Ok, slasher thanks for the insults, but i will bet my credentials against yours anyday, whoever you are.

My analysis of the HIP has been published in academia because it was deemed good enough.

Now we live in a democracy, and all i can say is that most people think Labor is a joke when it comes to running programs. That is why it will rightfully get the boot, because it is not competent.

As for me, I suspect i will get well paid work for a long time yet, so .... you.

Sorry Poirot, but some tossers deserve it.

I mean what sort of drongo would defend the HIP given the evidence.

I mean one minister was demoted, the program was criticised by govt reviews, and the Govt abandoned it. On top of that, senior Labor ministers (including gillard) slammed it.

And now we have AA claiming env benefits for decades to come, which is supposed to be an excuse for the debacle.

And you stooges have the audacity to question my education ability and learning skills.

I mean who are you, besides being an absolute tosser who cant even see how Labor stuffed up the HIP. What is your credentials? If i specilise in basket weaving, you mus be still learning how to use rocks as tools.

Now i admit that Monash is a bit of a joke, but i never got less than a distinction and all HDs from my third year. I achieved this despite the left wing bias of most uni academics, who mostly did not have much clue given they were stuck in their thought mode limited to good guy (Labor) versus bad guy (Coalition). There were some exception though.

To be honest,and notwithstanding my concern for battlers, I dont think i could ever vote Labor again. It clearly attracts to many tossers and know alls who really dont know that much at all.

Only an idiot could defend federal Labor over the HIP (and BER), and that is being kind.

chris, why are you not able to answer my simple questions?

1. if the federal govt funds a road is it responsible for the cost of users speeding (road accidents and deaths)?
2. If the federal govt funds a farmer through drought relief or flood relief, is the federal govt responsible for whs violations by the farmer?
3. is the commonwealth bank responsible for whs violations that occur on house constructions funded through their loans?

if not why then are you saying the cost of houses burning down or deaths of workers through the whs violations of the operators is some how the fault of the federal govt?

if you cannot answer suggest you ask for a refund from monash, where did you publish, was it properly peered reviewed and who by?

If anyone needs more evidence that Wayne Swan is living in Wonderland, here it is:

Wayne told us as late as last October that the 2012-13 budget would end in a surplus of $1.1bn. Now, just seven months later, he tells us that the deficit figure for 2012-13 will be $19.4bn -- out by a staggering $20.5bn. In fact, none of his budget surplus/deficit forecasts has looked like being realised . This man just cannot be believed.

Yet, he has no hesitation in still boasting about his performance to the ABC's Leigh Sales (Broadcast: 14/05/2013 http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3759324.htm):

LEIGH SALES: Wayne Swan are you going to contest the election in September?

WAYNE SWAN: Of course.

LEIGH SALES: Do you think you should reconsider that given your track record as Treasurer as Australians may see it could be overpromising and under delivering?

WAYNE SWAN: Leigh there's nothing I am prouder of than my record as Treasurer.

chris, I have the chance to read your article. Academic papers are not summarising submissions of vested interests with references added according to the form guides. Academic papers are the noblest pursuits, the search for truth, critical, objective analysis.
To analyse the pink batts policy in terms of consumer protection and labour standards (your main objections without oversimplifying the issues you have raised) an objective baseline needs to be established. what was the rate of consumer right violations (burnt or damaged houses for simplicity), what was the rate of injuries of workers. then and only then can an objective analyse be undertaken .
Further the next basic question needs to be asked does the funding source of economic activity in our society have any obligation to ensure the economic activity they are funding occurs with a higher consumer and worker standard than what our responsible legislators enact. the next question needs to be, if this is not a standard within our society does the pink batts represent a special class of economic activity that requires a different standard for the financers of an economic activity, if so what other activities are recognised in society as having similar obligations on the financers of economic activity. quite simply you failed to establish an objective baseline of empirical data to enable an objective comparison, in fact you glossed over other analysis that suggest empirical data contrary to your view. you failed to establish a fundamental basis for your argument in terms of either general principles or specific principles for societal responsibilities of financers of economic activity.

Greetings,

Intriguing discussion.

@Shadow Minister, re: “in Tasmania alone School halls closed … Upper Burnie Primary in 2011.”

Really?

From: “Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works - New Burnie Primary School”:

1.3 Building the Education Revolution

In the context of considering the amalgamation of existing schools, the announcement in February 2009 of the BER provided an unexpected opportunity to seriously contemplate proceeding with the construction of a completely new school ...

Permission was sought in the application process, to combine eligible BER funding into a single project fund amount. Accordingly, an application was made to the Commonwealth and approved in May 2009.”

True or false?

Re Brad Orgill: How about we stick to quoting what Orgill said, not blatant lies from Murdoch’s manipulators?

Orgill: “Given the context in which the BER program was delivered, it is a testament to those involved that the Taskforce has still only received 332 complaints, over three per cent of BER schools across the nation and at an overall premium on pre-BER business as usual costs of five to six per cent.

“Over 9,000 of the 10,500 projects have been completed since the P21 program was conceived in February 2009. This is a significant achievement. It is clear that the program did in fact deliver substantial stimulus.”

Your quote is from Anthony Klan – one of Murdoch’s most notorious liars. No?

Re: “The $2.5bn only covered a portion of the cost of insulating most homes.”

Untrue. It included the lot.

Re job participation: Why are you quoting February’s figure, SM? We have March and April numbers. Cherry picking?

Do you agree that whatever time series we use, we find:

* The lowest point under Howard was below Labor’s lowest point.

* The highest point under Howard was below Labor’s highest point.

* The average level under Howard was below Labor’s average.

* Five and half years after Howard took office the rate was lower than after five and half years of Labor.

* Howard's level was always below that of comparable nations. The level under Labor is now well above that of comparable nations.

Cheers