The home insulation scheme should not be a Liberal punchline

Frankly, we lefties – and certainly the ALP – should’ve done a better job calling the Coalition and their media allies on the absolute garbage they’ve been spouting about the Home Insulation Scheme over the last year or so, as this post from Pollytics makes clear:

That makes the insulation program around 8 times safer in terms of fire incidents compared to the state of the industry before the program. Even if we take the best absolute possible estimates of what went on before the program – say, 80 fires per year off 75 thousand installs – the program is still 7 times safer in terms of fire incidents than what occurred before the program.

The whole post is worth a read – and remembering, next time some Liberal cheerleader starts shamelessly trying to use the home insulation scheme as a synonym for homicidal incompetence.

About these ads

26 responses to “The home insulation scheme should not be a Liberal punchline

  1. Really is an appeal to statistics the bets that you can do?
    The scheme was hastily put together, badly designed and it is widely acknowledged to be an utter failure in environmental terms yet you still seek to defend it? :roll:

  2. “utter failure in environmental terms yet you still seek to defend it?”

    I guess if they’re going to remove it all and not replace it then yes, it would be an utter failure in environmental terms, otherwise how could it be, less fossil fuels burned to heat houses must have a positive impact, less fossil fuels burned to cool houses the same thing.

    I was amazed that everybody didn’t already have their houses insulated (clever country?), this is the problem with cheap energy, people just waste it. First thing I did when I purchased my house was install hydronic heating and insulate it, so many visitors comment on how lovely and warm my house is, my energy bills are lower than my peers who use that crappy ducted heating.

  3. Oh, and the way I read Jeremy’s post, he isn’t defending it, he’s calling out the Liberal lies.

  4. Splatterbottom

    What the reports linked to in the Pollytics article make clear is that the scheme wasn’t well implemented, risks weren’t properly evaluated and serious damage was done because of this, for example:

    In large measure, the focus by the department on the stimulus objective overrode risk management practices that should have been expected given the inherent program risks. ….

    Overall HIP has been a costly program for the outcomes achieved, including substantial remediation costs. There still remains a range of safety concerns and coronial inquiries are yet to be completed in relation to the four fatalities associated with installations under the program. The fallout from the program has caused serious inconvenience to many householders, reputational damage to the insulation industry, and financial difficulties for many Australian manufacturers and installers. It has also harmed the reputation of the Australian Public Service for effective service delivery. This experience underlines very starkly just how critical sound program design and implementation practices are to achieving policy outcomes. There are important lessons here for those agencies with policy implementation responsibilities but also those responsible for policy development.

  5. Rob
    He is defending it by seeking to down play the faults of the scheme and in particular to suggest that the fires and fatalities are of no substantial consequence.

  6. Oh and I forgot to mention that many of the installations were so poorly done that they do not do very much to improve the thermal efficiency of the homes that they were fitted to and I notice that neither Jeremy nor the piece he cites mentions the number of roofs fitted with foil insulation that may well still be electrical death traps

  7. “it is widely acknowledged to be an utter failure”

    By News Ltd and the Coalition, you mean.

    Did you actually read Pollytic’s post, Iain? And understand it?

  8. By everyone who has a brain Jeremy.
    Look you are generally no fan of Labor so just why are you trying so hard to defend this Fucked up scheme?

  9. “Oh and I forgot to mention that many of the installations were so poorly done that they do not do very much to improve the thermal efficiency of the homes”

    What all of them? Even the insulation fitted by the non-shonky tradies? I don’t think so, even the poorly fitted insulation would reduce waste thus your claim that it is an utter failure is completely false!

    “He is defending it by seeking to down play the faults of the scheme and in particular to suggest that the fires and fatalities are of no substantial consequence.”

    So you say, I don’t see it that way but Jeremy is highly capable of defending his own posts (though could you highlight the specific part of Jeremy’s post where he downplays the deaths?).

    Evidentlywhen it comes to insulation and energy efficiency you don’t actually have a clue what you are talking about, you claimed it has been an utter failure as far as the environment is concerned???t Maybe you subscribe to the Lord Monkton school of thought when it comes to the environment?

    **Personally I think the Rudd Govt did an appalling job, I don’t see why that should stop anyone pointing out the opposition’s bullshit (that you (Iain) swallowed).

  10. “Look you are generally no fan of Labor so just why are you trying so hard to defend this Fucked up scheme?”

    Oh, FFS Slagging the Libs != sticking up for Labor.

  11. My God!Not the Pink Batts saga again? R.I.P. FFS.Of course the wingnuts wont be satisfied until Peter Garrett is taken out the front of Parliament house and summarily executed.

    So after a failure of the Liberal party to convince the Australian people that 1. We are not being invaded by Muslims wanting to install sharia law and a new caliphate in the local suburbs. 2.The stimulus package was a waste of time and money.3.That Rudd was not a Chinese spy because he speaks Mandarin.4.The A.B.C. was not a nest of communist, Stalinist,Trotskyist, murdering homicidal maniacs.5.Julia spends a fortune getting her hair done.We again by popular demand, give you the Pink Batts.

    I would have thought instead of keeping on with the pink batts issue,(you can still hear them shouting about across the floor about it as late as this week) they would have at least given the “government not backing the troops mantra” another run.Hey, what better way to play on the emotions of people and the votes to be had, when their sons, wives, husbands, brothers, sisters, are all at risk of getting their arses shot off, in a war zone, being an excuse to be able to do what they like, with out any consequence.I got a parking ticket last week maybe Tony can help me?

    Of course Pollytics is right.

    I bloody despair.

  12. jordanrastrick

    “Really is an appeal to statistics the bets that you can do?”

    This says it all, really. “Data? Actual evidence? Hard numbers? Is THAT the best you can do?”

    Of course, the fact that the scheme did better than the insulation industry average doesn’t absolve the government of all responsibility for safety failures – that would be like saying a 40% loss of our aid money to corruption in say Ethiopia was acceptable, simply because for most programs in sub-Saharan Africa the rates are usually worse. Clearly, the level of fire hazard in the industry was unacceptably high, and the government’s decision to inject money rapidly into the economy by this way channel showed insufficient diligence.

    Ridiculous Liberal hysteria aside, there’s no doubting that the Department of Environment wasn’t well equipped to deliver a large and complex economic stimulus package, and that the results show that. Overall, the scheme has to rank as one of the government’s failures; but certainly its fair to inject some realism into the debate.

  13. Rob
    Just find someone any one who is genuinely full of praise for the insulation scheme , I think that you will be looking for a very long time, heck even you acknowledge as fact that it was an “appalling job” so what precisely is the sin of the opposition here?
    They quite rightly made it impossible for the Labor party to spin it as a success. Isn’t that what an opposition is supposed to do?
    Like wise a national news paper like the OZ is duty bound to point out to the public just how bad the scheme was You and Jeremy are going on as if the whole scandal was an invention of the Liberals and the OZ rather than something for which Labor continues to deserve our disgust for.

  14. I got some insulation and it works for me. I’ve saved on firewood and I don’t have to buy an airconditioner.

  15. Ahhhh!The genuflection of Hall to the Oz.But of course why wouldn’t he?I mean the Oz apart from making excellent wrapper for fush and chups, is renowned for its fair and balanced reporting of the trials and tribulations of the Labor party.And duty bound to give us the scoop, my my, what a profound way of looking at the art of propaganda, that only the Oz can pass off as a set of manufactured facts.

  16. Lynot , you have been missed at my place ;)
    Just what has the OZ said about the insulation scheme that has been untrue or that has relied on “manufactured facts”?
    Don’t forget that in the past the OZ has endorsed Labor over the coalition and if I remember correctly it endorsed Rudd over Howard so while I accept that it has a definite lean to the right politically you will forgive me for thinking that is a virtue rather than a failing.

  17. “Lynot , you have been missed at my place
    Just what has the OZ said about the insulation scheme that has been untrue or that has relied on “manufactured facts”?”

    Iain one does not have to quote the Oz verbatim to work out it is spinning the facts.(See the Pollytics comments) To report a problem one has to report all the facts, not just the ones that are meant to sensationalize the issue into something that it is not.Did some workers die?Were some houses made unsafe?Was some money wasted?Of course the answer is yes to all three.

    The whole scandal as you put it, was unfortunate and in some cases a tragedy, but a lot of good came out of it.However, to try and blame Garrett(who incidentally I believe is a wanker)is not going to wash.Yes I know he was the responsible Minister.But if you want to lay the blame off on everything that has/will go wrong with government, or for that matter private projects, Parliament house and board rooms would be empty.

    But of course this is not about insulation, or indeed, rhubarb and custard, is it?This is about trying anything to embarrass the Gillard government.But unlike you who will make no concessions on anything, and notwithstanding what I have said in the past about my beloved Julia, she is a one term P.M.Her ego got in the way of pragmatism.Rudd would have shit it in.

    But again having said that, your mob will not get a guernsey either at the next election of that I am sure.The last election was close not because of anything the government did, it was because of what they didn’t do.

    Garrett was going to save the whales, Rudd was going to give us an ETS, Roxan was going to fix up Abbotts total failure, etc, etc, etc, but let us not get toooo carried away.Your mob, are just as bad, the hot air is just the same just a different color. Anyone to quote your good self with a brain, or more to the point memory, would clearly admit the duopoly we have at the moment couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery.

    Iain I am not going to get into another debate about the Australian media, they have more bias than a pomey wind jammer in a strong south wester.Oh and I’ve missed you too Iain but not some of your regulars, who if not for by my estimation about sixteen, should have been at Nuremberg :)

  18. The funniest thing about the Liberals stance on this si that they are, in effect, calling for greater government control over business.

    At least in this they are correct – the insulation scheme was a great example of just how shoddy the private sector can be when safety stands between it and a buck.


  19. Lynot

    Iain one does not have to quote the Oz verbatim to work out it is spinning the facts.(See the Pollytics comments) To report a problem one has to report all the facts, not just the ones that are meant to sensationalise the issue into something that it is not.Did some workers die?Were some houses made unsafe?Was some money wasted?Of course the answer is yes to all three.

    By definition to “spin” something is to distort the truth yet by your own admission (above) all of the allegations about the scheme are correct so just how was either the coalition or the Oz being untruthful?

    The whole scandal as you put it, was unfortunate and in some cases a tragedy, but a lot of good came out of it.However, to try and blame Garrett(who incidentally I believe is a wanker)is not going to wash.Yes I know he was the responsible Minister.But if you want to lay the blame off on everything that has/will go wrong with government, or for that matter private projects, Parliament house and board rooms would be empty.

    I think that we can agree that the main culprit here was Rudd who wanted to have a big thing on the go to show that he was “doing something” to stimulate the economy

    But of course this is not about insulation, or indeed, rhubarb and custard, is it?This is about trying anything to embarrass the Gillard government.But unlike you who will make no concessions on anything, and notwithstanding what I have said in the past about my beloved Julia, she is a one term P.M.Her ego got in the way of pragmatism.Rudd would have shit it in.

    You are still desperate to defend the Labor government no matter what aren’t you? The Irony is that John Howard shares your opinion about Rudd doing better than Gillard But I doubt that Rudd would have won the election.

    But again having said that, your mob will not get a guernsey either at the next election of that I am sure.The last election was close not because of anything the government did, it was because of what they didn’t do.

    So who are you going to back for the next one?

    Garrett was going to save the whales, Rudd was going to give us an ETS, Roxan was going to fix up Abbott’s total failure, etc, etc, etc, but let us not get toooo carried away.Your mob, are just as bad, the hot air is just the same just a different colour. Anyone to quote your good self with a brain, or more to the point memory, would clearly admit the duopoly we have at the moment couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery.

    Surely you can’t think that the Loony Greens will get into the lodge?

    Iain I am not going to get into another debate about the Australian media, they have more bias than a pomey windjammer in a strong south wester.Oh and I’ve missed you too Iain but not some of your regulars, who if not for by my estimation about sixteen, should have been at Nuremberg :)

    Gee that is a confused spray, but sadly for you by invoking “Godwin’s Law” you have just lost the argument ;) .

  20. weewillywinkee

    I also think that employers have a lot to answer for in regards to this scheme. The Government cannot be expected to oversee every single home. It is up to employers to ensure they are complying with the relevant standards and properly training their employees. Employers also should be ensuring that all employees are safe in their work places.

  21. “Gee that is a confused spray, but sadly for you by invoking “Godwin’s Law” you have just lost the argument ”

    Iain nobody ever loses an argument to you, they just give up trying to explain logic to you, which you clearly have no understanding of.I never said the Labor party wouldn’t get reelected, I said Gillard will be a one term P.M. they will dump her..(with a rider the government goes full term)The Greens will increase their representation in the next election, and will again be the balance of power along with the Labor party as the government.

    As for my own voting intention, I will be voting for the Greens as I have done in the last three elections.Previous to that I have voted for Labor, Liberal, and independent.Unlike you of course, who will be voting for the coalition again.Which contrary to what you tell me, I firmly believe you have always voted for.A person with such right wing, unwavering, unable to be wrong about anything thought process as your self, does not have the capacity to think outside of your own muddled ideology.

    As for the “Loony Greens”Oh Iain please, the Greens are in the ascendancy, and as the planet slowly drowns in its own excreta, more mortgages are foreclosed on, and luxuries like food and clothes become harder to obtain.Yep I know, lets all vote for good ol Tony Abbott.

    I could care less what you say about Rudd, he would have won the election easy.The polls which all pundits get hung up on, change like the weather.

    I am far from confused about the insulation F.U. I will try one more time just for you.Because they had problems and the tragedy of some workers deaths, does not make the project a failure.We have lots of miners killed every year by industrial accidents, we don’t close the mines.Yes we sometimes prosecute the company’s concerned, even when the fault lies sometimes out of their control.Just like you are trying to do to Rudd.I will bore you with a thousand other examples if you wish.

    I find it a tad sad that right wingers that cannot bear the thought that Nazi’s were right wing fascists.Of course this latest attempt after the rights total failure to link Labor/Greens or for that matter any other progressive political party’s with Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin, or any communist homicidal maniac out of the past ad nauseam, has tried to rewrite history by telling us old Shicklegruber and his mates were all socialists.But of course 99% of the worlds bona fide historians, have put paid to that nonsense haven’t they? (Read Churchill’s memoirs)But its just dandy for you to label us Stalinists or any other epithet to suite, but associating the right with fascists ” It’s Goodwin’s law”

  22. Lynot

    Iain nobody ever loses an argument to you, they just give up trying to explain logic to you, which you clearly have no understanding of.I never said the Labor party wouldn’t get re-elected, I said Gillard will be a one term P.M. they will dump her..(with a rider the government goes full term)The Greens will increase their representation in the next election, and will again be the balance of power along with the Labor party as the government.

    What is your preferred game Lynot? Mine is chess and I play every day. I play to win and I take the same attitude to debating the issues on blogs. The error that you are making here is that you think that if an argument convinces you then it must mean that it is an instant checkmate. You are entirely wrong on that count.

    As for my own voting intention, I will be voting for the Greens as I have done in the last three elections.Previous to that I have voted for Labor, Liberal, and independent.Unlike you of course, who will be voting for the coalition again.Which contrary to what you tell me, I firmly believe you have always voted for.A person with such right wing, unwavering, unable to be wrong about anything thought process as your self, does not have the capacity to think outside of your own muddled ideology.

    As i have said many times I have previously voted Labor and there is absolutely no reason for me to be any thing less than honest about that.

    As for the “Loony Greens”Oh Iain please, the Greens are in the ascendancy, and as the planet slowly drowns in its own excreta, more mortgages are foreclosed on, and luxuries like food and clothes become harder to obtain.Yep I know, lets all vote for good ol Tony Abbott.

    How confused your mind must be, there have not been more foreclosures in this country of late I think that you are confusing news reports from the USA with our own domestic situation. Basic food stuffs are still very affordable in this country even for people on the most modest incomes and don’t dare pretend that anyone in this country can’t get a shirt for their backs at the most modest cost ( a couple of bucks from an op shop) You forget that most clothes purchases are not made out of necessity but as “retail therapy” or the factious desire to be “fashionable”.

    I could care less what you say about Rudd, he would have won the election easy.The polls which all pundits get hung up on, change like the weather.

    The Poll that counted for Rudd (for the leadership of his party) was unanimously against him

    I am far from confused about the insulation F.U. I will try one more time just for you.Because they had problems and the tragedy of some workers deaths, does not make the project a failure.

    Well it certainly does not make it a success!!!!

    We have lots of miners killed every year by industrial accidents, we don’t close the mines.Yes we sometimes prosecute the company’s concerned, even when the fault lies sometimes out of their control.Just like you are trying to do to Rudd.I will bore you with a thousand other examples if you wish.

    But the government did not pump billions of bucks into getting people to dig holes under everyone’s houses now did they?

    I find it a tad sad that right wingers that cannot bear the thought that Nazi’s were right wing fascists.Of course this latest attempt after the right’s total failure to link Labor/Greens or for that matter any other progressive political party’s with Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin, or any communist homicidal maniac out of the past ad nauseam, has tried to rewrite history by telling us old Shicklegruber and his mates were all socialists.But of course 99% of the worlds bona fide historians, have put paid to that nonsense haven’t they? (Read Churchill’s memoirs)But its just dandy for you to label us Stalinists or any other epithet to suite, but associating the right with fascists ” It’s Godwin’s law”

    I think that you must be entirely ignorant about just what “Godwin’s law” actually is. It has absolutely nothing to do with Nazi’s being socialists or even the totalitarian tendencies of the left It is a critique of those who invoke the Nazi’s in debate

  23. [I play to win and I take the same attitude to debating the issues on blogs. ]

    You must be disappointed ;)

    Me, I do it for the sake of debate, I admit, I’m an opinionated loud mouth, sometimes my views are changed when I’m shown that I’m wrong. That ever happen to you Iain?

  24. Yes Rob , sometimes , but like your own good self I’m an opinionated loud mouth but don’t you debate for the journey as much as the destination?

  25. Only if you see it as a competition, personally I enjoy the debate, the only times I don’t is when I’m humiliated but this can only happen if I’m dishonest, I try my best to be honest and consistent, alas, i’m not perfect, nowhere near it but I do try.

  26. I think that you must be entirely ignorant about just what “Godwin’s law” actually is. It has absolutely nothing to do with Nazi’s being socialists or even the totalitarian tendencies of the left It is a critique of those who invoke the Nazi’s in debate”

    Iain you started your last paragraph with “I think” As well as being a self opinionated loud mouth know all, you have a sense of humor as well.This is your whole problem, you don’t think about anything.What you do in fact is, engage your rather inflated ego, mixing that with a bit of your vivid imagination, sprinkle that with your considerable talent for long winded diatribe, and “Voilà” The world according to Hall.Oh yes I unlike you, know what Goodwin’s law is.It is an observation only, and means absolutely nothing.A gentleman’s agreement.

    Of course you are renowned on the blogospere for not thinking, that is why only a few people will amuse themselves debating you.No more is this more amply demonstrated than at your own blog where only a few brown shirted self opinionated people, who also see the world as you do, drop by and leave comments that you obviously agree with.You are like a lucky dip, people don’t know what may come out next to buttress your infantile view of the world.

    You’re a wasted talent Iain, I mean now let me see, you’re a qualified climate scientist, a barrister,(you must at least be a lawyer you know more than Jeremy Sear who is qualified) oceanographer,’psychologist, mathematician, mechanical engineer, an expert in the works of Shakespeare, and my God you play chess, Garry Kasparov be afraid, be very afraid…

    I guess that job they gave you at the U.N. Iain as a worlds problem solver just didn’t work out for you. You should be on the ‘Comedy channel’ you are funnier than a barrel of monkeys.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s