Judith Troeth (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to say how surprising it was that in Senator Feeney’s remarks of approximately 20 minutes he devoted only eight minutes to defending his minister and his government. I compare it to the actions of the Prime Minister during the censure motion yesterday in the House, when he did not have the courage to stand up in the parliament and defend his minister, his program or himself. He left Minister Garrett to defend himself. It was a truly insipid and weak performance.

I recognise that this motion put forward by Senator Brown also covers other policy failures by the Rudd government, but I particularly wish to focus on the Home Insulation Scheme. By far and away, it is the most serious failure of a minister to undertake his most basic responsibilities that I can remember in my years in this place. This government and this minister have presided over a policy that has left four people dead, four families grieving and hundreds of thousands of homes at risk of burning to the ground, threatening the lives of the people living in them.

Today, the Prime Minister says he is ultimately responsible for the failures of this program. But as is usual with this Prime Minister, those words are hollow and very different from the reality—that everyone else can plainly see—around him. The Prime Minister has not even taken the responsibility to sack his incompetent minister.

These sorts of numbers are staggering. We now have in this country 240,000 homes with unsafe or substandard installations. We have 160,000 installations that did not meet product standards. We have 80,000 installations that did not meet safety standards. We have 1,000 electrified homes and we have had 93 house fires. And we have had the tragic deaths of four young men. Yet, in the last four days, the Prime Minster had the nerve to call Mr Garrett a first class and very effective minister. This is despite the fact that the minister received at least 21 individual warnings over safety and reports on the four deaths. This is despite the minister’s officials receiving the Minter Ellison report exposing deep concerns in April of last year and a further risk register, from the same firm, with a clear warning to delay the program for three months to correct the problems. He claims he knew nothing about it until 11 days ago.

I am a member of the committee that cross-examined the department on Monday morning and I will say again what I said then. It is astounding that the minister did not know of a report, detailing those basic mistakes, from a firm that is a household name in this country for high level professional advice. Everyone in the department seemed to know about it, but no-one mentioned the report to the minister. The risks were apparently detailed in other ways, but obviously not enough. That is a very convenient lapse in ministerial procedure.

As early as last year, the minister was warned in writing by the National Electrical and Communications Association that this program was a disaster waiting to happen. In late April he was warned by state and territory ministers that this program was a disaster. On 14 October last year we had the first death directly linked to this program. On 16 October last year the Master Electricians Association formally wrote to the minister, warning him that without an immediate suspension of the foil insulation program there would be further fatalities. In November, the Australian Council of Trade Unions—surely the bible as far as this government is concerned—called for the suspension of the foil insulation program. And yet he took no action. The New South Wales minister warned of the fire risk from this program. The South Australian minister warned of the fire risk from this program. These were Labor government ministers warning this minister of the risks inherent in this program—and still he took no action. It was only in February that he finally acted.

Without question this is a breach of the most basic ministerial responsibility, and yet the Prime Minister and the minister do not have the dignity, or the respect for the victims or the people who are at risk, to do the honourable thing. The fact that Mr Garrett is still calling himself ‘the honourable minister’ is a contradiction in terms at the moment. If this kind of incompetent decision making and its disastrous consequences do not get you sacked in the Rudd government, you would have to ask what does.

Given that I have a limited amount of time, I would like to turn to the Green Loans scheme. I want to read a letter I received from a constituent in Victoria who has been left very much out of pocket by the scheme. This person writes:

I first heard of this scheme in November—

last year—

& was interested in training to become a Home Sustainabilty Assessment Scheme assessor. I’m primarily a—

professional person—

… with an interest in this area, and was very careful to do my homework …

I was aware of the total up-front cost to me; about $3000 … so I proceeded carefully. I calculated I would have to complete about 15 assessments in 2010 to break even, and that the assessments after this would provide a small income for me this year. I did not expect this scheme to provide a new job for me, just a part-time income which I could possibly increase over time with extra training in the area. There is no way I thought it possible that I would be looking at losing my $3000 investment entirely, a prospect I am facing right now.

… I carefully checked the figures in late November on the Australian Building Surveyor’s Association website as to how many assessors had been registered. According to their website, 1500 assessors were registered at this time, and there weren’t many assessors registered in the area where I wanted to work. So I decided to continue with the process …

There were no statistics from the DEWHA—

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts—

available at this time as to how many assessments had been completed. I assumed, along with many others I guess, that if this scheme was running out, they would have let the general public and ABSA know.

I was gob-smacked in January when I found out, courtesy of ABSA, that 5000 assessors had been registered before the 24/12 [3500 in December alone!!] and that my application to assess was amongst another 5000 waiting for approval. The other shock was the fact that over half the 360000 assessments—

that were originally budgeted for—

had already been completed [in a scheme that was supposed to run till 2012!!]

Now, according to ABSA, I should get my accreditation in about a week’s time, but I am really wondering now if I’ll make even one cent from this whole government-sponsored endeavour!

There are so many assessors who have been intending to take this up that by, mid-February, this gentleman calculates:

… that leaves 80000 assessments to be carried out by 10000 assessors, an average of 8 per assessor [well below the number required to break even]

This is a tragedy for this gentleman. He says:

I know I’ll be lucky if I can even book a couple of appointments.

… I’ve blown $3000. Now, with 2 teenage children, we’re currently struggling to cope with the early year bills; school fees & expenses and bills from the Christmas period. And I believe there are 1000s more in the same boat as me.

Regardless of whatever answers the government provides to those questions, the broader question remains of how so many mistakes, along with negligence, lack of attention to detail and gross incompetence, can be tolerated. How much more can we take? The government should be censured, the minister should resign and the Prime Minister should stop trying to look like he has friends on Good News Week, try showing some leadership on a serious issue for once and sack his minister if he refuses to resign.