Assuming the material you have is the genuine "Pink Batts", it's a quality product that won't burn so no problems there. Just make sure it's not covering the downlights though - NOTHING should be in contact with those since even if the insulation doesn't burn, it would still cause the lights to overheat because they are designed to pass heat through their rear into the roof space.
> 
> The "black box thingies" you mention are the transformers which convert 240V mains power into 12V that runs the downlights. They should be secured but very often aren't.




Cheers for that Smurf. Much appreciated.

I did get an electrician in yesterday arvo and thankfully he gave it all the A.O.K. He said the job was done properly and that we had nothing to worry about in terms of the recent dilemma. He also mentioned that I should pop my head up every month or so to make sure that rodents/possums/etc.. have not moved/shredded them causing the lights to be covered. 

The very few down-lights we do have (in our rumpus and lounge rooms) are all well clear of any bats (a good 600mm x 1m of space around them).

I had kept some of the original bags that held the bats and it is definitely the Pink Batts brand.

I guess as they say, you do get what you pay for. We didn't skimp on the costs to get it installed. 

Thanks again mate.


----------



## trainspotter (9 April 2010)

It just gets better and better for the Rudd Government.

The opposition has accused Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of a cover-up following revelations his department was explicitly warned about problems with the government's home insulation program as early as February last year.

Minutes of a February 18 meeting in 2009 show the risk of electrocutions, house fires and quality concerns was raised with senior officials from Mr Rudd's department.

*It flies in the face of evidence given to a Senate inquiry that Mr Rudd's office was never directly told about the possibility of fatalities or fires linked to the scheme.*

Axed in February 2010, the $2.45 billion program has been blamed for the deaths of four installers and some 120 house fires.

Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt labelled it an extraordinary cover-up by Mr Rudd, who had never referred to the meeting, despite repeated grillings about what - and how early - he knew about the risks.

"The prime minister has misled the parliament about the extent of warnings he and his department received," Mr Hunt said in a statement on Thursday.


http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/7037405/rudd-accused-of-insulation-cover-up/


----------



## Smurf1976 (9 April 2010)

WaveSurfer said:


> Cheers for that Smurf. Much appreciated.
> 
> I did get an electrician in yesterday arvo and thankfully he gave it all the A.O.K. He said the job was done properly and that we had nothing to worry about in terms of the recent dilemma. He also mentioned that I should pop my head up every month or so to make sure that rodents/possums/etc.. have not moved/shredded them causing the lights to be covered.



No worries. 

As for rodents etc in the roof, it's not at all uncommon for them to be there with or without insulation. Only yesterday I was at a friend's house helping put rat baits in the roof, behind the fridge, under the oil heater, in cupboards and the like as it seems that there are rat(s) in all those places starting to cause havoc - it/they went through the pantry the other night and also stole the easter eggs a few days earlier.

Certainly it's worth keeping a general look out for any sort of pest infestation in your home (and office etc) regardless of whether you own it or are renting. 

Rats / mice will build a nest using whatever materials they can find and usually that ends up being something flammable like paper, grass etc. Needless to say what will happen if a rat chooses to build its nest right next to something that normally gets hot...

As for insulation, I was somewhat surprised to find that my friend's flat roof rented house built circa 1970 (and completely original inside - it's like stepping into a time machine going in there...) has two layers of insulation in the roof. Foil directly under the roofing iron plus blow in fibreglass as well. It's still costing $1000 a year to heat the place though so it's a pity there's no insulation in the walls and under the floor.


----------



## bellenuit (10 April 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> they went through the pantry the other night and also stole the easter eggs a few days earlier.




I tried to use that excuse last week but nobody would buy it.


----------



## trainspotter (12 April 2010)

Prime Minister Rudd’s has spent well over $1.5 billion insulating 1.1 million homes. He’s now going to spend several hundred millions more checking each roof, identifying the estimated 240,000 dangerous or dodgy installations, and ripping them out. He’s done something only to undo it again. Because money is spent making it happen and then reversing it, what’s plainly waste becomes economic wisdom at least in Mr Rudd’s current guise as a born again Keynesian. The home insulation programme, hastily conceived and incompetently executed, has degenerated into little more than a make-work programme: almost as futile as shovelling sand hills from one spot to another and back again; only marginally more useful than painting rocks white. Installing insulation only to rip it out notionally constitutes economic activity but is actually a parody of productive work.


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> only marginally more useful than painting rocks white.



Painting rocks white is indeed useful under certain circumstances - I've seen it done for some actual benefit (road safety in this instace).


----------



## Julia (12 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Prime Minister Rudd’s has spent well over $1.5 billion insulating 1.1 million homes. He’s now going to spend several hundred millions more checking each roof, identifying the estimated 240,000 dangerous or dodgy installations, and ripping them out. He’s done something only to undo it again. Because money is spent making it happen and then reversing it, what’s plainly waste becomes economic wisdom at least in Mr Rudd’s current guise as a born again Keynesian. The home insulation programme, hastily conceived and incompetently executed, has degenerated into little more than a make-work programme: almost as futile as shovelling sand hills from one spot to another and back again; only marginally more useful than painting rocks white. Installing insulation only to rip it out notionally constitutes economic activity but is actually a parody of productive work.



So true.

The wonder of job creation continues.  Ms Gillard has now announced the spending of further multiple millions of dollars for an Enquiry into the rorts involved in the Education Building Revolution.
Just no limit to the spending of taxpayer dollars with enquiries as to where it all went wrong.


----------



## Bolle (12 April 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> Painting rocks white is indeed useful under certain circumstances - I've seen it done for some actual benefit (road safety in this instace).




This is true, but I was under the impression he thought it was *slightly* useful, just not *greatly* useful.  Has to at least be one small iota of useful for it to be a benchmark of minor usefulness...

On the other hand, there are occasions when paintings rocks white is an overpriced exercise in cultural dereliction, such as when the government paid a bunch of unemployed aboriginal youths to 'repaint' some Wandjina (like a rain god) paintings in the Kimberley ranges - something that was supposed to be done only by trained, initiated artists from the relevant tribes, using traditional materials... but in this instance they were kids, and hopelessly untrained, just given a pot of dulux paint and told to go for it.  destroyed them entirely.  Sure, the rocks are white now, but it's not what anybody wanted.  

You have to wonder how some people can get such simple things so amazingly wrong.  bureaucrats seem to have it down to a fine art.


----------



## pilots (12 April 2010)

Julia said:


> So true.
> 
> The wonder of job creation continues.  Ms Gillard has now announced the spending of further multiple millions of dollars for an Enquiry into the rorts involved in the Education Building Revolution.
> Just no limit to the spending of taxpayer dollars with enquiries as to where it all went wrong.




Julia, come on its ONLY 14Mil to set up a inquiry to find out that the money has gone to all her mates, God help any one who has to clean up this mess what they have gone.


----------



## trainspotter (13 April 2010)

Peter Garrett demoted ! "How can we sleep while our beds are burning" has taken on a whole new meaning for me now ! Greg Combet has conveniently sidestepped the media backlash on this one and Julia Gillard seems to be the vox pop for this debacle. 14 million dollars to inspect (not rectify) .......... Pffffffffffttttttt Wait for the millions more to FIX this catastrophe. Where is the money coming from by the way? The Government is borrowing about $1 billion a week, largely from overseas, to pay for its spending programmes. By 2012, the Government’s net public debt will surge to $135 billion. That’s about $13,500 for each of Australia’s 10 million-odd households.


----------



## pilots (13 April 2010)

Trainspotter, can we take it that you WON'T be handing out how to vote cards for the labor party at the next election???


----------



## trainspotter (13 April 2010)

pilots said:


> Trainspotter, can we take it that you WON'T be handing out how to vote cards for the labor party at the next election???




You can take that to the bank pilots. I am all for any government that will STOP this kind of bungling:

1) Northern Territory aboriginal housing scheme has spent 45 million and NOT ONE house has been built.

2) Grocery Choice was setup and shut down before it began at a cost of 10 million.

3) 150 permanent staff on The Department of Climate Change and a non - existent trading scheme in sight.

4) Insulation Debacle - Enuff said.

5) A taskforce setup to monitor the BER Scheme rorted for millions !

6) The National Broadband Network’s $43 billion investment was announced without even a business plan. 

I could go on and on but it would be pointless as the electorate will not respond to facts and are more likely to believe the bovine excreta and spin that the Labor Party produces in voluminous amounts.


----------



## Julia (13 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I could go on and on but it would be pointless as the electorate will not respond to facts and are more likely to believe the bovine excreta and spin that the Labor Party produces in voluminous amounts.



That's true, but why?  This is what gets me.   Does Joe Citizen just not listen to the news, not consider the incredible wasting of their tax dollars, observe stuffup after stuffup?

It seems to me it has to come down to the Opposition just not presenting a credible alternative.  Just can't see any other reason for the government not being down to about zero in the polls.


----------



## trainspotter (13 April 2010)

Julia said:


> That's true, but why?  This is what gets me.   Does Joe Citizen just not listen to the news, not consider the incredible wasting of their tax dollars, observe stuffup after stuffup?
> 
> It seems to me it has to come down to the Opposition just not presenting a credible alternative.  Just can't see any other reason for the government not being down to about zero in the polls.




The spin Julia ... the spin. Abbott is damaged goods in the media eyes and is portrayed as a mad monk with a passion for **** jocks. Herr Krudd is portrayed as a Messiah to rescue the voting electorate from the oppression we have been under for the past years of naughty Mr Johnny Howard who polluted this country with his "Neo Liberalism" which we must be punished for.


----------



## Julia (13 April 2010)

Surely the average voter is not so stupid!

Might be more a case of having voted for someone, they don't want to admit now that such a vote was a mistake.

I just can't see that any spin can hold up in the face of the monumental stuff ups of the last several weeks.


----------



## trainspotter (13 April 2010)

Media is repsonsible for a lot of the doctorate that is being espoused at the moment. Unfortunately most people are more concerned that iced coffee have a 25% bonus volume content and they cannot possibly drink this extra amount of milk product (actual true life conversation I had recently at a BBQ) I suggested that they do not drink the extra 25% and merely stop drinking once they are full. I was shouted down that I must be RICH to be able to afford wasting this extra resource. I tried to explain that the 25% extra was for FREE and in fact you are not wasting it as you were never charged extra in the first place?? THUS is the mentality of 90% the voting public I am afraid. Enuff said really.


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> You can take that to the bank pilots. I am all for any government that will STOP this kind of bungling:
> 
> 1) Northern Territory aboriginal housing scheme has spent 45 million and NOT ONE house has been built.
> 
> ...



7) Constant on again / off again / on again nonsense with the solar industry that has created nothing but chaos and seen consumers lose interest.

PS: RIP the former APPM Burnie Mill now that total closure has been announced. A sad end for an enterprise that once employed 4500 in a town of less than 20,000 that has slowly declined to nothing following the decisions of various governments, particularly a previous Labor federal government that stopped further investment in the mills 20 years ago thus sealing their fate. The Wesley Vale mill also closed a few weeks ago after 40 years in operation.


----------



## gav (13 April 2010)

Julia said:


> Surely the average voter is not so stupid!




Unfortunately Julia, I'd say yes, they are...


----------



## Julia (22 April 2010)

The government has now canned the proposed revised home insulation scheme which was due to start in June on the basis of the extremely critical nature of the Enquiry Report now in the government's hands.

Where does this leave all the insulation suppliers with still massive stocks on their books, most bought with borrowed money, I wonder?


----------



## trainspotter (22 April 2010)

Julia said:


> The government has now canned the proposed revised home insulation scheme which was due to start in June on the basis of the extremely critical nature of the Enquiry Report now in the government's hands.
> 
> Where does this leave all the insulation suppliers with still massive stocks on their books, most bought with borrowed money, I wonder?




Associate of mine owns said Insulation business. Guvmnt owes him 170k for install work. FROZEN. Not being paid until ALL his jobs have been inspected and given the all clear. Oh yeah ... he has a warehouse full of the stuff !! Want some?


----------



## awg (22 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> You can take that to the bank pilots. I am all for any government that will STOP this kind of bungling:
> 
> 1) Northern Territory aboriginal housing scheme has spent 45 million and NOT ONE house has been built.





I especially hate this one..estimated cost to build each house last time I looked was $500,000..so what sort of idiot would even consider building even 1 house of this type for Indigenous public housing in remote areas?

Would it not be better to train the local persons to construct themselves, environmentally sustainable housing such as rammed earth, mudbrick, and pay them to do it, and give them a stake?

I dont want to sound too racist, but building Mcmansion style accomodation in the middle of the desert for aboriginal communities, is bound to end in failure.

Anyone who has ever had anything to do with Aboriginal Community spending would know the destiny of such buildings



trainspotter said:


> 2) Grocery Choice was setup and shut down before it began at a cost of 10 million.
> 
> 3) 150 permanent staff on The Department of Climate Change and a non - existent trading scheme in sight.
> 
> ...


----------



## drsmith (22 April 2010)

awg said:


> Would it not be better to train the local persons to construct themselves, environmentally sustainable housing such as rammed earth, mudbrick, and pay them to do it, and give them a stake?



It would but that requires more effort than writing a cheque from the taxpayer.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401 (22 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Oh yeah ... he has a warehouse full of the stuff !! Want some?




Does he have any of the following
* Either R5 or R6 (in Pink Batts or Bradford Gold Batts) ceiling batts - enough to cover approximately 105m2.
* Plus either R2 or R2.5 (in Pink Batts or Bradford Gold Batts) wall batts - enough to cover approximately 160m2.

Delivery to Hamilton (3300), Victoria. I may be able to come and pick them up in a truck if the price is right!

Pete.


----------



## trainspotter (22 April 2010)

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Does he have any of the following
> * Either R5 or R6 (in Pink Batts or Bradford Gold Batts) ceiling batts - enough to cover approximately 105m2.
> * Plus either R2 or R2.5 (in Pink Batts or Bradford Gold Batts) wall batts - enough to cover approximately 160m2.
> 
> ...




Rick Smith All Decor would definitely have them BUT he is in Western Australia.  The fuel money for the truck would not be price competitive.


----------



## trainspotter (27 April 2010)

*Whistleblower's claims Rudd new risks*

A whistleblower from the Environment Department told the ABC's Four Corners program that warnings were made to senior bureaucrats about the insulation scheme, but safety issues were considered "of less importance than job creation".

The insider told Four Corners that people within the department were trying to warn their superiors about the risk of electrocution and fires.

"We were told many times by senior management that the technical and safety issues were of less importance than getting this program up and running and creating jobs," the insider said.

The public servants even came up with solutions to the safety problems they had identified. But those suggestions were also ignored.

"There was no way of knowing whether a house had foil insulation or any material installed safely, and because the installers were not trained properly, there was no way of checking that installers actually knew what they were doing," the insider said.

"There was no way to be sure that they were doing the insulation safely and correctly.

"It was discussed internally and it was mentioned by the industry and quite frankly, it's not rocket science."

It is not yet clear whether those warnings were passed on to the minister then responsible for the insulation program, Peter Garrett, or whether Mr Garrett passed those concerns on to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

Neither would speak to the ABC about the whistleblower's claims.


----------



## Mofra (28 April 2010)

trainspotter said:


> 6) The National Broadband Network’s $43 billion investment was announced without even a business plan.



The Tasmanian roll-out is now 6 months late on the NBN, which will inevitably lead to cost blowouts on the entire project.

Only $43b? Dreaming. The cost will be substantially higher than this - "minor issues" such as licensing poeple to do the work (registered cablers with an Optus endorsement aren't allowed to fix the external box to the wall as there is a power line running into it) and what happens to the emergency call service requirements (copper lines are slightly electrified so the phones work when the power goes out - not so with fibre to the premises optic lines) have not been decided yet.

$43b and they still haven't sorted these things out yet. Oh goody


----------



## trainspotter (28 April 2010)

"How can we sleep while our beds are burning" - Diesel & Dust Album Midnight Oil ....... surprised the media have not played it as background music for Peter Garrett promo?


----------



## trainspotter (5 May 2010)

*Rudd refuses to front insulation inquiry *

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and senior ministers have refused to appear before an inquiry into the botched roof insulation scheme.

A Senate committee is trying to establish what went wrong with the $2.45 billion scheme, which was axed after it was blamed for the deaths of installers and house fires.

The committee has asked Mr Rudd, the minister formerly responsible for the scheme Peter Garrett, the new minister responsible Greg Combet, and employment participation minister Mark Arbib to appear. They have refused.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...o-front-insulation-inquiry-20100505-u9ya.html

Where is the guillotine ?? Where are the people rioting in the streets? Where is the media questioning this decision ?


----------



## bellenuit (5 May 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Where is the guillotine ?? Where are the people rioting in the streets? Where is the media questioning this decision ?





Well it is only a few hours since this news broke, so its a bit early to be expecting such reactions. That being said, I don't think it will be any different in a day or two.


----------



## Julia (5 May 2010)

I'm not surprised.  However, their very refusal to attend implies they have something to hide.

I'd expect the Opposition to take this up when Parliament resumes.
Ditto why the enquiry into the BER did not consider the question of value for money.

Greg Hunt seems pretty sharp, so I don't see either of these issues getting away from him.


----------



## noco (5 May 2010)

trainspotter said:


> *Rudd refuses to front insulation inquiry *
> 
> Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and senior ministers have refused to appear before an inquiry into the botched roof insulation scheme.
> 
> ...




A Royal commission will be the only way to flush them out of hidding. Don't expect the media to do it. The Courier Mail made big head lines on the front page today of the two LNP rebels  in Queensland going independant which was far less significant than the Home Insulation debacle.


----------



## drsmith (5 May 2010)

Batts Are Burning



> Up where the rafters burn
> From politicians that never learn
> Flaming homes and ruined lives
> Fire at four forty five degrees
> ...


----------



## trainspotter (12 May 2010)

Coming to a CD shop near you real soon. No wait ....... it has already been and gone.


----------



## trainspotter (2 June 2010)

AFTER 12 home fires in as many days caused by badly installed insulation, the Minister responsible for the botched $2.45 billion program yesterday *refused *to answer questions about the government's promised home safety inspections. 

Assistant Climate Change Minister Greg Combet has said the government would inspect at least 150,000 homes fitted with ceiling batts or other non-foil insulation.

But more than three months since the troubled insulation scheme was suspended in February, the government has *still not hired *a company to roll out the home safety inspections program.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...ons-yet-to-begin/story-e6frgczf-1225874345694

GOSH ! What will it take to get this resolved?? More fires and deaths?


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> AFTER 12 home fires in as many days caused by badly installed insulation, the Minister responsible for the botched $2.45 billion program yesterday *refused *to answer questions about the government's promised home safety inspections.
> 
> Assistant Climate Change Minister Greg Combet has said the government would inspect at least 150,000 homes fitted with ceiling batts or other non-foil insulation.
> 
> ...




Many more I'm afraid, since it appears the Peasants Of Oz have not yet earned the respect of the Court of King Krudd.

_May God Save The KRudd...
All The KRudd...
And Nothing But The KRudd.

amen. _


----------



## GumbyLearner (16 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Royal Commission coming soon. Watch this space.




*Senate urges royal commission into insulation scheme*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/15/2954371.htm?section=justin

By Alexandra Kirk
Updated Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:25pm AEST

The $2.5 billion program was scrapped after it was linked to four deaths and a number of house fires.

The $2.5 billion program was scrapped after it was linked to four deaths and a number of house fires.

A Senate committee has called for a royal commission into the Federal Government's home insulation program.

The $2.5 billion program was scrapped after it was linked to four deaths and a number of house fires.

The Coalition-dominated committee said a royal commission is needed to work through the problems with the design and implementation of the program, as well as its response to the warnings about the deadly risks involved.

Coalition senators say the scheme was open to an unacceptable level of fraud and abuse and the Government had "clear and unambiguous warnings" that rolling out such a big program so quickly would be problematic.

The inquiry also recommends every home that had insulation installed under the program be inspected for fire and safety risks.

Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham says the Opposition is determined to get to the bottom of the insulation debacle.

"This is one of the most spectacular failures of government in a long, long time," he said.

"The home insulation program has cost lives, cost homes and wasted $1 billion plus of taxpayers' money. This is something that we need to get to the bottom of.

"Unfortunately government ministers and the Government generally have at many stages of this Senate inquiry obfuscated, avoided appearing, avoided releasing documents."


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

The coroner's report for anyone interested in reading it.

I would like to ask people for their opinions on two points about this topic.

1. How do people now view Peter Garrett's role in this? Given that he decided to resign rather than work for Kevin Rudd, has anyone determined that they unfairly attributed blame (as opposed to ministerial responsibility) to Peter Garrett?

2. Understanding the context that regulation is about degrees, not absolutes, how should a government (any party) balance the requirements of personal responsibility, vicarious responsibility for a business, and government regulation or red tape as it is often called.

I think the personal responsibility element of point 2 is the easiest one to address in that obviously if someone is untrained in an unsafe environment, it's just not negotiable that that should not have happened and those business are directly responsible. I'm assuming though that there will be a range of views on the other elements.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 July 2013)

They should have had Engineers involved. Unfortunately, the upper echelons of government are mainly unionists, teachers and lawyers and so are technologically incapable.

That said, the firms themselves were acting without responsibility and the full forces of the law should be thrown at them.

The ABC is running the quote died every 1/2 hour, from the mother on one of the boys that died. They asked her about Kevin Rudd and she stated that she just wished him to disappear. This will hurt his standing a lot.


----------



## drsmith (5 July 2013)

Re - Peter Garrett,



> "It's all very well that he's apologised," Mr Abbott said.
> 
> "But now he's got to explain why it is that he did nothing, despite at least 10 direct warnings to him, including it seems four letters to him from Mr Garrett, the then minister back in 2009, why he did nothing to address these safety issues before these tragedies and these disasters took place.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-05/abbott-demands-pm-explains-fatal-insulation-scheme/4801400


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

Has anyone else read the report?


----------



## noco (5 July 2013)

I would like an explaination from Rudd why he, Gillard, Swan and Garrett refused to face a senate enquiry in 2010.

I refer to post #203 of May 2010.


----------



## basilio (5 July 2013)

The disaster of some of the Home Insulation debacle was the governments/bueaucracys inability to jump on home insulation businesses that were just total cowboys. 

The government was intent on  quickly putting millions of dollars into the community AND achieving a good environmental result ie improving the long term efficiency of peoples homes. On paper the best way to do that was using the free enterprise system with hopefully some effective oversight.

Trouble is throwing buckets of money at the free enterprise system is just an invitation to every spiv in town to rip off the system.  And they are simply far more effective at ripping off employees and governments that bureaucrats are at defending the programs. *And unfortunately being a crook in this system was far more profitable and successful than doing a careful honest job of installing the insulation so the good operators were driven out of business !*

Similar issues were face with the Home Sustainability Audits.  It would be really worthwhile to have a dispassionate examination of these programs and establish  better ways of achieving similar results. Perhaps one of the starts might be spelling out to participants their personal liability for fraud and deliberately stuffing up the system.  I'd be interested to know for example if the government has the details of some of the rogue operators and what have been the consequences for them.


----------



## Country Lad (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> 1. How do people now view Peter Garrett's role in this?




It appears that Garrett had written to Rudd on 4 separate occasions outlining the risks and his concerns.  He could have stopped the program or resigned, same thing I suppose, either way he would not have remained Minister.  It is Rudd's responses to Garrett's letters that would be the real interesting part.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

basilio said:


> Similar issues were face with the Home Sustainability Audits.  It would be really worthwhile to have a dispassionate examination of these programs and establish  better ways of achieving similar results. Perhaps one of the starts might be spelling out to participants their personal liability for fraud and deliberately stuffing up the system.  I'd be interested to know for example if the government has the details of some of the rogue operators and what have been the consequences for them.




The report does cover some of this with regard to Workplace health and safety offences (page 75).

Lots of lessons for everyone (page 68).



> Unfortunately, electrical trades organisations such as NECA and the Master
> Electricians Association were not consulted earlier about the use of foil and metal
> staples in the program. If there had been such consultation, the safety issues in
> relation to the use of these products might have emerged at an earlier time. The
> ...


----------



## moXJO (5 July 2013)

A mate of mine in a certain industry body went to Canberra with a list of all the risks at the begining of the roll out. The govt was told by a lot of people with experiance that it would be rorted and unsafe practice and product would be used. I saw some of what went on and millions of dollars must have been scammed and went overseas

- - - Updated - - -

I also remember Rudd with his little notebook as he was confronted by all those legit insulation installers after he sent the lot to the wall. Empty promises is all he gave them.


----------



## banco (5 July 2013)

Country Lad said:


> It appears that Garrett had written to Rudd on 4 separate occasions outlining the risks and his concerns.  He could have stopped the program or resigned, same thing I suppose, either way he would not have remained Minister.  It is Rudd's responses to Garrett's letters that would be the real interesting part.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad




I wouldn't be at all surprised if Rudd's advisers ensured they never reached him.  Kind of like Howard and children overboard.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2013)

I think we did mention, that if Rudd got back to PM, it would be slammed as 'Batt man returns'.

Saw him tonight on the news in Indonesia, telling everyone they can catch him on Kevin Rudd at twit er.


----------



## noco (5 July 2013)

If Rudd ignored 10 warnings of the dangers involved with this scheme, then he should show some decency and compensate the loved ones of those who lost their lives due to his stubborness. Rudd has blood on his dirty grubby hands.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...h-says-coalition/story-fn59niix-1226674700421


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

noco said:


> If Rudd ignored 10 warnings of the dangers involved with this scheme, then he should show some decency and compensate the loved ones of those who lost their lives due to his stubborness. Rudd has blood on his dirty grubby hands.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...h-says-coalition/story-fn59niix-1226674700421





I love the way you start the sentence with "if" and finish with no doubt without noting the important bits in-between. Have you read the report?


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

Looks like it might be the QLD state governments turn also.



> The Queensland government must explain why there has been a 15-month delay in making electrical safety switches mandatory on all properties’ power circuits, the chief executive of Master Electricians Australia says.
> 
> The Electrical Safety Office recommended in March 2012 that the state government make their installation  mandatory, but no action has happened since then, Mr Richards said.
> 
> Malcolm Richards, CEO Master Electricians Association outside Brisbane's Magistrates Court. On Thursday, State Coroner Michael Barnes also recommended "the matter be actioned as a matter of urgency".


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Looks like it might be the QLD state governments turn also.




It's about time.

Laws are enacted which make the average person culpable, even if it wasn't intentional.
Yet politicians can just say "$hit I stuffed up, sorry" and suffer no recourse. Rudd epitomises it.IMO

Gillard, has waved and exited stage right, before the poo hits the fan. Un bloody believable.


----------



## noco (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I love the way you start the sentence with "if" and finish with no doubt without noting the important bits in-between. Have you read the report?




Yes I have and it is pretty clear where the buck stops and it is also clear it is with Rudd.


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

noco said:


> Yes I have and it is pretty clear where the buck stops and it is also clear it is with Rudd.




Do you mean clear cut in the sense that the buck stopped with the Howard government for the rise in construction worker deaths (~50) from 2005 when they ignored both unions and the Australian Industry Group (Section 3.39) about safety issues.

Or do you mean in a more direct sense? if so then could you cite the report page and paragraph please?


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2013)

Dude's view of Labor;


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Dude's view of Labor;




You got me, your awe inspiring cliches are too powerful for my mere reading and caring about the veracity of what I say.


----------



## sptrawler (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Do you mean clear cut in the sense that the buck stopped with the Howard government for the rise in construction worker deaths (~50) from 2005 when they ignored both unions and the Australian Industry Group (Section 3.39) about safety issues.
> 
> Or do you mean in a more direct sense? if so then could you cite the report page and paragraph please?




So that analogy in some weird way is meant to be representive of the Batt debacle.

I think this will blow up exponentionaly, as from memory a lot of people associated with the the 'batts' may be found'with their pants down'. 
I just noticed when reading articles ,at the time, how a lot of company directors had familiar names.lol

We will sit back and see what unfolds, I think Labor are a bit like the squirel in the 'Ice Age' movies.lol


----------



## noco (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Do you mean clear cut in the sense that the buck stopped with the Howard government for the rise in construction worker deaths (~50) from 2005 when they ignored both unions and the Australian Industry Group (Section 3.39) about safety issues.
> 
> Or do you mean in a more direct sense? if so then could you cite the report page and paragraph please?




Page 7 Courier Mail dated Friday 05/07/2013.


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> So that analogy in some weird way is meant to be representive of the Batt debacle.




The response illuminates what people are really focusing on i.e. worker deaths or politics. People genuinely interested in worker deaths should look at the stats, they may not like what they see. None of this negates what I have already said.



Some Dude said:


> Kevin et al very definitely made mistakes in that program but the mistakes were made up and down the line and in that way that disasters happen when everyone thinks someone else is taking care of it.




- - - Updated - - -



noco said:


> Page 7 Courier Mail dated Friday 05/07/2013.




My bad  I meant have you read the coroner's report?


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> You got me, your awe inspiring cliches are too powerful for my mere reading and caring about the veracity of what I say.




:screwy:


----------



## Some Dude (5 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> :screwy:




I haven't reached shopping centre wisdom yet


----------



## Calliope (6 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I haven't reached shopping centre wisdom yet




Obviously. Don't  worry about it Dude. Wisdom will come with maturity.


----------



## IFocus (7 July 2013)

Haven't read the report or previous pages(apologies).

Federal Labor will own the pink batt deaths politically. 

In Law and practice its quite simple but different (WA)

The employee is responsible for following the rules and work practices.

The supervisor on the job is responsible for the training / qualifications and safety conditions (environment / safety equipment etc.)of the workers.

The company employing them for providing all of the above and more.

The state government (not federal government) is responsible for the act that covers workers safety, practaces  and standards set and used along with policing etc.  

Putting tin foil into a roof space is a state responsibility. Ask any electrician and they will reply its insanity. How any state government could have allowed to happened is beyond me.
You could do it safely but would need to bond all conductive material to earth (relatively expensive and not practical)

As alluded to before having the lighting and power points covered by ELCB's would cover most scenarios but not completely all as there could still be some electrical circuits that can exist with out.


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 July 2013)

"TP" is what they used to write on the board when looking at the risk of something going wrong with a project.

You'd have all the "serious" risks like a contract not being let on time, insufficient funds, paperwork not being ready and so on. And there it would be shoved in at the bottom - TP. That's "Technical Problems" by the way.

That's what used to go on when I worked in the public service as such, and I'm assured that it still does. It is both a consequence of, and a driver for, outsourcing. Bureaucrats tend to see the major risks as being in the office, on the basis that they have a contractor doing the actual work and, if it all goes to crap, they can always take legal action against the contractor. Hence the outsourcing of practically all physical work, even though the cost is very much higher than it used to be back in the days of government construction and main roads departments etc.

It is now coming to the point where technical knowledge has almost completely been removed from key departments in many cases. You have "Project Managers" and "Administrators" but nobody who really understands what they are actually managing or administering. Hence external consultants effectively run the place, charging $300 per person per hour to do so. This is to the point that consultants can do the exact opposite of department / government policy if they so choose, simply because those administering the contracts lack technical understanding of what is actually being done. 

We live in a society underpinned by science and technology. And yet government has chosen to virtually rid itself of anyone with scientific or technical knowledge and rely instead on consultants. The trouble is, there's not much use relying on a consultant if (1) you can't afford to pay enough of them at $300 per hour to do the job and (2) there's nobody left in the department who understands what the consultants are saying anyway.

It's like getting an x-ray done. Unless it's something obvious, then you need a properly trained Doctor to look at the x-ray, comprehend what it really means, and work out what to do about it. Government has outsourced technical knowledge to the point where it can no longer do this effectively in all manner of fields.

So there's the underlying problem. Depending on expertise from people who may well not have any practical knowledge in the first place (only theory), who are being paid a huge hourly sum which limits their available time, and when nobody understands what they are saying anyway. 

Needless to say, many conflicts of interest arise in all of this. The words "license to print money" come to mind.

Been there, seen it first hand, and it was the primary thing I didn't like about working in the public service. The work ethic amongst technical staff wasn't anywhere near as bad as the stereotype, but managers simply didn't see a need to have technical knowledge in the first place. Even having a skilled manual worker on staff has a value, they will point out all sorts of things if asked, but the PS doesn't seem to see it this way.

If there had been an electrician involved then we'd never have had this insulation fiasco. For that matter, it would have rung some serious alarm bells for plenty of other trades too. Likewise anyone who has dealt with "cowboy" type contractors would have sounded the alarm also. Trouble is, you'll never spot the problems if you're a career bureaucrat relying on external advice from people who haven't actually been in a roof. 

Sadly, there are many more examples where this happens, it's just that most are fixed by throwing money at them without actually killing anyone. It's still a waste of taxpayers' funds however.

I'm not arguing that we ought to nationalise everything or something like that, but there needs to be a balance. If you really want to understand something properly then you need to be actively involved in it. In other words, outsourcing has gone too far and it's time to get some technical people, trades, engineers and the like back into the public service. You need them to be doing actual, proper work on a day to day basis but then you have a sound base on which to draw when technical advice is needed in relation to policy matters.

It's sad to see the mistakes being made in recent times over things like water, energy, road construction, the NBN and so on which all could have been avoided if engineers and other technical people were running these things and driving the decision making process. What we are doing now, is costing us a fortune and sending Australia backwards where this need not be the case.

Rant over.


----------



## sptrawler (7 July 2013)

Smurph, I can't believe how people with dubious ability are flipping from project to project, for mega bucks.
Just my opinion.


----------



## trainspotter (6 March 2014)

*How can we sleep while our batts are burning* 






> FORMER Labor government minister Peter Garrett has been granted leave to appear at the royal commission into the botched insulation scheme.
> Mr Garrett, a former environment minister who retired from politics in 2013, played a key role in rolling out the economic stimulus scheme.
> The inquiry, under commissioner Ian Hanger QC, is seeking new light on the deaths of four workers involved in the insulation scheme and what warnings were given to the Rudd government.
> The commission confirmed on its website that Mr Garrett had been granted leave to appear and have legal representation, along with the federal and Queensland governments and family members of the dead men.




http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...n-scheme-inquiry/story-e6frfku9-1226847055241


----------



## noco (17 March 2014)

The responsibility for 4 deaths and hundreds of house fires rests solely on Kevin Rudd's shoulders.......Two public servants had two days to cost a multi billion dollar project and all done in secrecy.

Rudd wanted the project to be complete within 2 years ...the two public servants recommended to Rudd that it be over 5 years.

Can't wait to hear what Rudd and Garrett have to say in the witness box.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ays-inquiry-told/story-fn59niix-1226856877459


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 March 2014)

noco said:


> Rudd wanted the project to be complete within 2 years ...the two public servants recommended to Rudd that it be over 5 years.




That's what tends to happen in the public service unfortunately and it's not limited to the Australian PS (same with the states) and it makes little difference if it's Labor or Liberal in government at the time.

A "technical person" recommends a sensible way of going about a program. Need to spend $x and it will take a certain amount of time to complete. Then along come the politicians or senior bureaucrats who know nothing of the realities of phyiscally doing things in the real world and try to speed it up. Then it turn to poo in a big way.

Been there, done this sort of thing in the PS. It's not until an actual crisis hits that all of a sudden the technical guy / girl is a hero and everyone listens. By then it's usually too late to do anything other than come up with a costly workaround.

We desperately need to get more "practical" people into politics in my opinion. Someone other than lawyers and union types. Someone who comprehends that putting twice as many people on a job doesn't necessarily get it done in half the time. Someone who understands why you can't plan everything down to the day and need some flexibiltiy. Eg a 5 year project so we'd expect to do 15 - 25% in any given year, not necessarily exactly 20% per year, and please don't ask me exactly what's happening with it on the 27th of October 2016 (to pick a random date) as planning in such detail that far in advance is pointless in most cases.


----------



## noco (17 March 2014)

Smurf1976 said:


> That's what tends to happen in the public service unfortunately and it's not limited to the Australian PS (same with the states) and it makes little difference if it's Labor or Liberal in government at the time.
> 
> A "technical person" recommends a sensible way of going about a program. Need to spend $x and it will take a certain amount of time to complete. Then along come the politicians or senior bureaucrats who know nothing of the realities of phyiscally doing things in the real world and try to speed it up. Then it turn to poo in a big way.
> 
> ...




A little off topic to a point, but I would like to see some law established to have all personnel, before entering into politics, study a special course in politics at university.

We have too many brainless people in parliament who should be sweeping floors as pilots in the milking sheds on a dairy farm .....Pile it here and pile it there.


----------



## drsmith (14 April 2014)

Royal commission live,

http://rcommedia.com.au/hiprc/live/

I don't know specifically what day or time Kevin Rudd is to front.


----------



## noco (16 April 2014)

drsmith said:


> Royal commission live,
> 
> http://rcommedia.com.au/hiprc/live/
> 
> I don't know specifically what day or time Kevin Rudd is to front.





Rudd has engaged a $15,000 a day barrister to get him out of trouble for the 4 deaths and the hundred plus house fires he created through his stupidity. 

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ink-batts-scheme/story-fnihsrf2-1226885510728


----------



## trainspotter (1 May 2014)

> THE costings for Labor's home insulation program were *drawn on the back of a napkin* by a senior politician, possibly Kevin Rudd, and an industry representative, a former government contractor claims.
> Troy Delbridge, a technical advisor for the scheme, has told a royal commission how he learned about the napkin when he asked a departmental colleague to see the program's costings.
> Under-cross examination by counsel assisting Keith Wilson, Dr Delbridge said the senior politician who wrote on it *might have been Mr Rudd.*




http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...umes-in-brisbane/story-e6frfku9-1226901604114

Well I suppose Stephen Conroy drew his business plan (read idea) on a napkin for the NBN so what is the difference?


----------



## noco (9 May 2014)

One organization were $100,000 our of pocket relating to subsidies and a nervous break down thanks to Rudd. ......I think Rudd gave them $440 in compensation.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...dsun/comments/the_price_of_a_rudd_brain_wave/


----------



## Julia (9 May 2014)

For all our complaints about bias within the ABC, they have been assiduous in reporting in some detail on at least "PM" the damning evidence against the Labor government exposed in the Royal Commission.

Next week will apparently see ex government ministers called to give evidence.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2014)

Julia said:


> For all our complaints about bias within the ABC...




Rather than being 'Left biased' I think there is a case for saying that the ABC is 'government biased', ie it doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Rather than being 'Left biased' I think there is a case for saying that the ABC is 'government biased', ie it doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it.




In the same way it could be said that News Corp is "Right biased". They don't want to bite the corporate hand that feeds them.


----------



## noco (13 May 2014)

Is there a doctor in the house?  I think Kevvie needs one right now.....looks like he has a head ache already.....His comrades are about to desert him and make him the fall-guy.
Oh dear...I do feel so sorry for him!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...royal-commission/story-fnihsrf2-1226916050361

Let the BLAME GAMES begin.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...nsulation-scheme/story-fnihsrf2-1226915765754


----------



## SirRumpole (14 May 2014)

From what I saw, Peter Garrett gave a very good account of himself. He didn't shirk the responsibility and was thanked by the family of a deceased installer for his frank evidence.

An intelligent and dedicated man who was set up imo by KRudd.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 May 2014)

Rudd is on now.

http://rcommedia.com.au/hiprc/live/


----------



## noco (15 May 2014)

noco said:


> Rudd has engaged a $15,000 a day barrister to get him out of trouble for the 4 deaths and the hundred plus house fires he created through his stupidity.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ink-batts-scheme/story-fnihsrf2-1226885510728




Mr. Rudd's outlay of $15,000 a day may very well  get him off the hook.....A lot of argy bargy went on regarding release of cabinet documents.....the Commissioner will make a decision today

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...royal-commission/story-fnihsrf2-1226917332553


----------



## dutchie (15 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> From what I saw, Peter Garrett gave a very good account of himself. He didn't shirk the responsibility and was thanked by the family of a deceased installer for his frank evidence.
> 
> An intelligent and dedicated man who was set up imo by KRudd.




Garrett said he was "gutted" when he heard about the death of an installer. I believe *him*.


----------



## drsmith (15 May 2014)

With regard to the cabinet documents, perhaps second prize for Kev is to take a few with him if he doesn't come out unscathed.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...r-victims-family/story-fn3dxiwe-1226918241477


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2014)

Can do Kev, blaming everyone else.lol

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/national/a/23526889/rudd-blames-bureaucrats-for-batts-fiasco/


----------



## trainspotter (15 May 2014)

Shaggy - "It wasn't me" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g5Hz17C4is&feature=kp


----------



## dutchie (15 May 2014)

The Buck stops here........


----------



## SirRumpole (15 May 2014)

"I have no familiarity with that <document/minute/conversation/person/recommendation>"


----------



## drsmith (15 May 2014)

Watching some of today's proceedings with Kevin Rudd in the box, I note the hinges on the doors at the back of the room require some oil.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 May 2014)

drsmith said:


> Watching some of today's proceedings with Kevin Rudd in the box, I note the hinges on the doors at the back of the room require some oil.




So does Kevin's memory.


----------



## noco (15 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> So does Kevin's memory.




What else would you expect from such a cunning rat?

He has been well oiled.


----------



## noco (15 May 2014)

As expected from Rudd, the blame game has started....I thought he said the buck stopped with him.

A good General would never blame his lieutenants.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-says-kevin-rudd/story-fn59niix-1226918108527


----------



## Julia (15 May 2014)

Mr Rudd has lost none of his pomposity.   I doubt that the Commission would have been taken in by his magnanimous acknowledgement that he had 'the ultimate responsibility', after he had spent most of his time blaming public servants and Mark Arbib.
What a total phony.


----------



## noco (17 May 2014)

Julia said:


> Mr Rudd has lost none of his pomposity.   I doubt that the Commission would have been taken in by his magnanimous acknowledgement that he had 'the ultimate responsibility', after he had spent most of his time blaming public servants and Mark Arbib.
> What a total phony.





Julia, do you know if any of the public servants will be called to the stand?


----------



## Julia (17 May 2014)

No, noco, sorry.  I have no idea.  I hope they are given the opportunity to defend themselves, given the way all the Labor ex ministers have dumped on them.


----------



## sptrawler (17 May 2014)

Julia said:


> No, noco, sorry.  I have no idea.  I hope they are given the opportunity to defend themselves, given the way all the Labor ex ministers have dumped on them.




Especially in the light of Rudds reputation of telling everyone what to do and how to do it, isn't that why his own party chucked him out?


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 May 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Rudds reputation of telling everyone what to do and how to do it



A micro-manager + a project they know little or nothing about at the technical level.

Guaranteed recipe for disaster. Always.


----------



## chiff (18 May 2014)

There is plenty of blame to go around.The ultimate responsibility ,of course,lies with the employers of the deceased persons.
For Rudd and co. they should have been aware what irresponsible employers  there are out there,and not relied on state governments  OH and S to be vigilant.
The government did not understand the pitfalls or risks with a big project like this one.


----------



## IFocus (18 May 2014)

chiff said:


> There is plenty of blame to go around.The ultimate responsibility ,of course,lies with the employers of the deceased persons.
> For Rudd and co. they should have been aware what irresponsible employers  there are out there,and not relied on state governments  OH and S to be vigilant.
> The government did not understand the pitfalls or risks with a big project like this one.




Such a minor point Chiff for gods sake get on board the Abbott government needs all the diversions it can muster at the moment.

On a more serious note I do feel for the family of those killed as its not likely that they will be able to stay apart of the politics being played out here.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 May 2014)

chiff said:


> The government did not understand the pitfalls or risks with a big project like this one.



To be fair, no politician is likely to know much about the details of any particular project they support unless it relates to their personal (pre-politics) working background.

Eg politicians decide to build a railway, road, dam or whatever. The smart ones then hand it to the relevant department to get on with it. If it takes 5 years to build well then it takes 5 years - the relevant department's job is to get on with it and keep the relevant Minister informed. The politician's job is to sell the message politically however they choose until its' completed, at which point they get to cut the ribbon and declare it open (which is usually after it actually started to be used).

But if you have politicians getting involved in things relating to delivery of the project well then that's where it goes horribly wrong in a big way.

In any big project there's basically a tradeoff between cost, quality and time. Assuming things are being done reasonably efficiently within whatever constraints are set then if you want to cut the time then your options involve some combination of increased cost and reduced quality. If the funding is fixed, well then reducing quality is the only real option available.

So you have a fixed amount of funding - OK so far. Then someone decides to cut the time to an unrealistic level. Your only real option now is to cut quality and that's what happened (noting that quality has a broad definition in this sense - eg using unsafe work practices is a form of quality reduction as is using cheap materials or simply not doing the job properly - all of which occurred in this case).

It's the same with any major project. Eg someone wants to construct a large building with an estimated cost of $200 million and taking 3 years to build based on the knowledge of those with relevant experience. Then someone comes along and insists that it be built for $100 million in 12 months and that the design can't be changed. End result - it's going to be a shoddy construction with all possible short cuts taken, safety included.

In principle I'm not opposed to the scheme. Insulating houses is a perfectly sensible thing to do in most parts of Australia from a practical, economic and environmental perspective. And if we're going to spend on a "make work" scheme well then insulating ceilings does create employment and it does bring some ongoing benefits once it's done. Where the problems arose was the rush - local manufacturers couldn't make the insulation quickly enough so a lot was imported thus reducing the economic benefit of what was supposed to be an economic stimulus. And of course the issues with the actual installation of it as well. Had it been done over, say, 5 or 10 years then it wouldn't have been a bad idea in my view.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2014)

Smurf1976 said:


> To be fair, no politician is likely to know much about the details of any particular project they support unless it relates to their personal (pre-politics) working background.




Fair comment smurf.

I wonder if it would have just been easier to pay householders to get the installation installed. The householders would then contact established companies to do the work. The increased demand would then require those companies to take on more staff. State building regulations would look after the OH&S requirements.

If the government wanted particular areas of likely unemployment targetted, they could restrict the scheme to payments to householders living in those areas. I think the Feds took on more than they were equipped to do.

You would have to ensure via random inspections that the householders didn't blow the money on something else and that the work was actually done.


----------



## Julia (18 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I wonder if it would have just been easier to pay householders to get the installation installed. The householders would then contact established companies to do the work. The increased demand would then require those companies to take on more staff. State building regulations would look after the OH&S requirements.



Good idea, Rumpole.  It's what the Qld government did some years ago with installation of home water tanks.
I can't remember the details now but $X was made available per household and it was up to the householder to get the work done.  



> You would have to ensure via random inspections that the householders didn't blow the money on something else and that the work was actually done.



I think with the tanks the money was reimbursed once the completed job was inspected.  A similar scheme was in place quite recently for rebate in having swimming pool pumps converted to the cheaper tariff.

The Rudd government put no safeguards in place from the point of view of keeping the workers safe or ensuring a proper level of training.  It was totally sloppy and dangerous and they deserve all the opprobrium they have reaped.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2014)

Julia said:


> and they deserve all the opprobrium they have reaped.




For the execution of the plan yes. The intention was fine, ie to save energy and create employment. As smurf said if they didn't try to rush it things could have turned out a lot better.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 May 2014)

Julia said:


> I think with the tanks the money was reimbursed once the completed job was inspected.  A similar scheme was in place quite recently for rebate in having swimming pool pumps converted to the cheaper tariff.




The solar hot water rebate worked that way too. Buy a system from whoever, pay for it, have it installed, then complete the paperwork to claim the rebate. An added precaution is that the license number of the plumber and/or electrician who did the installation was required to be supplied without which they wouldn't pay the rebate.

Whilst installing insulation isn't a trade as such, it wouldn't have been hard to come up with an appropriate certification of competency. That would have greatly improved safety and enabled the scheme to be administered in the same way as solar hot water was.

As for the effectiveness, well I haven't heard of any solar hot water systems falling off roofs or anything like that. With license number on the paperwork, nobody in their right mind would do a dodgy job.


----------



## trainspotter (30 March 2015)

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...-scheme-mistakes/story-fns0jze1-1227277448916

Finally ..........



> THE $2.7 billion saga of the ill-fated 2009 Home Insulation Program is all but over with the families of four young men killed in work accidents accepting compensation deals.
> The Government is keeping secret the full cost of its response to the $20 million Royal Commission it called into Labor’s HIP, one of its first major acts in office.


----------



## So_Cynical (30 March 2015)

trainspotter said:


> http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...-scheme-mistakes/story-fns0jze1-1227277448916
> 
> Finally ..........




Any news on the Employers being prosecuted for negligence?  that would actually be news.


----------



## trainspotter (30 March 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Any news on the Employers being prosecuted for negligence?  that would actually be news.




I dare say the insurance companies will be extracting their pound of flesh once the dust has settled.


----------

