I am surprised how fast this RC has been set up and by the huge costs in doing so.
It may well be Kevin Rudd unfairly failed to take the advice of his Minister.
But lets look at the way Australian workplace safety works.
If we can do that I think the costs of flogging a now gone PM may seem excessive to all.
Margret Thatcher first changed the British system of OH and S.We took our current system from hers.
It calls for Employer/Employee consultation on work place safety, always.
Accountability falls first on them both for accidents, fines and even imprisonment should follow the system says.
Union health and safety officers, mostly trained officials, have the right to inspect work sites and even stop work if it is unsafe.
*Here is a fault line in the system, some militant unions use this power to *create* safety issues*
Without a doubt in my view ten layers of different people had a closer hands on duty to find these installers, the guilty few, and stop them working.
Work Cover in all its different forms in any state did no do its job, coming in *only after a death*
Employee training has by *law* to include safe work practices instruction.
Too safe work practice calls for tool box meetings at least at the start of a job weekly or even daily if jobs change.
Workers and boss must review what is said and record them on paper.
In the end Tony Abbott5 and his front bench governing as if they are in opposition may see only wasted money come from this Royal Commission.
It is long term practice of all governments both sides, to contract out work to shonks, even the Ministers family.

Goodness and OMG, Belly! Sorry stuff.

It is plain why you would like all similar to you to link arms and get in step to find something, anything to beat up that Abbott bloke for.

There you go, I have given you and 'in', so go for it.

The problem with the soldiers for either side having a go at this, is that the systemic problems of the construction industry will never see the light of day. Besides, both have a vested interest, albeit different, in ensuring it stays that way.

The crux of the problem is that while there are Australian Standards, a Building Code and manufacturers' installation guides, no builder is obliged by regulation to meet any of that as a minimum. For example, thousands of new houses have wet areas that leak, causing structural damage. However if the relevant building Standard is followed that is a very unlikely event indeed.

During construction, the owner cannot challenge (say) the lack of proper waterproofing or the usual particle board/timber floor in lieu of the recommended compressed sheeting. The owner has to wait until problems evidence which can be years since and prove the original slack building and corner-cutting that did not meet the Standard, caused the damage. The builder will blame 'maintenance' and all sorts of other 'outs'. It is like trying to trap a rat in a wire-netting cage.

So the guvvy building standards inspectors are always diplomats and never proactive.

OK, on with the usual exchange of insults between the warring sides. The very last thing either side would want to do is represent the public and fix systemic problems, when it is the unions and builders who donate those wads for their electioneering.

Third sentence, 'and' should be 'an'.

I have no intention of answering that poster, ever.
And on putting up this thread want only to get an answer.
What is to be gained from it what out comes and yes why is it forming at a time cuts are about to hurt even cripple.

May I ask this? look at my first post,can anyone see my comments about the filth in my party?
Can they too see my admission Rudd maybe/did not take advice from his minister?
Why then will some make them selves look silly by saying I seek to coverup wrong here.
No matter what the findings are [and they will be damning to Labor] no one will suffer because of the result.
This former union official *Trained in Occupational Health and Safety*
Again puts the step GOVERNMENT REGULATION supports.
An inspection by Employer/Employee is held, union is able to take part.
If it is thought to be unsafe work stops, if boss refuses union or work cover take him to court.
This being the case,that just these first steps should ensure it is fixed in what way can the country,s Prime Minister other than morally beheld to account.
What is Abbott,s reasoning in spending so much
Less than one percent of those working on this project would be union members.
It has always been so in housing.
Unions wanted to get a foot hold, using safety as they do.
Rudd like many here, may have known that and stood for too long against that he however did not hold responsibility for the deaths and firers.
Government run work cover may have blood on their hands,a sloth like group of work dodgers they act only after not before.

Fail!

More subs and more jobs for union officials is not the answer. There are far too many union officials involved in sly deals and visiting knock shops.

It is simple enough, as a minimum requirement all builders must comply with the available Australian Standard and manufacturers' installation guides. In the event that there is no available Standard, Standards Australia to rectify through consultation with industry.

Honestly, as if more union heavies are needed expecting brown paper envelopes with tickets to the footy and spending money for the escort.

Given the nature of politics it's very likely there is a strong element of politicking in decisions around the Royal Commission however given the nature of some of the claims/suggestions surrounding the setup of the scheme I think its well worthy of investigation (and prosecution if those suspicions are proven to be true).

Whilst its not always happened or happened as quickly as it should most of us would have no trouble with an investigation where the CEO of a company was suspected of ignoring important safety advice while pushing a product to market which may then have contributed to the deaths of individuals.

There are other parties who had significant roles in regard to training and equipping installers, their handling of those responsibilities should not negate the responsibility of the instigators of the scheme if its shown that safety warnings were not given due weight in the setup of the scheme.

I don't know the truths of the claims about warnings and some other issues around the pink bats scheme but all to often politicians seem willing to promote schemes which do real harm to individuals with little or regard for that harm done. The idea that some may be held to account for that disregard has some merit.

R0bert

It is unlikely to identify and lead to the correction of existing serious systemic problems in home building that result in sub-standard building in Australia. Sub-standard compared with the Standards and more so if comparison is made with home construction in (say) Europe.

It is noticeable for instance that no-one has mentioned that power points are installed without the cheap protective back-cover despite the aluminium sarking in walls for instance. Nor is there any concern apparent that electrical flex is bare in open roof areas, instead of being encased in the cheap plastic conduit as was previously required.

In home construction the Tribunals deal with thousands of complaints annually concerning fundamental, serious building construction breaches that most European builders would themselves be demanding a government inquiry and proactive inspection to keep out the hundreds of cowboys active in the industry.

But as well, cut-backs and sales of electricity supply have made electrical inspection of new homes a thing of the past.

However contractors are continually stretching the envelope in safety as well, with their corner-cutting. If anyone cares to join the dots, there are regular events, some reported, examples being balustrade and balcony collapses (many seriously injured in one instance in Queensland).
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/balcony-death-family-to-sue/story-e6freoof-1226360649808

The subject Royal Commission is narrowly focussed, which must give heart to all who are raking in windfall profits from the sub-standard building that is foisted upon Aussie consumers. Useful for political purposes but once again the builder's ute has left the site and only the superficial flaws are obvious, as the saying goes in Oz.

Hi Belly,

Just taking a break from all the cooking.
The following link may be of interest:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/12/16/policy-politics/royal-commission-without-mission

Fingers-crossed that the Royal Commission will be about
more than just finger-pointing and politics. Hopefully
they'll achieve something for the future safety of workers.
Otherwise - it's a very expensive way to try to gain
political mileage by the government.

Hi Belly,

You started this thread about the RC into the pink bats and immediately followed your introduction with a giant Unicorn and mitigation for the sins of the ALP ingeneral and KRudd in particular.

As discussed previously, I do feel sorry for you. You cling to the remnants of the Union movement and the ALP, variously blaming “parts” of each movement for the transgressions that even you find hard to excuse.

There is no longer a “union movement” and there is no longer the traditional ALP that you once loved. Both have been subsumed by progressives that “appear” to share your ideology but they do not share your ”motivation or purpose”.

These Progressives were initially of great value to the traditional political Party left because the Progressives were able to represent the Labor party left in area’s where they had not traditionally enjoyed strong representation. These might include some of humanities academia, political elites, the so called intelligentsia, wealthy inner city dwellers, many bureaucrats, some in the judiciary, celebrities, activist media, commentariat and well resourced activist NGO’s. None of which could previously be described as part of the traditional working class or their representatives.

They are instead, professional power players in each and every domain they occupy. They have established and enjoy “parasitic” relationships with the groups (hosts) with which they choose to align themselves.

The trade union movement for example, initially benefited from the Progressives through the “injection” of external “professional” and academically qualified officials who in many cases “displaced” traditional representative member officials. It seems evident that this initial benefit soon evaporated as the new class of union officials/managers established themselves in the union management roles, drawing executive salaries and commensurate benefits packages.

You and your like have lost everything you ever supported. It serves no purpose to pretend that there is something of value left, particularly when you seek to blame others for the apathy of the true believers who allowed this all to happen on your watch.

Get over it and move on Belly, it’s over

Considering that this matter was well and truly investigated some time ago and handed down rulings and judgements, this new approach is nothing more than political opportunism and the chance for an Abbott free-kick.

Considering the main players have since left the stage even that will produce little of value, despite Team Abbott being well-and-truly on the decline.

However there may be unforseen consequences for how this and future governments should operate and it will be interesting to see if any resulting recommendations are adopted or quietly ignored.

Spin Doc we some times agree, and I am sure you will agree with the following.
You are a master of spin!
Let me say yet again, Unions did want to control the installation and training of the pink bats installers.
As a membership drive tool,I too had my union had coverage wanted the same.
Rudd has no union background,his aim was to get the job done quickly spend the money and create jobs.

Here it gets difficult for some, the provider of the funding under law did not hold *any responsibility for the safe completion of the work*
The very same folk trying to linch Rudd and the unions,are the same ones who tried every trick to stop safety inspections under both work choices and current laws.
*Undoubtedly, no defence, some shonks got some contracts for this work*
Hold Rudd morally guilty if you insist.
But current work place safety law says first it is Employer/and some times Employee who are guilty.
Abbott is ruling as he did in opposition.
He is spending millions to slander the ALP and Rudd.
He is no leader and is served by the worst front bench ever seen in this country.
Thanks Foxy I am posting after my visitors go to be and before they getup.

I agree with Belly on this one.
I thought the verdict was already out on all those slack pink bat providers?

Why is this Government continuing on with this expensive venture when they have cut down on some of their pre-election promises in other areas?

Surely it's not simply Abbott having a go at the previous Government's obvious stuff-ups when we already know they stuffed up?
It's an expensive way of saying so, if that is the case...

Hi Belly,

There are two perspectives here, those who think it is appropriate to hold a Royal Commission and those who don’t.

There are those who do support an RC and are focused on the families of those who lost their lives, those who were injured, those who invested their own funds to start businesses as installers, those who expanded their businesses and employed extra workers, those businesses who imported large stocks to meet demand, those who signed up to have the pink bats installed in their homes, some losing their homes to resulting fires, those paying extra insurance premiums to cover losses and most importantly of all, the fact that all these people were losers, some tragically in some shape or form.

It beggars belief that someone like you, grounded in the compassion for industrial safety of workers, rights for jobs, fair working conditions, the right to earn a living to feed ones family, secure employment, the protection of trade union membership, the right to an industrial voice and compensation for the mistakes of others, how could you take a position contrary to everything you have ever stood for and not support a full investigation?.

You are now willing to trot out an incomprehensible stream of mitigation, excuses and misdirection’s. It is Abbotts fault, the industry’s fault, it is the victims fault, it is everything except ALP culpability and incompetence.

You should hang your head in abject shame for even attempting to excuse that which is contrary to everything you have ever stood for.

There was a time in your life when you would have stood strong for such victims, now you shame yourself because the need to support what is left of your Unions and ALP is greater than the feeble heart that once beat in time with the workers of Australia.

You are a disgrace to your former self.

Spindoc I will die proud of my history as a union official.
Proud too that my ex members still like and trust me.
Too that some of this country,s civil construction site managers have a mutual liking and respect for me.
That respect was not won by being a soft unionist.
But an ability to see both sides and to cut the junk and get down to fixing the issues.
So my views in this thread are not a fabrication, in no way a defense of ANY ONE, but my truly held thoughts and opinions.
Built too on the understanding past efforts of SOME UNIONS and the wish to hide unsafe practices by bosses, along with a government department slothful and unproductive, often employing the out casts of the union movement.
Work cover truly is the owner of workplace safety as government agent, in law and in truth, for not policing these jobs.
*owns this issue*
Unions have been held at arms length, kept as they are today, away from the housing industry.
Small projects and housing is more often than not, are non union because of contractors wish and too because the more radical unions can not get members.
Abbott is intent on cutting costs, sometimes doing true harm to Education, Health and welfare.
He has enough money however to pay women on $150.000 a year half a years salary.
He too is willing to spend this RC money to try the imposable, further slander an ex PM who is now an EX politician.
Look at my posts try to find other than truth from a man who understands the OHXS laws, who even targets some on his side right here.
Spindoc mate, we are not enemy's but if you can not open your heart and mind, not see my words, all of them, for what they truly are you have no reason to throw mud at me.
Remember the polls, ask again is the continuing negativity of this flawed man a reason Australia is not buying him?

Priests who raped children years ago are facing a royal commission for their crimes, why should Rudd and Garret not face the parents of the youngsters they had a role in killing?

Hi Belly,

A very merry Christmas to you and yours . I've just taken the turkey out of the oven and there are a dozen or so hungry guests to feed, the prawns and crabs are gone and we are well on our way to a food coma.

When you are over your celebrations perhaps you might turn your attention to those less fortunate, those who suffered as a result of the pink bats issue and how they might be facing this Christmas.

Your fine words might firstly recognise that many suffered because of this "mistake" which hapennned under an ALP government. Rather than the nonsensical rhetoric about everything that was an excuse. Could you at the very least acknowledge that many were hurt, some fatally, some economically under the scheme and watch of the ALP?

After that you don't need to say more, no industrial relations issues, no Maggie Thatcher, no oh&s, no Penalty rates, no Tony Abbott, no LNP, just the government of the day, just the ALP.

Have the good grace to acknowledge reality and stop making excuses. Those who are hurting don't need it.

I don't see anything coming out of this, don't we already know what happened. I see this as an exercise in wasted money. Money that could be given to Abbott's rich mothers.
I think there is a few Abbott supporters here that have been scalded and are ready to blame anything and anyone for Abbott's inability to do anything.

It is truly disgraceful that OLO posters who may have previously called for a Royal Commission into a stupid sex video by defence cadets cannot see any reason for an inquiry into the deaths of four men, serious injury to many more, fires in homes and many thousands more people put at similar risk.

This sums up what the RC is all about,

<Commissioner Ian Hanger QC officially opened his investigation with the first public hearing in Brisbane this morning, vowing to find answers as yet uncovered by coronial inquests and other inquiries into the botched stimulus program.

"My aim is to find answers to the questions unresolved in previous inquiries,'' he told the hearing.

"What really went wrong? What made it go wrong? And how can this commission assist government and industry to ensure that circumstances like the ones we face here do not happen again?''

Four young men died in late 2009 and early 2010 during the rollout of the scheme: Matthew Fuller, Rueben Barnes, Mitchell Sweeney and Marcus Wilson.

Outside court, Matthew Fuller's parents Kevin and Christine Fuller said they wanted the whole truth about their son's death to emerge.

Mr Fuller said he did not want another family to endure what his had.

He said the defining problem that led to Matthew's death was: ``Arrogance, stupidity and assumptions by everyone ...(the attitude of) let's just roll it out, make it happen and who cares''.

Mr and Mrs Fuller said they felt their son, and the other three men killed, had been sacrificed for the economy.

"Not only his, but everyone including all of us around here now are talking about four people who got killed,'' Mr Fuller said.

"We don't talk about the huge number that got almost killed, or were severely injured and are still suffering mentally and physically to this day.

"Yes, we suffer every day as you can tell right now, from Matthew's death.''

Mr Fuller said it was often overlooked that more people were injured, houses were burnt and insulation installers' lives were put at risk.>

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/my-aim-to-find-answers-home-insulation-inquiry-head/story-fn59niix-1226788877804

Hi 579,

You say <<I don't see anything coming out of this, don't we already know what happened>>.

I don’t know who “we” is but I don’t know.

So if you already know what happened perhaps you could share that with us.

Can’t wait to hear.

Thanks.

There was deaths but was there any more than usual, given the amount of people working in ceilings at the same time. I am making a comment after to good days! but i will be back.

I did my time as a electrical mechanic apprentice many years ago and at that time the apprentices were nothing more than slave labor for the masters up to your third year. We did five years I think they do four or less today.
Any wiring that you put into, under the floor or up in the ceiling had to be enclosed in steel, screwed conduit and the pipe earthed through an external pipe in the ground.
Today they just throw the "figure 8" cable from one end of the roof in the ceiling and don't even fix it to the timbers.
If you throw insulation batts willy nilly into a ceiling space and start firing fixing pins into the stuff there's a damn good chance your going to hit a live wire.
There are two main methodology failing in this issue. First the actual wiring protocols and secondly the fixing methods of the batt installers.
Add speed for profit and you have a recipe for disaster.
Rudd and the "Musio" have a lot to answer for and in China they would be executed very quickly lets hope that they only finish up in prison for a few years.

Hi BELLY...

I wonder why a government wants to constitute a Royal Commission in matters similar to these ? Further, I'm always suspicious about their motives, because it's a well known fact that the initiating authority (the government) already know many of the answers together with the outcome, before they even consider calling those, who are seeking 'leave to appear', in any event.

Terms of reference are always a concern too ? Often too restrictive and narrow, then the RC is more often confined and limited, with his examination in chief. Conversely, if they're too broad, then the RC is burdened with considerations apropos fiscal constraints. You see, the government likes to obtain the 'most bang for it's buck'. Excessive spending never tends to ingratiate an eager Royal Commissioner, with Treasury either ?

There's nothing more certain when generating wholly unnecessary and excessive costs, to ensure the presiding Royal Commissioner, never gets another 'Guernsey' to ever officiate at another Judicial Enquiry...ever ! Essentially, because government consider he's far too expensive to risk he ever be allowed to run (unrestrained) another more 'lean' Royal Commission, during his lifetime tenure (quorum).

Compellability is a powerful incentive for those witnesses appearing before the Commission. Nevertheless, it can and does occasionally terrify a co-operative and collaborative witness to such an extent, they literally freeze when being examined ? Thus the witness doesn't actually end up benefitting the Commission, even though they're listed as co-operative.

In conclusion, it'll be interesting to see the success or otherwise, of the current Royal Commission into Child Abuse. I certainly hope for the sake of all our children, it's a total success and laws are strengthened to protect our precious children !

Gday all, like I suspect every one of us, I often question my own words and thoughts.
Life has taken me many places and many jobs.
However I am well equipped to know the truth here.
I often tripped over my own thought I knew better than others in my youth, even now.
Chris Gaff is quite right.
Apprentices in this industry are wages slaves.
When the word union crops up people place a blank over their minds union so its wrong!
Again and again I [despite the fact SOME union heads deny it] say there is a difference! a great yawning gap difference, between unions.

Can I say SM, if he wished, as an engineer, could confirm the difference , lunatic some times thugs from the unions worst enemy to its good name the CFMEU! to lets sit down and resolve this issue of the better unions.
And too ANTI UNION FEELINGS before the deaths and fires helped keep the unions of site and out off this issue.
THEY DID try to get a foothold and failed.
Is this country to farm class warfare amongst its classes.
Is the total failure to live up to expectations Abbott and half his front bench has been seen to be, going to use our money to taunt a now gone ex PM.
Look at the cuts planned.
REMEMBER the few truly lost here who made claim Gillards Royal commission was politics based and a waste, not true but remember.
Abbott confronts this year his greatest challenge of his life, himself!
2014 is much more than likely to see not me but his team question his suitability to lead.

I and if we are honest many do not see solicitors and any level of justice as fair or honest.
So no one can know if the fix is in,if honesty or party politics will draw up the results of this RC.
But here is what I see the out come being.
Governments must ensure all work done on its behalf is done with safy.
Too all contractors have the skills and safe work practice in hand.
That work cover or its equivalent must police all such work.
More supervised training for contractors and employees.
By then if justice reigns Tony Abbott will be a back bencher.
SPQR we failed the test at Christmas, did nnot try our first ever Turkey!
All gone now and the salad went down well.
New years day will be on my own king prawns blue swimmer crabs and the sauce?
Victoria Bitter.

<I and if we are honest many do not see solicitors and any level of justice as fair or honest.
So no one can know if the fix is in,if honesty or party politics will draw up the results of this RC.>

That is rubbish. What possible reason do you have to cast aspersions on the character of the eminent mediator selected to head the commission?

Belly,

Having worked in several countries, I have negotiated with several unions, several who genuinely have the best interests of their members at heart, and several that are more interested in posturing and making work impossible. In the construction industry the latter seems to overwhelm. This is the reason that under Labor construction costs rocketed and work ground nearly to a halt.

Having seen the unions stop work for days because the "workers" would have to work 50m in very light rain, because someone thought he might have got a shock miles from any live power, and a myriad of other pathetic reasons, not to mention the scams in charging a levy on the lunch and drinks suppliers on site, my opinion of the unions is very low. The overseas specialists went home thinking that Australians are stupid and lazy.

This royal commission is to force much of what Rudd and Garrett have refused to release as to the advise they received and their response. The pink Batts debacle is a prime example of where Labor and the unions talk of safety, but ignore it when they are in charge.

Dear Belly,

"The four fatalities is one of the most calculated acts
of political bastardry and hypocrisy in Australia's
history. Four lives were lost,
... about 120 houses caught fire in a program
employing more than 12,000 people in the space of a year.
During this time a million homes were insulated. This was
up from 67,000 homes a year previously."

"Of course, these deaths were tragedies. But what was the
rate of house fires, injuries, and deaths prevailing
during the Howard years? The CSIRO's basic research
developed further by Possum Comitatus at Crikey - found the
rate of fires, injuries and deaths was actually four times
higher during the Howard years than during the period of
the home insulation program."

"The correspondence on the public records and tabled at the
various inquiries shows the government was aware of the
risks and had communicated these to the State Authorities."

"Contrary to the false assertions in the Mainstream Media the
Queensland Coroner did not blame the Federal Government.
Culpability, according to the Coroner was shared three ways:

1) The State Authorities:

"Under our Constitutional arrangements, workplace health
and safety is primarily within the domain of State Governments."

2) The Companies:

"That the employers of the 3 people whose deaths were
investiagted by this inquest failed to adequately discharge
their responsibilities is evidenced by their conviction
of offences under electrical and workplace safety legislation."

3) And in one case, the victim:

"Despite being directed, not to use metal staples,
Mitchell chose to do so and died as a direct result."

(Mitchell also did not turn off power to the house
as he'd been instructed to do).

Mr Abbott has not indicated which questions
remain unanswered by the eight or more inquiries completed
so far.

These include, "Minter Ellison's risk managmeent plan. Minter
Ellison's final risk register, The 2010 Alan Hawke Review for the
Prime Minister and Cabinet, the 2010 Senate Standing Committee
Report, and the 2012 NSW Coronial inquest."

As Austin states:

"Those responsible ... for cynically exploiting the
deaths of four young men deserve total repudiation at the
ballot box."

http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/we-really-must-talk-about-the-pink-batts,5622

This whole debacle is ignorant of safety laws that exist. isn't that up to employers not to put their employees into harms way. Employers are responsible for the safety of employees. Not surprising that 3 out of the four died in QLD. I do not know what sort of an answer Abbott is looking for. The host of investigations already completed apparently have not yet given the desired answer.

Alan Austin points out in the link I gave earlier:

"As with every scheme - perfectly good girders were
dropped into Sydney Harbour in the 1920s. Materials were
wasted and workers injured and killed building the
Great Ocean Road, the Snowy River Scheme and the West
Gate Bridge. And the Adelaide-Darwin Railway during the
Howard years. No one labels these disasters, catastrophes,
and rorts. No one condemns the governments that
commissioned and financed them."

"The Auditor-Generals Report into the scheme highlighted the
need for shonky installations to be re-done and for the
crooks to be prosecuted. Yes, that all cost time and
money. But to economists none of that was waste."

We need to rememberd the urgent task was not primarily to
insulate buildings. That was secondary. The main purpose of
this was as a stimulus package to save us from the Global
Financial Crisis. Which it did. The main purpose of the
stimulus packages was to get $42 billion into circulation as
rapidly as possible. "This they did. All of the $42 billion
ended up precisely where it was intended - in Australia's
steadily growing economy."

Austin tells us that:

"Assessing all the data, it is a great loss to Australia that
the scheme was not continued through to the end.
It was truncated purely in response to a media-frenzy of
totally irrational fear and outrage purely to benefit the
Coalition."

"Those responsible for this and for cynically exploiting the
deaths of 4 young men deserve total repudiation at the
ballot box."

Read the entire link given earlier. It's a real eye-opener.
And it's not something you'll read in the Mainstream Media.

Er, 579,

Were you not going to get back to us with what it is we already know? Or you already know.

You say <<I don't see anything coming out of this, don't we already know what happened>>.

I don’t know who “we” is but I don’t know.

So if you already know what happened perhaps you could share that with us.

Can’t wait to hear.

Still waiting?

Foxy you are one feisty Lady, and quite right.
579 too is trying to shed light on the truth but as can be seen some do not want to know.
Shadow Minister I could list the firms international and local I serviced.
And offer no defense for your truly held opinions, some I clearly share.
*The sheer stupidity of the THUGGISH C F M E U*
A union that targets other unions, lies and uses the OHXS laws to force bosses to ? *help them gain members*!
My pride is I took them on and won, every time, even more after determining my boss was unfit to work for did not take my revenge, the thugs trying to become civilized offered me a job, I refused.
Now! have some manners OTB you know I will never again talk to you, so cop this! your needling and loud mouthed shouting changes nothing!
I have more respect for the thugs and mugs union than I do for you, ZERO.
A challenge, who of us posts just to protect their side of politics?
Then look at my continuing willingness to target unions and yes Rudd Gillard and who ever deserves it?
I without doubt know Abbott is stuck in opposition, he has about 8 followers intent on using federal funds to wound Labor.
And he is gone!
Not over night not by my sides hands but by an emerging true Liberal revival in his party.
And in truth I fear that.
Abbott would be a much easier target in an election.
A thought, what is the answer or is there one when you consider leaving the forum to avoid what you see as a troll?
I doubt there is one but we have bled very good posters too often.
Free speech must be supported but it damages some times, if an answer exists it would involve the good will of both sides, an agreement to keep a distance, unlikely in my view from one of note.

Dear Belly,

I don't know about being feisty.
I prefer not to be confrontational - and many interpret
that as a weakness. However, I do feel obliged to
get to the bottom of things. To me this entire business
looks like providing a diversion for the current government
away from the shambles of their 100 days. What is worrying
is what these klutzes will do to protect themselves
and retrieve themselves in the year ahead.

As someone suggested in another article on the web -
"It's quite likely that they will refuse to let
Parliament sit for long periods once Howard is Governor
General and then with a friendlier Senate, break up the
ABC and sell off some of its component parts -
Current Affairs to Skynews, Drama to Jamie Packer, sport
to Singo, and so on. And it will be hard to discover
what's happening or how badly they're doing, since only
Newspoll will be published and show each week, "Surprising
support for Abbott death penalty," or whatever. And then
they will try to make voting voluntary or make it harder,
as happened in Florida, to get into the polling booths after
10.30am."

We're told that "Incompetence is the father of fascism."
And we're also told, "there has been a huge array of incompetence
in the last 100 days as to provide a perfect storm from which
Mussolini's emerge."

cont'd ...

Dear Belly,

This link may be of interest:

http://newmatilda.com/2013/07/08/why-pink-batts-scheme-failed

Its by Ian McAuley - who's reputable, reasoned, and balanced in his views.

While I agree that workplace safety starts with the employer, the problem in this case is that the then PM Rudd, despite several warnings from both his minister (Peter Garret) and industry experts, he, in his usual pig headed manner chose to ignore these REPEATED warnings and push on WITH HASTE.

As a result, it is he who the blame should be fairly and squarely placed upon, as he, as the PM of the day, had the power to shut the scheme down.

Which ever way you look at it, had he acted on the repeated advive, four young lives and billions of dollars, not to mention many ligit businesses would have been saved.

He didn't and he has blood on his hands as a DIRECT RESULT of his arrogance.

He should be judged in the same manner as any employer has been judged for his actions, action that, had they not occurred would have saved the lives of four innocent victims.

One suggestion, if found guilty of criminal or non criminal negligence, would be to strip him of his life long pension as this money could be well used in many better ways than to support this guy.

This is good acknowledgement and great information to participate with experienced persons. I am happy to get satisfied response from the professionals and forum expertise.

I wonder if the investigation will include those contractors who tried to squeeze even more money out of the taxpayer by importing cheap Chinese formaldehyde-laced batts and that may affect installers?

It's not surprising to see Shadow Minister equating the Commonwealth's responsibility with the long-term institutionalised covering up of abuse within the Church - especially considering Abbott's own personal support of child abuser Priest Nestor and the failings of George Pell.

.....I wonder if the investigation will include those contractors who tried to squeeze even more money out of the taxpayer

I hope it does Rache, I also hope it charges those leaches who, not being content with making a fortune, reverted to tearing the batts in half to make even more profit.

The enquiry, as unaffordable as it may be, must not leave any stone unturned.

Like many schemes, it was profit driven and as A rule of thumb profit was about $700 per house, and some were doing three houses per day, seven days per week.

Well actually, they wer'nt, it was the mostly untrained workers who were.

A mate of mine was involved, apparently ligit, he told me it cost $300 for the materials and $200 each for the installers and that the rogue operators would often pull their installers from the centerlink office.

Unfortunately where there is money to be made, there will also be the shonks.

But the fact remains, the shonks would have been shut down and the lives would have been saved had Rudd acted on the expert advice.

He, K Rudd has nowhere to hide with this one and needs to be made accountable for is arrogant actions.

Spindoc I was referring to the host of investigations already completed.
To some those investigations weren't adequate as they did not give the preferred answer.
Abbott with his wisdom and his big mouth, with pledges in blood and impossible promises,has found himself in a corner. Any distraction will do. A record breaking first hundred days in more ways than one. Total incompetence is the norm.

Strangely enough I can contribute to the true statement and question some have about contractors.
SOME contractors are Criminal.
And such contractors getaway with even far worse in working for any shade of government in Australia.
I am not saying most, not all some.
No defense the pink bats race to help the economy and keep jobs was not known for the quality of SOME of its contractors.
Several would be contractors tried to recruit me, by offering to install,even say they had insulation in my already insulated home.
My job saw a unique chance to rein them in, I took it.
No failed and miserable thief/contractor in my time in my DMR/RTA years ever managed to shift their blame to government.
And finally every time I acted on clearly unsafe work practices even in the removal of asbestos I was branded union scum and bad bosses made every effort to make their crime look to be OK and my actions unfair.

Off Topic?
Well no right in the center of it actually.
May I ask that Liberal/National Party followers rather than spit at my cheekiness read about the great fall in governments polling in WA.
At the heart of my thoughts about this threads subject so close you cannot find air between them is Abbotts failure as PM.
We even I, over estimated the man.
Look at that screeching school yard bully Pyne.
Know 7 or 8 more are just like him.
Them comes ah ah gee Tony.
WA polling is not a Labor plot this country in just a very few months is sick of the petulant actions of sad failed Tony.

Dear rehctub,

The Auditor General's Report into the Scheme highlighted
the need for shonky installations to be re-done and for
the crooks to be prosecuted. This has been done!

We have to remember the urgent task
was not primarily to insulate buildings. That was secondary.
The main pupose of the stimulus packages was to get $42 billion
into circulation as rapidly as possible. This they did.
All of the $42 billion ended up precisely where it was
intended - in Australia's steadily growing economy during
the Global Financial Crisis.

The four fatalities in the link I cited
earlier "is one of the most calculated acts of political
bastardy and hypocrisy in Australia's history. Four lives
were lost, several workers were injured and about 120 houses
caught fire in a program employing more than 12,000 people
in the space of a year. During this time a million homes were
insulated. This was up from 67,000 homes a year previously.
of course, those deaths were tragedies. But what was the
rate of house fires, injuries and deaths prevailing
during the Howard years?"

"The CSIRO's basic research developed further by Possum Comitatus
at Crikey - found the rate of fires, injuries and deaths was
actually four times higher during the Howard years than during the
period of the home insulation program."

"the correspondence on the public record and tabled
at all the various inquiries clearly shows that the government
was well aware of the risks AND HAD communicated these to
State Authorities. Contrary to the false assertions in the
Mainstream Media the Queensland Coroner DID NOT blame the
Federal government. Culpability, accoridng to the Coroner
was shared three ways - 1) State Authorities. 2) The Companies.
3) And in one case, the victim - who despite being directed not
to use metal staples chose to do so and died as a direct
result. He also did not turn off the power to the house as
instructed."

"If Mr Abbott feels that this 'disaster' requires another
inquiry, then he hasn't indicated which questions remain
unanswered by the eight or more inquires completed so far."

Abbott fans are desperate at any cost, and this will cost plenty. Answers that will overlap already sieved time, and add to Abbott's private deficit,which has already cost 40 billion in 100 days.

There are posters here who have argued on previous occasions that reviews and cases should be allowed to be resolved first to decide the facts, and there shouldn't be any pre-judgement.

As well, the same posters have often called for Royal Commissions, inquiries and suchlike.

A Royal Commission is independent and its processes are rigorous and transparent. Its fact-finding is open to contributions from all interested parties.

What is happening here is that aspersions are directly and indirectly being cast on the independence and competence of the Royal Commissioner to do his job. One fellow has outrageously referred obliquely to possible corruption of the RC, "So no one can know if the fix is in"! The motivation of such critics must be regarded with suspicion and their foolish claims disregarded.

The RC is conducting hearings. The report is not far off, when the facts will be available for scrutiny.

onthebeach, the devil in the detail with RC's and a lot of other investigations is in the terms of reference and what's included and excluded. Sometimes its about the independence of those conducting the inquiry, more often its the agenda of those calling for the inquiry.

I suspect that for the most part those in favor of this inquiry think that the terms of reference or scope of previous inquiry's has not adequetly included the governments role (the fix was in by the scope) or just want mud dished on Ruddand the ALP, those opposed to the RC either don't want the governments role exposed or they think the fix is in with terms of reference.

My overall impression is that RC's and the like rarely have the power to fully investigate the role of the government in the issue. Qld's Fitzgerald inquiry was the last that I can recall that clearly did so.

R0bert

As stated earlier, "If Mr Abbott feels that this
'disaster' requires another inquiry - then he
has not indicated which questions remain unanswered by
the eight or more inquiries completed so far. These
include, Minter Ellison's Risk Management Plan, Minter
Ellison's Final Risk Register, The 2010 Alan Hawke
Review for the Prime Minister and Cabinet, The 2010 Senate
Standing Committee Report, and The 2012 NSW Coronial Inquest."

"Assessing all the data, it is a great loss to Australia that
the scheme was not continued through to the end. It was truncated
purely in response to a media-frenzy of totally irrational
fear and outrage purely to benefit the Coalition. Those
responsible for this and for cycnically exploiting the deaths
of four young men deserve total repudiation at the ballot
box."

Looking back at history we're told that "as with every scheme -
perfectly good girders were dropped into Sydney Harbour
in the 1920s. Materials were wasted and workers injured and
killed building the Great Ocean Road, the Snowy River Scheme,
and the West Gate Bridge. And the Adelaide-Darwin Railway
during the Howard years. No one labels these as disasters,
catastrophes, and rorts. No one condemns the governments that
commissioned and financed them."

The Auditor-Generals Report into the Scheme highlighted
the need for shonky installations to be re-done and for the
crooks to be prosecuted. This has been done!

Continued baying for blood - and continued pursuit of further
inquires and expense is simply to provide a diversion from
the shambles of the current government's past 100 days in
government. It's simply a ploy to protect themselves and
retrieve themselves in the year ahead. The pink batts provides
an excellent diversion.

Terms of Reference

http://www.homeinsulationroyalcommission.gov.au/About/Pages/TermsofReference.aspx

Appear quite broad, but specific and allow for any extra work as and if required. See these clauses for example,

"without limiting the scope of your inquiry or the scope of any recommendations arising out of your inquiry that you may consider appropriate, We direct you to consider:
all relevant matters occurring during the period:
starting at the commencement of the policy development that led to the introduction of the Program; and
ending at the termination of the Program; and
all remedial measures undertaken by the Australian Government after the Program was terminated.

AND, without limiting the scope of your inquiry or the scope of any recommendations arising out of your inquiry that you may consider appropriate, We declare that you may:
consider:
damage to property claimed to have arisen from the implementation of the Program; and
the effects on pre-existing home insulation businesses resulting from the damage; and
make findings or recommendations about those matters;

but you are not required by these Our Letters Patent to do so."

to be continued..

continued..

"

AND We further declare that you are not required by these Our Letters Patent to inquire, or to continue to inquire, into a particular matter to the extent that you are satisfied that the matter has been, is being, or will be, sufficiently and appropriately dealt with by any of the following:
the inquests in Queensland and New South Wales into the deaths of the persons named in paragraph (d);
the findings of any court or tribunal inquiring into serious injuries, or loss or damage, claimed to have arisen from the Program;
inquiries by State or Territory governments, police forces or other agencies into the deaths of the persons named in paragraph (d) or into serious injuries, or loss or damage, claimed to have arisen from the Program;
the findings of the Report by the Australian National Audit Office into the Program;
the findings of the Review of the Administration of the Program;
any other relevant inquiry, proceeding or finding."

Best wait until the facts have been found and sieved through. The RC is in progress after all and anyone can request to appear before it, or provide written information pertinent to its work.

Some of the wording there is disregarding, we already have health and safety rules. This is clearly an Abbott expenditure.

579,

If any political commentators or knuckles men (and knuckles women!) of political parties are encouraging people to doubt the independence and earnestness of Royal Commissions they are shameless.

Of course the feckless media will always sensationalise for headlines to entertain the easily led. Especially where Parliament is not in session for media hacks to make trashy stories to fill ten second grabs and the endless opinion (read as speculative gossip) columns that the media serves up instead of informed news and articles.

In truth, RCs are arduous, combing through detail to separate the wheat from the chaff. It would be good if the findings could bring closure to grieving relatives and give some hope to insurance and other claimants who are out of pocket. By way of example, many Queensland flood victims are still struggling to resolve their claims, and against government as well.

Government is never keen these days to play it straight down the line. Perhaps government never was. Which I guess brings us back in a full circle to the need for Royal Commissions.

Dear 579,

The facts have been found and sieved through
Data has been assessed and published. More
than eight times including the 2012 Coronial
Inquest. Still the current government needs the
diversion and hang the expense. They can always
continue to increase the debt ceiling.

Foxy,

That is not correct. You need to read the terms of reference. See my link and post, eg
onthebeach, Saturday, 28 December 2013 11:36:42 AM

As well, you deny the grieving families closure, which is heartless.

Definitely has got Abbott's slant all over it Question 1,2,3, are all related.
It is a witch hunt, as expected.

RObert I like your frank and honest style, indeed even today supporters of the once government of Queensland tell us the Fitzgerald inquiry was fixed.
Standing on a ant hill claiming it is a mountain is folly.
Lets look, deeper and at least give my views about Tony Abbott and just a few in his right of right faction of the Liberal party.
No benefit in lies, Labors internal selfy from that day in 2010 made us unelectable.
Folk in truth wanted any one but Labor.
Murdock rounded up the sheep but the result was never in doubt.
Now others think we under estimated Abbott, I think he played only a minor roll, yes he had the smile the white shirt but electorate over looked its well know feelings about the man.
Now? well why is he acting as opposition leader still, why fish in this dry dam?
Surely common sense shouts the only clear out come is damning a past PM.
As is the case for Labor the real task for Abbott is to keep those who usually do not vote for him.
And win over the ones who never have.
His task while trying to use our taxes to rake up mud is impossible to deliver.
LOOK at and read this days story in that Liberal Comic book/paper the Australian.
Then know the puppet Master Murdock himself may call for his team to unseat Tony ah gee ah next year.

Dear Belly,

I again give you the link that sums it up so well:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/we-really-must-talk-about-the-pink-batts,5622

The mendacious Murdoch media and the Coalition are using
their same tried and tested tactics - to depict whatever
Labor did as disasters, rorts, and catastrophes and as
we've learned this tactic worked in the past and will
probably work again for the simple-minded. It's successful
as it is malicious. As Alan Austin tells us,

"This is again the subject of extreme headlines condemning
the Rudd Government and reprising the old labels of -
bungle, debacle, and disaster."

Contrary to the false assertions in the Mainstream Media
the Queensland Coroner did not blame the Federal Government.
Culpability, according to the Coroner was shared three ways:

1) The State Authorities -
"Under our Constitutional arrangements, workplace, health,
and safety is primarily within the domain of State Governments."

2) The Companies -
"That the employees of the three people whose deaths were
investigated by this inquest failed to adequately discharge
their rewsponsibilities is evidenced by their conviction of
offences under electrical and work-place safety legislation."

3) And in one case, the victim -
"Despite being directed not to use metal staples Mitchell
chose to do so and died as a direct result."
(He also did not turn off the power to the house as he'd
been instructed to do).

Of course these deaths were tragedies - however,
what is shameless is for a political party to cynically
exploit the deaths of four young men. This political party
deserves total repudiation at the ballot box. What is
currently happening is purely to benefit the Coalition.
And that is shameless!

Foxy, "What is currently happening is purely to benefit the Coalition"

Casting aspersions on the independence and competence of the Royal Commission is not a good look.

What about you, Belly and 579 packing all of your complaints into personal submissions and lodging same with the Royal Commission?

That is the decent thing to do.

Here is the address and you could let us all know how you did,

Office of the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program
PO Box 7365
Canberra BC ACT 2610

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-running-against-himself-as-marathon-turns-into-a-sprint-20131226-2zxxg.html
Thank you Foxy, I read every link you and most put here.
I am rather amused some, or is it just one, continue to plant the blame for Abbott,s fall from grace on me!
This link adds to my truly held belief the man is acting irrationally, seems voters agree.
In looking at politics we at the least should ask why.
I have expressed a view,that the Royal Commission is nothing but a propaganda machine on steroids.
Shall we agree at its end? will the out comes tell us something we do not already know?

I think i get the picture, The federal govt; was guilty of thinking of the scheme to insulate houses. As far as health and safety goes the laws have been in place for years. OTB says the family's of the deaths need closure. After a dozen or so investigations so far he is of the opinion they do not have closure. May it's the constant reopening of multiple investigations that do not allow closure.
As question 1-2-3 all relate to the govt; of the day, they are guilty of coming up with the idea. That is what govt's do. as Abbott is yet to find out he is the govt; and do something beside unsettling our neighbors and biggest trading partners.
The first 100 days were a disaster,business confidence slumped, unemployment is guaranteed, 40 billion added to our deficit, and what have we got to show for it. If Abbott lasts another six months the people are going to fume and spit fire. We are probably the closest of any time so far of having an assassination on our hands

Dear Belly and 579,

A political commentator lists some of
the shambles of the current government's
100 days in office, they include:

"The Speaker's bias, the childcare snatchback,
the Gonski betrayal, the gay marriage shaming,
the crumbling of Qantas, the Holden wasteland,
the boat people cooking crayfishundetected on
an Australian beach, the fury of China, the
stealing of taxpayer millions to fly to faraway
weddings, the turned around boat whose bow broke,
the broadband blow out, the fresh new splintering
of Tasmanian forests, the 18 policy backflips
of Christopher Pyne, each would have been a
government shaking scandal... but for the Murdoch
press." Now of course the pink batts provides the
much needed diversion - to protect themselves and
retrieve themselves in the year ahead.

Even Scott Morrison has decided to cancel his weekly
media meetings. "Morrison retreats from media on
asylum seekers," are the headlines in The Saturday Age,
Dec. 28, 2013. It seems he has stopped holding weekly
press conferences on asylum seeker boat arrivals, instead
issuing a written statement with no opportunity to ask
questions.

So much for transparency and accountability in government.
No wonder diversions are necessary for this government.

Belly, "I have expressed a view,that the Royal Commission is nothing but a propaganda machine on steroids"

If you, Foxy and 579 have any evidence to support your noxious allegations that reflect on the competence and independence of the commissioner and his staff you should put it forward.

Here they are. What exactly do any of you have to say about them?

<The Commissioner
Ian Hanger AM QC

Mr Ian Hanger AM QC was admitted to practice as a Barrister in 1968, and is highly regarded as a leading commercial dispute resolution practitioner. Mr Hanger is also an Adjunct Professor at the University of Queensland and an Honorary Professor of Law at Bond University. Mr Hanger was appointed as Queen’s Counsel in 1984 and a Member of the Order of Australia in 2007. He holds a Bachelor of Arts and of Laws from the University of Queensland and a Master of Laws from the Queensland University of Technology.
Counsel Assisting
Keith Wilson QC

Keith Wilson commenced practice at the Private bar Bar in 1986. Mr Wilson served as a Federal Magistrate between September 2006 and February 2010, at which point he returned to his practice at the Private Bar. Mr Wilson was appointed as a Senior Counsel in 2002, and re-appointed as a Queens’ Counsel in 2013.

He has a Bachelor of Commerce and of Laws from the University of Queensland, and a Master of Laws from the Queensland University of Technology.
Jonathan Horton

Jonathan Horton has been in practice at the private Bar since 2002. He has a Bachelor of Arts from the Australian National University, a Bachelor of Laws from University of Sydney and a Master of Laws from the University of Edinburgh in the United Kingdom.

Mr Horton has previously acted as Counsel Assisting for a number of significant inquiries, including the Review of the Queensland Crime and Misconduct Act and related matters in 2012>
http://www.homeinsulationroyalcommission.gov.au/Pages/AbouttheRoyalCommission.aspx

Candide,

If you believe there are buckets of dough to be made from rental property what is preventing you from getting a bit of the action?

I have been to meetings of (residential) property owners. I must tell you that for people who are supposedly wealthy as you obviously believe, they sure dress as though they buy at St Vinnies, and the cars outside were older versions of very common, cheap cars. All had heaps of troubles to discuss too, which explained their haunted looks.

Government can't manage public housing. It was always too complex, too expensive and damned unrewarding in every way. So government has unceremoniously shoved its welfare recipients onto the private owners. Tenancy regulations are drafted to protect the most incompetent and wilful tenants and rental authorities and tribunals know how to protect their large and growing hierarchies.

Anyhow, the mums and dads who provide the lion's share of rental housing would be lucky to be earning a few percent gross for their sacrifice, worries and loss of their own quality of life.

Candice, you and others like you should be worried that these mums and dads investors do not realise how futile their property 'investing' really is, forever sacrificing and laboring themselves in the hope of a pay-off one day, but taxed once again of course.

From the facts, not the blurb of the white shoe brigade and envious superficial assessment from people such as yourself, these property investors live on a razor edge and it would be easy for them to collapse financially from a myriad of serious events. Murphy's Law, with a lot of help from 'those' tenants (who are in an abundance).

As well, it would be easy for the ham-fisted actions of government to provoke a lasting run against investment in rentals. Then again, you might think that a downhill run is a good thing too. But once again, you don't consider the negative consequences.

I wouldn't advise any family member to invest in rental property. You should 'invest' in it though for the learning experience.

Dear Belly,

The New Year is almost upon us and with it are the
New Year Resolutions that many of us will make.
Mine, as far as this forum is
concerned will be to simply neither read or respond
but simply scroll past certain postings.

Belly, Thanks for this thread. For me it's now run its
course and I look forward to seeing you on the next
one.

Happy New Year - I'll drink a toast to you on New Year's
Eve!

Take care.

Take care.

Foxy,

It is an easy New Year resolution that requires no change.

For example, you are ducking this,

<If you, Foxy and 579 have any evidence to support your noxious allegations that reflect on the competence and independence of the commissioner and his staff you should put it forward.>

Foxy the same to you and yours remember the post under yours confirms you have made a good resolution.
Some come only to sink barbs in and see no opinion other than theirs.
Very few such posters last long here.
I again ask of balanced posters, what is the reason for this Royal Commission?
Now before answering how many know a truck drivers death in his truck on his factory floor is about the only workplace death *NOT INVESTIGATED BY WORK SAFE INSPECTORATES? WHY?
The answer may be while such deaths are not in the horrific numbers they once reached they are indeed bad indeed many times the tragic Pink Bats Toll.
And free passage of interstate freight may be more important than saving lives.
Why then not have a Royal Commission in to the road transport industry?
Yoy will be told time and again COSTS!

Onthebeach,
Sorry old mate I can't quite grasp what you are saying in respect of the RC bench officers.
The law teams representing the victims families would and will run rings around the bench
team and as far as integrity is concerned if you think that having a few 'silver-tail' degrees
makes for integrity I can assure you I locked up plenty of pedophiles
and lawyers and commerce degree holders for breaches of the Criminal Law.
These RC bosses are hand picked by the government on the advice of their own Law Society unionists.
The results are a forgone conclusion as everybody already knows. You don't have a RC unless you already know the outcomes.
Abbot is simply hoping that he might be able to goal a few Labor Party heads but I can't see that happening.
As far as the Fitzgerald RC ! and 2 were concerned. I can guarantee the man himself was as
honest as the day is long but a lot of the people around him were not especially in government and police ranks.
I know because I was an investigator on secondment from NSW in the first one and Fitzgerald's bodyguard in the second.

Gee Onthebeach, I am surprised at you supporting lawyers and barristers working for this RC as pillars of society!
What would your bosom pal Individual say about that?
Whether they are squeaky clean or not, you are not able to prove one way or the other can you?

The fact remains that we already know that it was the fault of shonky safety standards from shonky Pink Batt installers that caused these men to die, with the Government partially at fault for not setting higher standards for these businesses.

We don't need an expensive RC to tell us all this over again.

By the way, we have a rental property that has never given us any problems, and we certainly reap the financial benefits at tax return time...

Ask yourselves one question, how many deaths occurred once the scheme was shut down BY THE PM.

Answer, ZERO!

Need I say more, because had he (Rudd) acted on the advice of experts, those four young people would not have died on those days and that is one critical fact that can not be disputed.

Furthermore, if the states were responsible, why then did Rudd shut the scheme down, not to mention kick it off.

You people are simply trying to protect the man.

Rechtub! reconsider your words mate please, if you are right how come I am ever willing to charge my side with wrong.
Look I could easily ignore you, but in truth the evidence for my balance is in my comment history.
Chris Gaff appears to have been too high up in the police force to have seen it much.
But my story about road deaths and trucks is the truth.
Poor car driving kills and often that is the reason for car truck casualty's.
But *for five decades* truck deaths have been the *SINGLE WORK PLACE DEATH* not investigated in NSW at least by other than police no work cover ever.
Police get this mob involved in every workplace serious injury but they just do not get involved in truck deaths.
Rechtub you not me must open your eyes, some, very few, may not believe what they post.
I believe the Fitzgerald inquiry ,at least the man him self, was open and honest.
But what other Royal Commission in this country,s history will be based on such as this?
We waited so long and fought so hard for the child molestation one, this seems nothing in comparison.
Do you think I a unionist under value these deaths?
Never but the reason they died is far from Rudd,s hands.

....Never but the reason they died is far from Rudd,s hands.

Belly, how can you honestly say that, when all he needed to do to prevent those deaths, was to follow the advive of industry experts, and shut, or at the very least suspend the scheme.

In short, he weighed up the cost of young lives, against the cost of removing stimulus, actions that would have cost any company director dearly.

Now I have no problems with company directors being hauled over the coals for malpractice, but why should he be protected when he was the only person with the power to stop the scheme, evidence of that being in the way he eventually did, albeit, too late for those four and the many ligit businesses that suffered.

chrisgaff100,

I read your post carefully and it is true that some who entrusted to uphold the law, abuse it instead. Likewise for those fortunate enough to be able to afford the best counsel are likely to have superior defence in court. Although it is some defect in the prosecution case, or legal technicality that allows any to escape their just desserts as we see it.

However there is no better system. We have inherited the best there is available.

I am more concerned about the creeping changes that are corrosive to that well-developed, well-proved system.

While employed with a couple of the 'Big Four' consulting firms I had some exposure to the operation of three Royal Commissions. I disagree emphatically with the criticisms and inferences being made here as ill-informed, malicious and aimed at reducing the public belief in this RC, in RCs generally and also in our system of government. There are some very foolish statements being made at present.

The Royal Commission is underway and the public should be assured that it will do its job very competently and independently. What politicians do later is a different matter entirely. The report will be tabled in parliament and all can mull over it then.

Belly,
The problem with trucks is very simple and very easily rectified.
First you remove the TWU from the picture.
Second you require all truck drivers to undergo medical tests for
1. Obesity
2. Sleep Apnea
3. Introduce a specialism trucking police force
4. Introduce zero drug (legal and illegal) use
5. Increase penalties to include truck confiscation

Reasons
1. leads to 2.
2. Caused drivers to fall asleep or doze at the wheel.
3, Current police resources are stretched to the limit and corrupt.
4. Should speak for itself
5. That would wake up the cowboys real quick. We do it for
ordinary road users why discriminate. Get rid of the TWU.

onthebeach,
The RC will find what it is expected to find and the public will be appeased. Its a sham/scam at the highest level.
If a RC was serious they would have the power to prosecute based on evidence discovered and imprison the guilty. Instead they recommend and no one gets locked up

Belly,

Your claim to be balanced is clearly flawed, as tho occasional admission of some of the glaring errors of Labor wildly over compensated for by reams of subjective bias.

Labor has form in preventing scrutiny of everything they do, and the extreme consequences of the Pink Batts debacle is justification for an enquiry more far reaching than the coroner's investigation that clearly fingered Labor for negligence in spite of Labor's boycott and deliberate withholding of documentation.

Chris Gaff as I said in another post your position in the Police force did not see you at the coal face on this issue.
First the TWU is no strong union in this area federal interstate transport.
Owner Drivers from the end of World War Two join then leave in disgust.
Post ww2 the industry was small fleet owners and single lorry ex military trucks and usually drivers.
It took days Sydney to Melbourne not hours, cheap freely available drugs ,the very same ones given to bomber pilots in the ww2 bombing of Germany became part of the industry.
That part exploded as other drugs became available every driver knew a brand that was better and some drivers rarely slept.
Razor back and other blockades got rid of road tax and the industry took another step.
Owner drivers took on an extra truck, maybe more.
And handed out the *lollys* stay awakes, to under paid drivers content to drive for the CB radio the air horn and little else.
Meanwhile fleets slowly but surely took on these small contractors to carry their goods and make even more money.
The pills became more needed than ever as deadlines became death traps.
Trucks rolled over every Sunday night and week day in such numbers three firms formed just to repair trucks.
Other smaller one existed but every tow truck driver had his police contacts and knew within minutes who owned the truck
Continued.

Not taking a shot at you CG just telling it like it is.
It became a separate industry truck roll overs and a spotter got $500 for being first in, a Cop got that too.
And a mental list became educational for every truck driver, say this if you crash list, load shifted, car on high beam, car on wrong side of the road.
Police took or had handed to them goods from every prang, tea coffee some times export packed meat and always in great quantity boot load to divy vans to? hiring a four ton truck to take three pallets of frozen cooked fish.
A drive of such a lorry rarely faced much of a fine, hard if you have gained quite a lot from his smash.
ICAC put and end to the crews waiting to cash in.
And at least a start was made mid to late 1990s to clean up the industry.
Lorry owner drivers are in lessor numbers and very much more professional.
Firms truly demand professional conduct at all times from every employee.
But some, see the headlines,damage speed monitors and pay for speed not safety.
22 years on the then DMR/RTA I saw too many deaths car and truck, single truck, saw mates die.
Saw a great husband and wife ex prison warden go broke trying to both be honest and too drive within the rules.
Not many years ago a TV crew asked 8 blokes in a truck stop if they would agree to be tested all said OK 6 failed, failed badly.
The road transport industry kills many drivers and innocent car drivers, car drivers kill truck drivers but why is this industry the only single one work cover never goes near after a death?
You are sharing the roads with that nice bloke down the road who is off his head on drugs.

I noticed SM and others thoughts and comments, but just can not agree with them.
However this I pledge if the mirror I have put to you about Australia s Road Transport industry is not true *then I am a worthless lier*
Chris Gaff please sport do not think my words in any way aim at you.
Know I do think a good Cop is worth far more than we can ever pay.
I have suffered, just because I worked [second job] for the biggest and best truck salvage firm.
They brooked no graft and did not use the police approved towy.
After work thrown in the back of a divy van driven at speed over a rough road I was pushed in to a sergeants office and lectured!
He may still regrete it, he was new and acted for a totally dirty large area police stations crew.
I stood my ground and followed his warning *get out of the industry* with my own, be honest or be found out.

Time passed police lost jobs, the newbys went the motor of the criminal activity's stayed.
ICAC knocked on my door, other victims of this cartel had named me to help.
Chief inspector of Police, you will know him CG offered me anything to give evidence.
Including a life time government job.
Do you know why I refused?
You can not ever beat a bent cop he has his team behind him, they feel all bar one and he likes glaring at me all these years after nearly as much as I like grinning at him.
He probably is not yet out of coffee and tea or sope powder even now but he remains unmarked.
We need a Royal Commission it to the safety and licensing practices of our road transport industry.

chrisgaff1000,

I know of no Royal Commission that ever served a political interest, or obviously 'delivered the political goods' for an incumbent government. In fact a government has to be courageous to set one up because they go where they want and are fearless in rooting out evidence and reporting.

Many RCs have resulted in police investigations and charges. The Fitzgerald RC into the Queensland police resulted in three former ministers and a police commissioner in gaol and the ex-premier only just escaped gaol, but his reputation was forever damaged as a result. The long successful run of the National Party was stopped in its tracks.

In my view RCs investigate and report and then it is up to the parliament to take action. Auditors are about the same. Keep them clean and independent, facts and recommendations, you don't want them involved where the investigators should be.

onthebeach
Fitzgerald was honest and ruthless but I can assure you he did not investigate, charge, prosecute and lock up one single person. He had no power to.
That job was down to seconded cops like myself and my partner who put our lives on the line to face off with the filth that ran Queensland at the time.
At one point in time we were billeted in a caravan park at Banora Point in NSW and the whole side of the caravan was ripped off by Brisbane CIB detectives totting M16s and wearing BP vests.
They carted us off to Brisbane and held us overnight. The next day we were driven to Ipswich and locked up in the Ipswich Special Hospital (Sandy Gallop)and it took a Habeas Corpus writ in The High Court in Adelaide filed by Harry Gibbs (later Sir Harry and Chief Justice)to get us out of being scheduled (all down to Joe and his SOD Squad)
We got over 100 bent coppers but missed a 1000 more because the money ran out.
What he did do was expose the root corruption in the job and the politicians hanging off the tit.
Whatever you do 'onthebeach' don' try to lecture me about the Fitzgerald RC. I know the man well, so well he appointed me his bodyguard in his Cape York Commission of Inquiry later on.

chrisgaff1000, "Fitzgerald was honest and ruthless but I can assure you he did not investigate, charge, prosecute and lock up one single person"

Where did I say that? I didn't, did I? Those are your words not mine.

You need to read my post more carefully. Because I said it resulted in charges etc. From a normal reading most would take that as meaning that the RC report resulted in investigations being undertaken and as a consequence charges were laid, NOT that the commissioner himself laid the charges or even found the evidence. That is not the role of RCs, as I explained to you.

You will find that my wording is very close to the Wikipedia entry on the subject and relevant news reports. See here,

< The inquiry resulted in the deposition of a premier, two by-elections, the jailing of three former ministers and a police commissioner who was jailed and lost his knighthood. It also led directly to the end of the National Party of Australia's 32-year run as the government of Queensland.>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzgerald_Inquiry

The whole tenor of my reply was that such inquiries (RCs) do not do the work of investigators and police, they do not lay charges. There are very good reasons for that. Perhaps you might go back and read my post again, and read the brief for the present RC from the link I gave in an earlier post.

Chris Gaff 1000 you are an interesting bloke.
And highlight just why I refused to give evidence to NSW ICAC if you had to face that what chance did I have.
A book lives inside your head that would make you very rich, one I would be first in line to buy.
You and I differ forever on politics but I watched that RC not even guessing how bad it truly was.
A mate once highway patrol then NSW internal investigations helped me while in the former job to separate myself from being a victim/telling my story others did and lost much.
A Royal Commission by its nature costs heaps, I truly and honestly would rather see the current ICAC investigation become a RC to further dig up the NSW FILTH *in my party* than the wasted Abbott weapon of war his RC in truth is.
And Rechtub, true! your insulting view I am only targeting mad Tony?
NSW FILTH should have every cent they own confiscated and serve nothing less than 20 years, hows is that for bias?

Suseonline, "By the way, we have a rental property that has never given us any problems, and we certainly reap the financial benefits at tax return time..."

Maybe you could explain how you legally "reap the financial benefits at tax time"?

What about the numbers? Income against all outgoings that arrive at your claimed profit of (what)?

Next, if you have a rental property that "has never given (you) any problems", you might care to pass on your wisdom as to how you have achieved that very enviable result and for how many years.

The B.S. detector is reading way off-scale.

Quite simple really Susi never rents her place to vandals like you.
BS come if you have an alarm how do you live with your self?

Suze, negative gearing only really provided a healthy tax break when interest rates are high.

Now given they are at record lows, you must have a huge mortgage over your rental to get great write offs, because you can only write off rates, maintenance and direct related expenses, not improvements.

So this then makes you wonder if you are robbing Peter to feed Paul, because my rule of thumb when it comes to property investing, is to make sure your annual inputs don't exceed the annual growth rates in your investment, because otherwise you are actually going backwards, albeit at someone else's expense.

If you do have large NG write offs, perhaps you would be better to consider shares, as they also attract NG write offs and are far more liquid.

There are funds out there returning up to 65% at the moment and they are not huge risk funds either.

It just seems to me that anyone with large write offs in property at the moment is too heavily geared in a stagnated market place.

Not advising, merely observing.

rehctub, "It just seems to me that anyone with large write offs in property at the moment is too heavily geared in a stagnated market place"

Property prices shot up during the watch of Labor governments of Hawke and Keating. Hawke and Keating scare-mongered 'negative gearing' as the excuse they had to have, with 'rich property investors' as the whipping boys at fault for higher home prices. It was actually a balance of payments problem.

The 'rich property investors/speculators' was utter bull too, because it is largely aspirational mums and dads 'investors' who buy rental property. Ordinary folk were strongly encouraged to provide for their own retirement by parallel scare-mongering about humps in population - baby boomers. The latter descriptor includes around 18 years of births(!) and somehow avoids mentioning the overwhelming contribution to the 'hump' in population from over-enthusiastic annual record immigration targets.

Property prices and rents have stalled and even retreated for the last ten years. Owners have been facing high risks (as usual) for very poor returns. They shouldn't have to sell the farm as it were, to realise some return, but even that is illusory if prices have not increased, and of course there still is the capital gains tax to pay.

Suseonline,
Still waiting for you to give your numbers and strategies for everyone's edification.

Rechtub you and I have visited this subject before, I warned of a housing bubble.
And you said it was not coming.
Remember your claims about current prices while unlikely, are I take it in QLD.
NSW Sydney highlighted is seeing record prices and massive home and unit sales.
How all that makes the fall more certain, not sure any government can bring about rise or falls in this market.
Go back re read Susionline comment, then re think did she claim capital gains gave her the tax break?
Look once more and tell me if you think female posters should face words like those used to taunt her?

Belly this is the post from Suze I was referring to.

....By the way, we have a rental property that has never given us any problems, and we certainly reap the financial benefits at tax return time...

We have a rental that HAS .... Implies that it has been held for a while,otherwise the word has would be replaced with will or did.

As for your claim that I though prices would never fall, I don't see where you get that.

What I do recall saying is that our prices and situation would not be like Europe.

I also suggest QLD gas towns would make sound investments and I was right. 400%increases is not uncommon. My land has increased some 600% in just six years.

QLD will boom in the next year or so as the royalties from gas are about to flow.

In fact, we may buck the traditional trend whereby all booms start in Sydney, because chances are, thanks to the gas, Brisbane may lead the way this time round.

On the beach, it was negative gearing that has actually seen returns fall and rents stay affordable in comparison to returns on investment.

Prior to the early 80's there was no capital gains tax, so one could buy an asset one day, sell it for a profit the next and not get taxed.

NG has seen returns on investment plummet to low numbers 2-5% whereas prior to rents generally returned 10%.

the big unknown is how much growth would have occurred had things not changed.

Plenty I would suggest as building costs skyrocketed meaning existing homes went along for the ride.

Of cause the first home owners grant kicked prices along as well.

A first home owners loan with zero or very low interest rates (non capitalizing) would have been a much beget option.

There isn't a bubble. Prices exceeded affordability as traditionally defined.

While on the subject, Australian tenants and landlords should adopt the US approach where properties are leased 'bare bones' and the tenant equips and decorates to taste. A similar system works well for commercial property.

That will result in reduced management, maintenance and repair costs, fewer disputes and much cheaper rents, all for obvious reasons. It would also be fairer for good tenants, who inevitably shoulder the additional costs from tenants who damage property and/or default, which are common.

The change would allow owners to offer much longer leases to good tenants, again for obvious reasons. It would enable much simpler regulations and less administration by government tenancy authorities, who should aim to pass back savings to tenants, ie., a proportion of the interest they earn on the money market from tenants' bonds.

Returning to the RC, it has been adjourned until a date to be notified. Here is the site to watch,

http://www.homeinsulationroyalcommission.gov.au/Hearings/Pages/default.aspx

Firstly I would like to wish all of you on OLO a very Happy New Year and trust we will all have fun blogging in 2014.

I am sorry this is off the topic but it seems relevant.

On the subject of negative gearing, I thought it was all done and dusted during the Hawke-Keating years, but correct me if I am wrong. I thought the Hawke Gov’t stopped the practice but Keating (as treasurer) was forced to re-introduce negative gearing because the rental market dried up and the poor were forced to pay rents that had risen out of proportion to inflation.

I would like to make a few points about negative gearing; it cannot go on forever. The ATO requires that there be “light at the end of the tunnel” and that the investment eventually makes a taxable profit. In real terms this means that the investment may be reviewed after about eight years and in extreme cases the avoided tax may be deemed by the ATO as due for collection.

Personally I prefer the local share market for my “other” investments. Most of us own our own homes and for many this is their first and largest investment. I like a 60:40 split between real estate and shares, so once we have started buying our own home, the next best investment is in shares. To play safe it is good to have a spread of investments and for most of us this is impossible with real- estate. How many of us can afford a diverse portfolio of real-estate, such as one bedroom units, a factory, a domestic dwelling or a shop in a variety of location’s? But with shares you can invest in AFIC or Argo and get a great spread operated by professionals with years of experience. If you invest in Argo or AFIC, any of the banks or Telstra you can get great returns without any outgoings such as repairs and maintenance, land tax or council rates and there is no stamp duty on the purchase price.

Once again, Happy New Year,

Geoffrey Kelley

G Kelly I found your post spot on and agree totally.
Rechtub I knew what Susionline wrote read every post in any thread I get involved in
Great deal of talk about the effectiveness of that tax off set but it drive in part of housing sector and almost toatly our unit/flat market.
Over seas investors are buying as an investment in that market more than housing.
Forget what I write on the subject of housing bubble, even forget those who have been forced out of the Sydney rental market.
But at your peril find and read the experts views in investing and soon you will see an inevitable burst bubble will come.

G Kelly, I agree to a point, however, for one to be successful in shares, you must approach them in the right way.

One of the downfalls of shares is that they are too easy to get out of, and as such, many investors realize a loss simply because their shares drop by say 20%.

I do however think you are more referring to managed funds, shares but in a different way.

As for turn g a profit, this ruling put an end to many scams like charter boats etc, as many were simply scams to allow owners to have a boat at the expense of the tax payer. In fact, I had one myself at one point.

The ruling also put a stop to what was commonly known as the queen street farmer. On five acres expecting to run a business in say fruit trees.



Belly, to me, for a housing bubble to burst, means all housing markets have to crash and I simply can't see this happening.

Sure, the Sydney unit market may crash, but only because of an event like over supply.

One thing about property is that while one market is suffering, there are usually others that are goimg gang busters.

Our biggest challenge in the next few years will be jobs.

As for opponents of negative gearing, all I can say is be careful what you wish for as you may not like what you get if you get your way and have it squashed.

Now as for the RC, bring it on I say as Mr Rudd must face up to his actions, actions that were directly linked to the deaths of four young innocents.

Geoffrey Kelley,

Yes, I agree with those facts.

What can be added is that governments have regularly tweaked investment property to take away any possibility of a return commensurate with the high risks of that form of investment.

John Howard also trimmed property owners in case any forum 'Progressive' is wondering.

I notice that no-one is concerned about unfair nasties like land tax.

The regulatory change risks are far too high for starters, and I am not referring simply to the negative gearing that is available to other forms of investment as well.

OTB, you said that nobody mentioned land tax; be fair, I did say " returns without any outgoings such as repairs and maintenance, land tax or council rates and there is no stamp duty on the purchase price."

I would add that with equities if you need some cash you can quickly sell a few shares and get your capital within days, cf. property, you can't sell a bedroom!

Geoffrey Kelley

....property, you can't sell a bedroom!

That's right G Kelly, and it is for this reason many investors only ever invest once in shares, as they oppt out when the price falls, Telstra being a prime example.

Property on the other hand sees most investors tough it out so they usually gain in the end.

One of the worst rulings made was to allow people to redraw on their mortage for the likes of toys and holidays.

Crazy stuff and a practice that should have been stopped long ago.

http://www.theadviser.com.au/breaking-news/29571-home-values-rise-almost-10pc
This link tells of over all price rises in 2013.
Another seen yesterday but unable to be found today gives state by state rises.
NSW topped the list with 14% rise in one year.
On the evidence I still see a bubble.
And await the burst.

rehctub, I am glad you mentioned Telstra! Not everyone has the temperament for the sharemarket and perhaps should never venture into it, but there are a few rules they must observe. Firstly the equity market is a long-term investment. Secondly the overall market ALWAYS recovers eventually so there is no point in locking in losses by bailing out when the going gets tough. If you wait long enough it will recover.

I have made a lot of money out of Telstra. Wayne Swan did a deal with Telstra that guaranteed a return of $11 Billion in cash over some years and then ordered the Futures Fund to quit the remaining 30% of their holding. At the same time the ALP and Swan in particular talked down the shares by getting stuck into Sol Trujillo and his mates. When the gov't floods the market with a sell-off of 30% of TLS it is little wonder that the price plunges. In fact, it plunged to less than $2.50 and I started buying at $2.60 and kept buying p to $3.60. I now hold a healthy quantity of TLS. Yes, I bought some as high as $7.50 back in T2 but overall my capital gain is close to 50% as the price is now over $5.25 and the yield including franking credits is in excess of 7.5% and is set to rise.I LUV Telstra almost as much as I LUV Wayne Swan :-)

Geoffrey Kelley

Belly, you are correct that prices of housing are going up rapidly, but I am not as negative as you. Will the bubble burst or will there be a market correction? I suggest the latter. The financial gurus are stating that interest rates will be more or less stable over the next twelve months. The bubble will only burst if we see massive hikes in housing interest rates as we saw in 1974 and again in the late 1980s. The reason house prices have risen is because the interest rates are very low and I do not know anyone predicting big rises in the near future.

This is only my opinion :-)

Geoffrey Kelley

We have not just walked away from the subject, we ran.
However in a post above Rechtub warns of unemployment and other things to concern us.
An icebergs tip bloke.
The economy is the problem.
And blaming Labor is not going to do it.
The GFC is not behind this emerging trouble.
And Abbott squandering cash on his pay the rich to have a child and have a RC to fund party propaganda will be seen as the cuts hurt.
And Rechtub be aware,your thoughts will have no impact on the eventual bursting bubble in housing.

Belly, you object to the Royal Commission because it is flogging a dead horse, and anyway, both sides of politics are guilty of the same offence. That is your opinion but not mine.

For instance, you are saying that we ought to let a murderer go because bringing him to account will not bring the victim back to life. I do not believe justice is served if we adopt that attitude. Parents, relatives and friends of the workers killed in this project need to see justice done and justice will be done if the RC can bring people to account. Forget the politics Belly; it is justice that must be served.

You said, “Abbott squandering cash on his pay the rich to have a child”, but again this is a political statement and not one based on any particular philosophy. You see, Abbott and the Libs see PPL as a work entitlement but the ALP and you want to paint it as a welfare measure. We see the payment as being the same as long service leave, annual recreational leave and especially sick leave. Are you proposing that these work entitlements ought o attract some kind of “basic wage” like the pension? Or, are you singling out PPL because it is a Liberal policy and not an ALP policy?

Let it go Belly; Abbott won the election and the people gave him a mandate to govern and introduce OUR policies, not the ALP’s policies.

Geoffrey Kelley

G Kelly, I proudly voted for Abbott, but I would not vote for his PPL scheme, simply because it is unaffordable for us, and benefits only a percentage of the population. I am tipping it will not pass as law.

A better idea in my view would be to allow would be parents to contribute additional dollars into their super,based on their incomes, at 15% tax and, when needed withdraw it as such.

If they don't have the children, then they owe the tax, to be paid/paid off at a later date.

Like many things, having children is a choice, and At least this way those who chose to have children, will not burden the tax payer other than the few dollars in lost taxes.

Now for unexpected pregnancies, perhaps they could have a use now, pay later scheme as Well.

Either way, we have to get away from the tax payer paying people for personal choices, because let's face it, our taxes are dwindling, not growing to meet demands.

BTW, I bought Testra at $2.88, so I'm happy.

geoffreykelley,

Land tax
I was meaning to say that the critics of 'negative gearing' do not mention land tax, as they don't mention many other things.

You did mention it and sorry if my comment appeared to be directed at your comment.

.....What can be added is that governments have regularly tweaked investment property to take away any possibility of a return commensurate with the high risks of that form of investment.

On the beach, I would suggest that other than gov bonds, or money in the bank, (both low returns) residential property would be the number three in safe investments, unless of cause your expectations are too high.

As for governments taking away the cream, as I think you're implying, what about the first home owners grant.

I doubt there has been any government action that has led to a larger winfal for investors than this one.

It's just a pity that, like most gov shemes, it has been wasted to some degree, well in my opinion anyway.

rehctub, "I would suggest that other than gov bonds, or money in the bank, (both low returns) residential property would be the number three in safe investments, unless of cause your expectations are too high"

I disagree with you.

As one bit of evidence, I have yet to meet a 'professional' property manager or her REA boss who has a comprehensive list of risks, let alone effective treatments of those risks. They contract themselves out of any accountability too.

It is very different from what our grandparents imagined property investment to be, and they were probably over-optimistic and dismissive of the actual risks back then.

It is the rare individual who understands and has any hope of selecting and managing rental property. They know enough to invest in commercial property instead.

Just forgetting other risks and thinking about the tenants. there is a growing horde of clever 'professional' tenants - educated and savvy in the use of tenancy advocates and tribunals- out there whose modus operandi is to use the very tenant focussed regulations to clip the owners for many thousands of dollars. Now I am not going to add to the prolific information out there to educate any of the quick witted rogues who may read this, but it is a profitable hobby and lifestyle for some and they are not always the unwashed Bogans, but well-educated, unprincipled and immoral people (a growing problem in modern Oz).

GK your self confidence is wasted.
Facts not the usual negativity see Abbott about as popular in the polls as he is and staying there.
Because you disagree is not evidence I am wrong or you right.
For sure the concerns about ah um Abbott are from his own side too.
JUSTIFY if you dare Abbott,s largest to women earning $150.,000 a year,
While cutting health education and much more.
Try JUSTIFYING his intention to ham string the ABC as a REWARD to that merchant of filth Rupert Murdock.
Australia deserves far better than Murdock a known do any thing for headlines man, including becoming an American, then helping install a government and telling us what his reward will be.
This coming scandal will emerge as sure as the sun rises.

onthebeach, when my grand parents were at their prime, the only investing they did was in the family home.

It was more the immigrants who invested in property other than the family home, houses, farms and commercial and their predecessors are now reaping the benefits.

How many farmers today could Aford to go off and buy that 100,000 ac at $800 per ac.

As for commercial, I have had many chances to invest in this median, some I regret not pursuing, but most I am glad I didn't.

My concern rose about fifteen to twenty years ago when our governments seemed reluctant to intervene in the two big retailers quest for total market domination, domination that has proven to be the demise of many centers, not to mention family owned businesses.

I always thought that once they had secured fuel and liquor the rest would follow. Unfortunately I was right.

In the late 80's one would have felt secure owning a complex with a fruit shop, butcher, news agent, baker even a family owned hardware. Nowadays, they are on shaky ground.

Another little known law in commercial leases was that anyone could break a long term lease by simply paying five years rent in advance. This caught many out with twenty year seemingly 'bullet proof' leases.

Commercial is under constant preasure from redirected roads, to online shopping so it is still my opinion that residential is a fairly safe investment however, if one borrows 110% and expects hastel free investing, then more fool them I say.

As for serial lease pests, I hear you. My advice to any wanaby landlord, is engage and agent and never let yourself be known as the owner.