Hi again Chris,

Thanks for the responses.

Why did you count Rudd as a forced resignation? He freely chose a leadership challenge knowing in advance he was choosing a career change – either to become PM or backbencher. No?

It had nothing to do with ministerial accountability which you claim to be the subject of this piece.

Did you also count Keating in June 1991 as a forced resignation? Did you count the other ministers over the years who retired to the backbench in similar circumstances – unrelated to actual ministerial performance?

Regarding your opinion of the HIP, Chris, I would agree with you wholeheartedly if it was indeed a program that “wastes a third of its resources, ignores key advice from key players in terms of consultation towards safety, destroys long established Home insulations businesses, allows some criminals to benefit from the scheme, pays out entire rebate with consumers having little need or desire to check or question quality …”

That is a neat summary of most of the false claims presented continually by the Murdoch media. But actual investigations – by Prof Stiglitz, Prof Tiffin, the CSIRO, Possum Comitatus and others – show these are without factual basis. They are all News Limited concoctions.

Please indicate the independent research which validates any of your assertions, Chris. I have sought these for some years now, and found none. Just mindless repetition of the established lies.

We can then proceed with the other important questions arising.
Thanks, Chris.
Cheers, AA

Alan,

Yes, i can refer to my own work which I feel more than adequately counters the work you refer to.

You should stop hero worshipping false prophets as if the title professor gives you some sort of infallability, read the documents from the Senate inquiry, and then make your own mind up.

Unlike you, i dont give a damn what some supposed professor says; i make my own mind up from my own research.

And let us not forget what Labor ministers said abotu the HIP, although i am sure even their comments will not be good enough for you with your with your own self-confidence about what truth is. You know everything and all the Murdoch newspaper journalists are useless.

During July 2010, the Labor Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Jenny Macklin, told Fairfax Radio that the HIP had “been terrible. There’s no beating around the bush about it” (Editorial 2010j).

Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, who had replaced Rudd as leader on 24 June 2010, stated during the 2010 election campaign that “the insulation scheme was an absolute mess” (Karvelas and Franklin 2010).

I rest my case. Take it up with Gillard and Macklin.

Wow.
Someone is getting a butt kicking. Not sure if it is deserved, though. Perhaps we shall see.
Chris Lewis and Keith Dowding, who are the 10 forced resignations during the Howard period, please? Just a list of surnames will do.
This will help to resolve some of the questions I also have about your methodology and conclusions.

WOW

There it is again.

It doesn't happen every time but often enough to make it noteworthy.
Whenever Alan Austin is in a bind Sunflower appears. Its amazing.

Hi Chris,

Thanks for this. But you are doing it again.

We request links to independent research to validate your assertions which are, on the face of it, refuted by Stiglitz, Tiffin, the CSIRO, Comitatus and others.

And you say “i can refer to my own work which I feel more than adequately counters the work you refer to.”

Hmmm. Not really, Chris. When has that ever worked for anyone before?

Your ‘own work’ is simply a cut-and-paste of the Murdoch fabrications. No?

Has your ‘research’ revealed anything not already run in a newspaper?

Yes, I have read the documents from the Senate inquiry and other independent authorities.

They all support Comitatus’s conclusions, not yours: “Ultimately, the HIP – as we’ve stated from the beginning, regularly, using publically available data at the time – was much safer in terms of fire rates than what preceded it. Now, however, we know that it was safer over both the short term as well as the longer term.

“There’s plenty that could be said about the widespread and pathetic excuse for journalism that was involved in the coverage ...

“Much of News Ltd – particularly that sh+t sheet The Australian – not to mention the entertainers pretending to be informed commentators that live under the bridges of talkback radio, had their heads firmly embedded up their own sphincters.”

Chris, you also seem to be using another Murdoch trick by quoting an answer from Minister Jenny Macklin without the question.

“It has been terrible. There's no beating around the bush about it.”

But what was the question, Chris? What was terrible? This is fairly important.

Was it, “What do you read of the public’s mood regarding the scheme?”
Or was it, “What do you think of the media coverage?”
Or something else?

The actual wording of the question is critical. So please provide a link to the audio.

Similarly, the quote from Julia Gillard. Please show the link to the specific question as well the answer. Or at least the sentences before and after.

Thanks, Chris.
Cheers, AA

Alan, as I predicted, not even Labor figures bagging the HIP would convince you. You obviously know it all.

Here is an article from the SMH, also bagging the HIP, although again i am sure you have 'the' answer.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/no-insulation-for-carelessness-20120221-1tlok.html

why dont you write a piece explaining how good the HIP is, and let the reasders respond to you.

I will keep on working and keep getting published, what about you?