What does it take to take note of advice about insulation.

Well from the outlook it was about policy,policy and spending money.
In the end it is about 3 people dying from electrocution and one from heat.

The advise and warning given but Garrett ignored these.

This is a safety issue what is going on, when governments say its not our fault.

We just ignored the evidence.

What's even more ridiculous is the focus Garrett has got on this when OBVIOUSLY most of the blame lands squarely at the feet of workcover, state governments, and the employers. Garrett should cop the least amount, for sure he some some, but of course it's more fun from the RETARDED media to latch on to the rib poking as opposed to getting to the guts of the problem. Kudos to you for being sucked in.

Sorry, turns you and me commented on this initially, but first in best dressed and all that.

Here's my original point:

I'm REALLY starting to get my back up about this. Yes, Garrett didn't do all he should've but let's get this into perspective here. Insulation Installers are subject to state OH&S and building regulations land squarely at the feet of the state governments.

Installers terms and conditions:

http://www.bsa.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/Generic/Fact%20Sheets/installer-terms.pdf

"n) comply with the Program guidelines (as updated from time to time) and all relevant Commonwealth, State, Territory and local government laws and regulations;"

Obviously there were failures there. ESPECIALLY in regards to state work cover requirements as employers.

Competencies Requirements:

http://www.environment.gov.au/energyefficiency/insulation/installers/register/pubs/installer-competencies.pdf

"Completion of the construction induction training (one day course) applicable in their State or Territory of residency resulting in the award of the Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) induction card. Installers should retain the OHS induction card from completing this training."

Etc etc...

How about the media go after the REAL people responsible...?

I was talking about Garrett with my brother and, in particular, his interview with Kerry O'Brien on the 7.30 Report.

We agreed that it wasn't Garrett's responsibility to micromanage the installers, but that it was obvious he was dancing around Kerry's very robust attempts at getting him to answer the question of whether or not he (Garrett) knew before the roll-out that there wouldn't be enough inspectors on the ground to police the regulations. In other words, was rolling out the insulation program reckless and ill-thought through. Garrett's non-answer of this question, I suspect, says it all.

Should he get the sack? Not sure, but I've got my doubts as to his administrative competence.

"How about the media go after the REAL people responsible...?"

It is a bit more complicated than that. This is just par for the course in a country where, with respect to the few good builders out there, house construction is generally of a very poor quality and short-cutting is rife.

There is no compulsion to meet the Building Code, Australian Standards or the recommended installation of manufacturers. As far as government is concerned, the individual home owner can look out himself and this is despite the knowledge that a home owner is in a very vulnerable position. On top of that, the selling of such assets as energy distribution and cut-backs in client service have resulted in the withdrawal of valuable services such as the free routine inspection of new electrical wiring.

So why wouldn't government confidently expect big problems for home owners where it threw open its coffers for the 'entrepreneurs' of the building industry? Maybe it is because Canberra is so cocooned and remote from the remainder of Australia that its bureaucrats couldn't see the writing on the wall.

Government damage control via restriction of information and spin has ensured that the media is concentrating on metal staples puncturing electrical wiring, but there are other serious problems, examples being the creation of fire hazards through not shielding 12V downlights (esp. with polyester insulation) and future health problems through not sealing ceilings before adding insulation.

The problems being found with the installation of insulation should be red flags for any competent regulator to review the home construction industry. However that is not likely to happen, no Siree, not when it will stir up the hornets' nest with the HIA and other biggies.

Such reluctance of government to act on behalf of ordinary citizens to improve building construction is how all of these shoddy practices got a foothold in the first place. Quick, plaster over the gaps, another election is within sight.

What suprises me is that Garrett was warned about the problems but disregarded then, from unions and electrical groups.

Now if a employer did this OHS, and the unions would be going for their heads but in this case Garrett has the backing off the labor saying he did the right thing.

$ deaths and 86 home burnt down so far, and if i was one of those families it doesnt sound like the right thing.

Where is Combet, the fighter of workers but he is in hiding as he knows Garrett and Rudd are wrong.

Hurry up for election time

Garrett should take responsibility and resign because he was advised of problems yet did nothing.

However both sides of parliament have knowingly presided over a house construction industry that arguably has the laxest building code, standards and inspection in the western world AND by far the worst attitudes.

The standard of workmanship is pathetic when compared with what is seen in other countries, for example in Europe and it is sliding downwards every year as anyone who can strap on a nail belt makes a killing out of the demand created by Rudd's over-the-top immigration targets.

As can be expected of political debate in Australia, the focus is entirely on scoring political points, when what is required is someone with a broader view who can see the systemic problems in an industry and do something about them for the benefit of the country and not just for short term political advantage.

It wouldn't have mattered who was in the minister's chair, the same grubby short-cuts, sub-standard workmanship and defrauding would have occurred. However Garrett would have been warned and he was made aware of deficiencies (complaints were common on radio talk-back shows) and he failed to act. He should pay.

One of those tragic deaths was caused by excessive heat, one by putting a metal staple through a live wire and another due to pre-existing faulty wiring.

All of these factors are already covered by existing Workplace OHS Legislation and are the responsibility of the on-site supervisor.

If I take my car to a dodgey brake mechanic and have an accident as a result, should the Minister for Transport resign?

Garrett may yet take the fall for this but it also demonstrates the willingness of the Opposition to use those same deaths for political gain.

By the way, the insulation project was an initiative of Malcolm Turnbull when he was a Minister but it was resurrected by Rudd as part of the stimulus package.

Wobbles; You make a very good point when you say;

If I take my car to a dodgey brake mechanic and have an accident as a result, should the Minister for Transport resign?

In normal circumstances I would say no, but!, had the transport minister been warned of the dodgy mechanic, several times and by several authorities, there in lies your answer.

One major problem with this scheme was the fact that such a diverse range of people were all of a sudden, instalers.

Many electricians and plumbers all of a sudden went in to insulation. Even serurity installers became insulation installers.

Many staff were lterally dragged from the dole office to install insulation.

Why did they do this, because the profits were huge.

The average cost of goods was around $300 per roof. The employers paid mainly inexperienced workers (two of them per job) around $100 per roof and, on a good day they could finnish two to three rooves.

Do the math. $400 for wages, $300 for costs, $900 profit. Three rooves per day, six days per week = $16,200 profit per week.

The blame in my view lies with the employers.

Now if the government didn't have set guidlines for insisting that the employer performed all the required safety checks, prior, during and post completion, then the government should also share the blame.

I hate the current labor government but in my view they can not be held accountable for dodgy contractors/employers, provided the guidelines were set.

Having said that, I think Garret must go for ignoring the warnings, also, there needs to be a royal commision into who was privy to that information and ultimately, who, along with Garret ignored the warnings, as they must go as well.

For cryin' out loud, as much as I'd like to see these two muppets off the show, stop blaming them. Blame the mutts who voted them in.

What gets me is the seriousness off the issue.

Garrett was warned did nothing.

Now he might not be the employer but since he knew the risks, he did nothing to ensure training was fixed.

Another thing where is the great union and labor supporter , belly.

Workers rights, deaths right up your alley or are you holding Combets hand so he doesnt get afraid.

A real union rep would be going to the max and not hidind but since you are labor then the workers do not get a look in.

TAPP, you know very well I do not wish to get involved in your rambling threads.
You are aware of a time and event here in OLO that I regarded as a betrayal of my privacy.
Yet knowing this you taunt me in print.
Being aware of how you conduct your campaigns I want nothing to do with you.
In this one disjointed thread you insult the minister for defense, me, Rudd, and Garret.
If any have reason to defend themselves it can only be Garret, no fan of the man, but your charges are ridiculous.
do me the service bloke of keeping me out of your threads, not much to ask, but you can see I do not refer to you in my posts.

Belly
you jump up and down telling us where you stand but when labor ,Garrett,Rudd allow these things to happen, you would be jumping sky high, remember beaconsfield when the management did not take note of the warning well this is what garrett, did and rudd is backing him.

And Combet where is he standing up and saying this is wrong or with his Mp girlfriend.

So belly you can either comment or just rant and as we have seen it is rant.
One would have to say regarding your passion to stand up for the worker is somewhat lost.
You are payed by the worker not the labor party so act like a union official and fight instaed of rolling over.

And how i run my campaign, well belly if you do not like the truth then stay out of the fire.

Good point Tapp. What did happen to the directors of the mining company. I will bet they can he held financially accountable, so why can't government ministers when they defy a warning and, as proven here, cost lives.

Now I am not suggesting they are responsoble for the deaths, but then, are the mining exec's?

I think this comparison may well open a can of worms as it is my understanding that there are similarities in both cases.

Now as for Belly, well, he has frequently blown his trumpet about how he and his collegues inforce safety at the workplace. If not for the unions, he says!

Perhaps they were all asleep at the wheel this time hey!

As I say, I think we may see another royal commision into this one.

I think Abbott is playing a dangerous game in using these deaths for short-term gain.

Despite all the ongoing political opportunities in blaming deaths on such things as Hospital waiting lists and Social Security shortcomings, the last time I remember this happening so blatantly was when a Liberal tried to make political mileage over the number killed in the Granville Disaster. It didn't work and resulted in a severe backlash.

This may be the time for cool heads and waiting for Coroners reports and all the facts yet to come out. The victims deserve at least that much.

Most of what has been reported so far is just heresay and Newspaper sensationalism.

If Abbott was genuinely concerned he would be looking at ways to stop such things from happening in the future. It was his own party that wound back a lot of Industrial Safety employer obligations in the first place.

rache

do you remember beaconsfield mine tragedy

well it seems that it is good enough for labor and the unions then but not now.

Labor has been in government since 2007 and you still blame the liberals.
Remember rudd said he would stop the blame game and the buck stops with him.
Labor had more than enough time to sort out training, but instead trying to be popular with spin.

Time they took responsibility for extremely bad policy , and it is this policy that cost lives and so far 86 homes burnt.

By the way i am an independent and i say it like i see it.