Paul Keating called them unrepresentative swill but he at least had goals beyond the political.Rudd keeps demanding the senate gets out of the way.
How Rudd blows your billions
Andrew Bolt
Friday, March 12, 2010 at 07:11am
THINK you must now have heard the worst of Kevin Rudd’s colossal waste of your billions?
Think nothing could top Rudd’s spending $1.5 billion on free insulation so dodgy that he must spend an estimated $450 million more to pull it out or make it safe?
Then check out this shack above.
It’s actually a school library being built at Stuarts Point with cash from perhaps the most scandalously wasteful of all the Rudd Government’s “stimulus” packages.
How much would you pay for it, do you think? $150,000? $200,000, tops?
Ha! Try $931,000, sucker. And that’s out of your pocket, too.
For a contrast, check what you’d get for less than a quarter of the price if the school had cut out the Government middlemen and simply picked a whole house off the shelf from a builder.
Ezyhomes, for instance, offers a 182sq m house called the Outlook (below), with a huge central area just right for a reading or teaching area, as well as three bedrooms you could use for the books, or knock out to make bigger spaces. Add toilets, kitchen and veranda and you’d still have change from $220,000.
Or check what the Australian Construction Handbook of 2008 says you should actually pay for a single-storey primary school building - around $1300 per square metre, actually, or about a tenth of what Stuarts Point’s library costs.
This is not a lone example, either. All round the country you’ll find the same astonishingly inflated prices for buildings knocked up in a hurry under rush-rush-Rudd’s Building the Education Revolution, set up last year to hurl $16.2 billion into quick-quick building projects for schools to “save” us from a catastrophic recession that the Reserve Bank now admits was just one of our milder downturns.
This waste is worst in the $14 billion of that money that went on primary schools, which were given just a couple of months to ask for, plan and start building their choice of hall, library, shade or classroom.
And what you saw with Rudd’s disastrous free insulation scheme is now unfolding with these BER projects. Too much money chased too few builders, who naturally quoted mad prices for jobs they barely cared if they didn’t get.
So Eungai Public School in NSW spent $850,000 for just a two-room classroom. Berwick Lodge Primary, in Victoria, was quoted $200,000 by a Government project manager to move a sewer and stormwater drain - more than three times what private contractors told the principal the job was worth.
A Wollongong school couldn’t even buy a school hall for its $2.5 million, even though the one it was quoted was less than half the size of the hall a nearby Catholic school had built for half the price.
Nor does this scandal stop at the overcharging. Many schools asked for or were offered buildings they didn’t really need, and said yes only for fear of missing out on a freebie.
For instance, Yapeen Primary School, near Castlemaine, was given $150,000 of BER money even though it has just two students and may soon close.
Coincidentally, perhaps, the principal has twice stood as a Labor candidate.
The reports of overcharging and waste in this massive program, administered by Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard, are so overwhelming that the auditor-general is now investigating where the money went, and is also asking primary school principals to say in confidence whether they got value for these billions.
I’m yet to speak to a builder who thinks they did.
“I’d say a figure of $1000 a sq m is a very good ball-park figure (for school buildings),” the prominent head of one of the country’s biggest home builders told me, asking not to be identified.
“The price for this Building the Education Revolution stuff is phenomenally much higher than that. There’s been a feeding frenzy and people could charge what they liked.
“You could get a couple of houses off the shelf for a fraction of the price of what they’re paying for (a small library).”
The Opposition estimates that of the $16.2 billion being spent, as much as $9 billion will be frittered away, and no one can be sure that’s not just spin. After all, this Government’s mismanagement of spending already rivals anything Gough Whitlam ever perpetrated.
The Herald Sun’s s front page report yesterday on the latest scheme to be rorted came almost as a comic interlude, since the Government’s Solar Hot Water Rebate - another “stimulus” package - at least involves less than $1 billion (just) of your money.
Consider: here’s a “green” scheme that’s meant to pay $1600 a pop to install solar hot water systems in (only) private homes, but which instead pays for banks of up to 17 free hot water showers at a time for small football clubs like Koondrook-Barham’s, and without even hooking the units up to those feel-good solar panels.
Is anyone in Canberra looking after your money? Hello?
The answer, I fear, is no. In fact the carelessness with which this Government spends billions of our now-vanished national savings on rubbish is so monumental that few voters seem able to grasp it.
Take the utter ****-up the Government made of its signature “stimulus” package - its plan to stick free insulation into the homes of people who hadn’t thought it worth their own good money.
On Wednesday, while most of the Canberra press gallery was off reporting on the Indonesian President’s visit, Greg Combet, the Assistant Minister for Energy Efficiency and for Fixing Government Disasters, finally slipped out the statistics that show the staggering scale of this waste.
I’ll spare you the adjectives, and give you just the numbers that tell the tale.
Homes installed: 1,200,000.
Cost so far: $1.5 billion.
Installers killed: 4.
Homes given bad insulation: 160,000.
Homes now at risk of fire: 78,500.
Homes burned: 105
Homes at risk of electrification: 1500.
Homes with incomplete insulation: 95,000.
Homes with fraudulent installations: 5000.
THAT adds up to about 340,000 homes given bad, dangerous, incomplete or even non-existent insulation, including 50,000 now so dangerous that Combet says they must have the stuff the Government installed ripped out or protected by the installation of safety switches.
The cost of fixing up this disaster? Perhaps $450 million, warns the National Electrical Contractors Association, not including the $41 million the Government is paying to retrain the people it threw out of work when it belatedly scrapped its mad scheme.
Your money again. What an incredible, incredible waste.
Oh, but we meant well, cries the Government. We had to spend all this to save you from the recession.
Oh, really? Sinclair Davidson, professor of institutional economics at RMIT University, has compared the size of Rudd’s “stimulus” spending to those of other developed countries, and concludes: “The Australian stimulus was massive compared to most other OECD economies while our unemployment performance was average.
“As I keep saying, the Government panicked and spent far too much money that we now know was poorly allocated on projects that were not carefully thought through.”
True. Your billions have gone on insulation that’s now being removed, and some schools that should be closed.
It’s gone on “cash splashes” that went down the pokies, and on pink batts that sent houses up in smoke.
It’s gone on massive margins charged by name-my-own price builders and on insulation shonks who charged for work they never did.
It’s gone on Saturday showers for footballers, and on rush orders for Chinese exporters wondering who’d need so much of their shoddy stuff so fast.
Oh, but there’s one statistic I haven’t yet given. How many ministers have lost their jobs for sending your cash to the scheizenhausen?
But you know. It’s zero.
Trainspotter im wondering if you have ever heard of something called the Australian Green house office? im guessing you haven't so let me fill you in a little...The AGO was created by the Howard Govt in its first term as basically a political move to show the electorate that the govt was serious about GHG issues and spending money to do something about it....while ignoring Kyoto
This office handed out grants to projects totalling over 200 mill from memory, and according to the linked document, spent around 50 million annually for 5 years on public servants....running a program. giving away money to organisations that already had money so they could produce plans for projects that never reduced GHG's....over 400 million spent and ZERO result.
Just for the record.
http://www.environment.gov.au/about/publications/budget/2004/paes/pubs/ago.pdf
It may be time to remember that it is the SAME public "servants" that work implementing the Rudd program that worked implementing the Howard program. Maybe it is the failings of the public service that should be called to account.
As you seem to be up to speed on these issues could you give me a rough estimate of how much of this money would return to government coffers through taxes
Overall yes...would be helpful if the senate would actually pass some of the Govt's legislative agenda...pretty hard to get any major reforms happening without the senate at-least cooperating a little....but that's politics.
Thanks for the segway So_Cynical ... still waiting for a reply from previous posts but Oh well ...... you get that.
Yesssssssssss little Johnny did take seriously Global Warming and looooooooong before an ETS ?? You did question me about "The good 'ol days" with NO ETS, green house gasses were something that affected the rest of the world, all we had to worry about were 700 Iraqis on boats trying to que (sic) jump," ?? Slipped your mind did it? LOLOLOL
So ALL this money that had been previously spent with it's mountains of data and knowledge were completely ignored by Herr Rudd and Co only to propogate another Dept. to investigate what had already been discovered? ROFL.
This was all done PRIOR to Copenhagen (GG our secret codeword is out in the public domain) prior to Al Gore fantacism (where is he by the way, must be with Penny Wong) and long before it became a catch cry of the collective masses bleating carbon neutral vehicles and eco friendly co habitation environments.
Is this the best you can come up with So_Cynical? A fart in a bottle? (make sure it is not methane) Next time don't bring a knife to a gun fight or I might just have to get serious.:
Thank goodness we have a watch dog senate and not a lap dog senate to scrutinize and monitor the good from the bad Rudd policies otherwise we could be in even worse cicumstances than we are now. I understand the senate has passed more than 80% of the Governments legislative agenda. What do expect 100%? I hope not!!!!!!
Rudd keeps demanding the senate gets out of the way. What does Rudd want? A DICTATORSHIP. Must I remind you we live in a democracy. He would like nothing more than to be Emperor Rudd and treat our citizens like he treats his staff.
Back in the good old days the Democrat's used to control the senate and actually let the coalition get there bills thru...until they stupidly (Meg Lees) approved the GST legislation...which Rudd is stealthily now trying to claw back from the states...if only Johnny hadn't given it all away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Lees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_and_Services_Tax_(Australia)
Thanks for the segway So_Cynical ... still waiting for a reply from previous posts but Oh well ...... you get that.
Yesssssssssss little Johnny did take seriously Global Warming and looooooooong before an ETS ?? You did question me about "The good 'ol days" with NO ETS, green house gasses were something that affected the rest of the world, all we had to worry about were 700 Iraqis on boats trying to que (sic) jump," ?? Slipped your mind did it? LOLOLOL
So ALL this money that had been previously spent with it's mountains of data and knowledge were completely ignored by Herr Rudd and Co only to propogate another Dept. to investigate what had already been discovered? ROFL.
This was all done PRIOR to Copenhagen (GG our secret codeword is out in the public domain) prior to Al Gore fantacism (where is he by the way, must be with Penny Wong) and long before it became a catch cry of the collective masses bleating carbon neutral vehicles and eco friendly co habitation environments.
Is this the best you can come up with So_Cynical? A fart in a bottle? (make sure it is not methane) Next time don't bring a knife to a gun fight or I might just have to get serious.:
Overall yes...would be helpful if the senate would actually pass some of the Govt's legislative agenda...pretty hard to get any major reforms happening without the senate at-least cooperating a little....but that's politics.
As you seem to be up to speed on these issues could you give me a rough estimate of how much of this money would return to government coffers through taxes
Back in the good old days the Democrat's used to control the senate and actually let the coalition get there bills thru...until they stupidly (Meg Lees) approved the GST legislation...which Rudd is stealthily now trying to claw back from the states...if only Johnny hadn't given it all away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Lees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_and_Services_Tax_(Australia)
So tell me dear so cynical, what don't you like about the GST?
Previous post...segway huh, you made a silly comment about public service waste and i responded with a Howard Govt example...and now your ranting and clearly lost the plot.
You were so coherent just a couple of pages ago...what happened?
Sarcasm is so easily lost on a forum...Howards green house office was created as a political stunt, a 400 million dollar distraction, so he and other ministers could say they were doing something about 'global warming" while withdrawing from IPCC meetings and Kyoto framework discussions.
They spent 400 million on nothing...i remember a wave project up in the Kimberly got 7 million for a feasibility study...but you wont ever see a tidal energy project up there, the money was totally wasted.
Todster ol' son - I wouldn't waste my time in trying to give you such an estimate. Since you're the one who wants an estimate, I'll let you provide your own.
I do hope though, that you're not silly enough to suggest that Rudd's outrageous and irresponsible expenditure is justified on the basis of the taxes it generates for the government!
No you use a dozen schools out of how many as an example,is there any out there that got what they wanted or is the whole scheme corrupt.Cmon.
The money is in the economy as planned i suspect
And they will get a good slice back through tax
A big part of construction materials are actually OZ made believe it or not
bricks mortar steel,cheer up fellas WA and QLD will float your busted **** states
Yes, there may well be some schools out there that got what they wanted.
That, however, does not excuse the outrageous waste of taxpayers money on Rudd's ill-considered and poorly managed schemes, whether it's spending on schools or home insulation or whatever.
If you're looking for return through taxes, you'll always get more return on money invested wisely than on money wasted irresponsibly.
Like you, I fully understand the concept of government spending to sell goods, create jobs and produce revenue for government coffers.
But trying to justify completely irresponsible and reckless expenditure on the basis of the taxes it produces, is about as silly as trying to justify the drug trade on the basis of how many jobs it creates and how much taxation revenue it produces.
If you're not concerned about your money being splashed around recklessly, you should be. It's you and me and everyone else who has to pay for it sooner or later.
It is a refreshing change that the Rudd gang have tacitly admitted that they can't manage the home insulation scheme and have decided to abandon it
It's only a matter of time before they come to the same conclusion about the BER, the Agoriginal housing scheme, the Broadband scheme and eventually the health reform fiasco.
It's a shame that so many billions have to go down the gurgler, before they come to their senses and realise they are incapable of managing anything.
It will be interesting to see them trying to put a positive spin on their failure. Probably;
Blame Howard,
Blame Abbott,
They did it to save Australia from recession,
Etc.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?