Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a censure on the Prime Minister.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately:That the House:

(1)

notes that the

(a)

Minister for the Environment has failed repeatedly to answer vital questions regarding when he was warned of critical safety flaws inherent in his Home Insulation Program; and

(b)

Prime Minister has failed to require the Minister for the Environment to provide information about the program required by the House, on behalf of the thousands of concerned and at risk homeowners across the country; and

(2)

acknowledges that the Senate has censured the Rudd Government for its failings, including in connection with the Home Insulation Program, but that the Government has suppressed debate on the Senate resolution in the House; and

(3)

censures the Prime Minister and Government for failing in their responsibilities in the management of this program, for their failure to provide information reasonably sought in the House and for failing to abide by the doctrine of ministerial responsibility that is the bedrock of our Westminster system

What we saw from the Prime Minister today was a Peter Beattie moment. The Prime Minister may not be much of a Queenslander, but he has learned this much from the former Queensland Premier: when your government has got it seriously wrong, you say, ‘Yes, we created the mess and here I am—I will fix the mess.’ In fact, if it were not for the fact that he probably would have drowned in the attempt, I half-expected to see the Prime Minister in a fish tank with the sharks—so much has he stolen today’s tactic from the former Premier of Queensland.

Today the Prime Minister has said—drawn right from the Peter Beattie playbook—‘The government has to lift its game.’ This is the government which has left 48,000 homes potentially electrified. This is the government which has a program that installed dodgy insulation in 240,000 homes across the country. This is the government which has suspended a program and left at least 6,000 workers without the guarantee of employment and 7,000 businesses without the guarantee of business. This is the government whose program has led to four deaths. And what does the Prime Minister say? He says, ‘The government will lift its game.’ This is a government which is so determined to lift its game that the same minister—the same allegedly first-class minister who created this disaster and these tragedies—has been left in place.

You cannot trust a government to lift its game when it leaves in place the minister who is responsible for this disaster and this tragedy. I ask the people of Australia to weigh what the Prime Minister has done today. He has said that all the workers involved in this scheme will either keep their jobs or keep their wages, but he has not said how. He has said that all the businesses which were involved in the scheme will continue or will be compensated, but he has not said how. He has said that all the 240,000 houses that might have been badly insulated—in particular, all the 48,000 houses with foil insulation that is potentially electrified—will be inspected and fixed, but he has not said how and he cannot say when.

What, essentially, we have from this Prime Minister is a big ‘trust me’. That is what we have had. But why would you trust this government, which have created the problem, to solve the problem, especially when they have shown so little remorse, so little contrition, so little human emotion that they refuse to apologise and they refuse to remove the minister who is responsible for this disastrous and tragic program? I hate to say this of the Prime Minister, but the secretary of the Department of the Environment and Heritage at least had the decency to apologise for this disaster, and she has shown more compassion, more decency and more human understanding than the minister and the Prime Minister, two members of this parliament who have demonstrated by their conduct throughout this business that they just do not get it. They just do not understand the scale of the disaster for which they are responsible.

Where are we left now? Plainly, the Prime Minister has decided that the minister for the environment is indispensable. Plainly, he has decided that the minister for the environment is so politically important for the government that he cannot possibly be sacked, no matter how deep and desperate his incompetence. So what we have had is the Prime Minister say, ‘I take personal responsibility for this,’ because the Prime Minister is the only person in the government who cannot be sacked. But as a result of all of this the government has sustained serious damage. The people now understand the true nature of the Rudd government. It is a government that cannot deliver. It is a government which tried to deliver one million home insulations and in fact has got at least a quarter of them monumentally wrong. This is a government which could not even deliver free insulation, let alone run the country. They could not even give these batts away successfully, let alone run the country.

This is also a government which does not listen. We had all sorts of blather, all sorts of equivocation. It is no wonder the Prime Minister is called by members of the public ‘Prime Minister Blah Blah’. Anyone listening to the Prime Minister’s explanation today would know exactly why attendees at the community cabinet in Victoria the other day were so disappointed. This is a government which does not listen. We know the Prime Minister will not properly disclose or admit that the government received repeated warnings that this was a scheme that would lead to disaster. This government was too arrogant and too out of touch to listen to the people who know what they are doing in this sector and who for years had avoided the kinds of problems which are now endemic in homes across Australia.

It is a government which cannot be trusted with money. That is one of the other great lessons of this debacle. It is a government which cannot be trusted with money. We know from none other than the finance minister himself that they did not care about the disasters that were taking place in 240,000 ceilings across Australia. They could not be bothered with dotting i’s and crossing t’s. They just had to shovel the money out in order to avoid a recession. We all know that not only was this a monumental waste of money but it was a terrible tragedy for workers, for families and for the 240,000 households throughout this country who do not know whether their house is safe, who do not know whether they can enter their roof.

It is a government that cannot be trusted to keep its word. Here are thousands of workers and thousands of businesses which made life-changing decisions, which invested tens—sometimes hundreds—of thousands of dollars of their money on the word of this government. They now know that if it ever suits the political convenience of this government to scrap its word, to walk away from its commitments, it will do it. This is a government and a Prime Minister who simply cannot be trusted.

But above all else what we have learnt from this is that this is a government that has no integrity. This is a government which has torn up its own code of ministerial conduct, which is no longer worth the paper that it is written on. Let me just read a definition of ministerial accountability from the Prime Minister. He said:

Ministerial accountability means … that–that they should be responsible to the Parliament for their actions … be responsible for the operation of their department as well … And that is a core principle of Westminster and a core principle, I believe, of restoring Westminster.

That is what he said in opposition. That is what he has completely abandoned in government. This was a politician who built his career demanding the resignation of ministers who had done nothing wrong, let alone potentially damage the lives of 240,000 people. Then he said:

As a member of this parliament, I cannot understand how ministers can stand at this dispatch box and seek to exonerate themselves of responsibility for the damage they have done to the good name of this country,

Well, his minister has not damaged the good name of this country. He has damaged the lives and the welfare of 240,000 Australians. He should be sacked and the government should be censured.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion. After weeks of the controversy that has engulfed the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts in one of the worst public policy scandals that many seasoned political operatives have ever seen in this country—worse than anyone can recall in decades—we have a Commonwealth program failure that has no peer in the memory of political commentators. This government’s program is a scandal that has resulted in 240,000 homes considered to have dodgy insulation; 48,000 homes considered to be at risk; 6,000 people out of a job; about a thousand homes considered to be live, considered to be electrified at present; 165 house fires, according to the most recent emergency services report; and four tragic deaths of young men and boys.

After weeks of this controversy, yesterday the Prime Minister said that he was responsible for this disastrous program. He said he accepted responsibility for the failings of this program. But those who know this Prime Minister, those who have watched this Prime Minister over the last two years, know what he was actually saying. He was not accepting responsibility for this program. We know he actually does not believe it is his responsibility. It is not because he is a noble person. It is not because he is a man of conscience. It is not because he was graciously trying to take the rap for the minister for the environment. It is not because he is contrite for what has happened. It is not because he wants to say sorry to the families of those four boys. It is because he is thumbing his nose at the Australian people. He is saying: ‘I’m the Prime Minister. I’ve taken responsibility. So what? What are you going to do about it?’ That is what he said to the Australian people yesterday. He is thumbing his nose at the Australian people.

Such is the arrogance of this Prime Minister he thinks he can get away with it. He thinks he can get away with a program like this, which has cost lives, has put thousands of homes and people at risk and has cost thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ money already. And they want to throw more after this disastrous scheme. He thinks he can get away with one of the most incompetent and scandalous examples of maladministration that this country has seen. This parliament must censure the Prime Minister and the government for the comprehensive failure of a government policy, with such devastating consequences.

What many Australians will find as disturbing and as offensive as the government’s failings are the double standards and sheer hypocrisy of this Prime Minister. When he was seeking election to the high office of Prime Minister before the 2007 election, he claimed he would usher in a new era of ministerial accountability. He said to the media:

I am determined to re-establish a functioning Westminster system in this country along those two principles—that is ministerial responsibility and the independence of the public service.

He has now demonstrated a contumelious disregard for the Westminster system of ministerial responsibility by refusing to hold the minister for the environment responsible for a program that has left thousands of Australians negatively affected. They have lost jobs. Businesses have lost work. They are left with unused stock and vehicles. People are worried sick that their home has been subjected to shoddy insulation that will result in a house fire—maybe not this year, but what about next year or the year after? Electricians are refusing to become involved in this scheme. Where are the assessors who are going to give people the peace of mind that they need to be assured that they are safe in their homes? There have been 165 house fires. Who would leave their home if they knew that one of those shoddy installers had been there but the government had not yet assessed the risk? People are worried sick. They cannot sleep. Yet the Prime Minister ignores their concerns.

Mr Speaker, remember the fanfare about this Prime Minister’s code of ministerial conduct? He said:

The Australian people are entitled to expect the highest standards of behaviour from their elected representatives in general and Ministers in particular.

He said:

Ministers must accept the full implications of the principle of ministerial responsibility. They will be required to answer for the consequences of their decisions and actions …

This Prime Minister and this minister must answer for the consequences of their decisions and actions. We censure the Prime Minister. (Time expired)

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said earlier in question time today, it is important that we deal with the serious matters which have arisen as a consequence of the government’s decision to cancel the Home Insulation Program. What I have sought to do in the parliament today is to go through a range of those measures, which go to, firstly, assistance for insulation workers; secondly, possible assistance for business; and, thirdly, a checking process for homes where insulation has been installed. The government’s information service has received a number of telephone calls on all of these practical matters.

I say in response to the honourable members who have moved this motion that the critical thing when it comes to dealing with industrial safety is to make sure that you engage in the most effective measures possible to try and reduce risk. In Australia each year we suffer more than 300 deaths in industrial accidents. Each one of those deaths is one too many. I am advised, for example, that between 2000 and 2008 there were something like four deaths in the home insulation and retrofitting industry, and they are four deaths too many. The four young lives which have been lost so far are four deaths too many. The 138,000 industrial accidents and injuries that we have each year in this country are 138,000 too many, as are all forms of other industrial accidents, including those that occur when people undertake do-it-yourself repairs to their homes. I was speaking to various members about the deaths which occur each year from do-it-yourself repairs, and I am advised some 50 die each year in Australia from those sorts of accidents. Any loss or injury which occurs through industrial accidents is to be regretted by all members of this place. Therefore, we must act appropriately to ensure that we minimise risk in all workplaces.

When it comes to assistance to insulation workers, the government today has outlined a large number of quite specific measures. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition asked: what does it mean when you accept responsibility and then do nothing? I simply say to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that following the statement I made yesterday was a detailed statement concerning the 6,000-plus workers who work in the home insulation industry, a number of whom I had a conversation with earlier today. What we put out today in terms of the content of the insulation worker adjustment package is a direct response to us acknowledging our responsibility in terms of the decision to discontinue the Home Insulation Program. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition asks the question: what does it mean to accept responsibility? I believe all leaders of government, if they are accountable for the entire programs of their government, should as a matter of principle publicly acknowledge that fact and say that they are answerable to the parliament and the people at large for the things that go right, the things that go wrong, the good news, the bad news and, therefore, those things that need to be changed.

Based on that and the statement I made yesterday and consistent with earlier statements made by the minister, we advance the specific assistance for insulation workers package which was outlined. Further, the Leader of the Opposition says that the measures announced by me today are non-specific. In response to what he has said let me again, for the benefit of the House and for those listening to the debate, go through the measures.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Seniors) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will be heard in silence.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government’s commitment is that each worker will receive support to retain their current job through the transition phase before the Renewable Energy Bonus Program begins. This support will be provided through assistance for businesses to retain workers through the transition phase in either work or training. I say to the Leader of the Opposition: what is non-specific about that?

I think that those opposite appear to be disappointed by the nature of the specific response which the government has provided to the workers who have been affected by the government’s decision. Secondly, I say that the other part of what the government has announced today as part of its $41.2 million insulation workers adjustment package is as follows. The government would assist displaced insulation workers in finding alternative jobs with other employers in other industries. This assistance will be provided through priority employment coordinators, dedicated insulation coordination officers and resources to the Job Services Australia network.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Abbott interjecting

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition interjects again, ‘Name them’ and ‘What is all that about?’ I simply say in response to the Leader of the Opposition’s question: if he looked at the detail of the government’s Compact with Retrenched Workers, the specific provisions which flow from that also apply to the workers who have been affected in this industry. He asked specifically about insulation employment coordinators; I draw his attention to the $1.5 million which will be dedicated to the 25 locations which we intend to fund to assist with those individual workers who have been affected by this program.

The third measure which I outlined today was that which flows from an inability to secure either the first or the second measures that I referred to above—that is, where appropriate employment opportunities are not available, the government will ensure that a relevant training place is available to displaced insulation workers. That is to help those workers transition to more permanent employment in the future, given that the Home Insulation Program itself was designed as a temporary program. If the Leader of the Opposition is asking for further specificity on that, I draw his attention to these points. They are as follows: the government has announced 7,000 training places for insulation workers; 2,000 apprenticeship access places; 2,000 places in the language, literacy and numeracy program; and 3,000 further training places to retrain insulation workers in alternative industries.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Pyne interjecting

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Sturt interjects, ‘Why is it relevant to have a language and literacy program?’ The member for Sturt should be familiar with the fact that many who work in this industry report back from many who have been employers in this industry in terms of securing long-term transition into a permanent job, and they say they would benefit specifically from that program. That is why we are doing it.

The Leader of the Opposition asked for details on each of the three elements that I have announced today. They are the details and I provide them to him for his information. I also draw the attention of the Leader of the Opposition to the following. This concerns the incidence of fires which have occurred in this sector over a period of time. I also draw the honourable member’s attention to the fact that in 2008, against an industry that at that stage was rolling out something in the vicinity of 50,000 to 75,000 retrofitted insulations each year, the number of fires was, I am advised, something in the order of 83. The number of fires that we have had reported to us concerning the current program relate to something between 80 and 90. That is against an overall insulation rate of some one million plus across the Australian nation. Therefore, what I am saying is that, on the question of risk associated with industry, it existed before. I also say that that risk also needs to be appropriately managed in the future. That is the point that I draw to the attention of those opposite.

I also say to the Leader of the Opposition that the question that was posed by him and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition concerning the doctrine of ministerial accountability goes to the question of ministers, firstly, appropriately informing themselves of risk management as associated with the implementation of a government program and, secondly, taking departmental advice and acting on it in terms of the best way to mitigate that risk. I have listened very carefully to what the minister for the environment has said about his actions on this matter and, based on the evidence before me, I can simply say that the minister has (1) sought to apprise himself of those risks and (2) has acted in accordance of the advice which has been provided by his department in terms of the management of that risk.

I also draw to the attention of the Leader of the Opposition the following. The minister’s actions resulted in, firstly, the first national skills requirements for installation contractors; secondly, the department work with state and territory governments and registered training organisations to put the first accredited training course for installers in place; and, thirdly, for the first time, the Commonwealth program brought in new OH&S standards by requiring that every person installing ceiling insulation had conducted OHS training evidenced by an OHS induction card. These are three standards or measures which did not exist under the previous government in relation to this entire industry. They are the specific measures which the minister implemented in order to respond to the advice provided to him by his department.

I conclude where I began. The government accepts responsibility for the implementation of the program. I furthermore say in response to the Leader of the Opposition that that is why we have announced today specific measures concerning the workforce. The government intends to get on with the job. (Time expired)

Question put:

That the motion (Mr Abbott’s) be agreed to.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, I ask whether the Prime Minister will be returning to give information as to whether his office did receive information from the Coordinator-General.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.