25millions to proove what?

[***super_nova***]

Whoever pays for the job is the client (in this case the Rudd Labor government). The person who undertakes to do the job is the contractor. The contractor employs workers to do the job. Workplace safety is the contractor's responsibility, not the client's. The four deaths resulted from dodgy contractors failing to properly train their workers and provide a safe workplace. The home insulation scheme was a success overall, and only this government of fools would try to blame Labor for what happened on particular work sites.

 

[silverfaun]

another fake from the hate files.  .Shame on you for reposting this garbage on here. 

[***super_nova***]

What exactly do you think that this investigation is going to prove?  What is it going to achieve?  It will not bring the 4 young men back. 

Should it find that the government is responsible for employees of contractors it would mean that every builder who gets a tradesman to install something in one of their buildings will be responsible if somebody gets killed due to lack of training?

We do not need to spend 25 000 000 to know that the young men should have been better trained, and not forced to work in 40+degree heat.  Unfortunately, all too often people die or are seriously injured at work due to bad practices and by all means it would be great if the government would try to reduce that, but why focus on this 1 program?  It has been scrapped. 

And by the way there is nothing hateful in my post; there are just pure facts. 

[punch*drunk]

I still dont understand what the connection is to the iraq war?

[lakeland27]

abbott knows he can only survive by smearing others (as if murdoch hadn't done the job already)

there have been what 4 inquiries  ? more people died as a result of Abbotts tenure as health minister.

in the period encompassing the scheme the rate of deaths actually decreased in this industry..

i sincerely hope that every employer who has had workers die on the job faces a royal commision ( As at 23 December 2013, 181 Australian workers have been killed while at work.)

http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/swa/statistics/work-related-fatalities/pages/worker-fatali...

[i-need-a-martini]

Punch - the point is that we are spending 25mill simply to try and find out if Rudd knew the deaths would occurr. The other reviews have already resolved that these accidents were OHS workplace accidents that were isolated from the government but Abbott is pressing on trying to find proof that doesn't exist by taking it to a Royal Commission.

Yet in comparison, Howard sends troops into Iraq because there was a 'suspicion' that Iraq was holding weapons of mass destruction even though he had no proof. In fact, very quickly it turned out that our intelligence organisations had been told that there were no weapons. Yet that information was ignored and he still sent our troops to risk their lives for nothing.

On the one hand there is a determined digging to uncover something that isn't there just in an attempt to persecute a former prime minister for something beyond his control. On the other hand a blind ignorance that sacrificed young Australians so that Howard could still play with the big boys in the US and the UK. 

Where is the Royal Commission into the latter?

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@silverfaun wrote:

another fake from the hate files.  .Shame on you for reposting this garbage on here. 

---

What exactly is fake silverfaun? What is garbage?

[lakeland27]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@silverfaun wrote:

another fake from the hate files.  .Shame on you for reposting this garbage on here. 

---

What exactly is fake silverfaun? What is garbage?

---

 none of it obviously. some only read the herald sun and have no idea what the facts really are

[lakeland27]

---

@**meep** wrote:

scroll down the page, does any of the material look familiar?

there is also phonytonyabbott.com  lol

---

 it looks like the telegraph , and is probably more accurate

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@***super_nova*** wrote:

What exactly do you think that this investigation is going to prove?  What is it going to achieve?  It will not bring the 4 young men back. 

Should it find that the government is responsible for employees of contractors it would mean that every builder who gets a tradesman to install something in one of their buildings will be responsible if somebody gets killed due to lack of training?

We do not need to spend 25 000 000 to know that the young men should have been better trained, and not forced to work in 40+degree heat.  Unfortunately, all too often people die or are seriously injured at work due to bad practices and by all means it would be great if the government would try to reduce that, but why focus on this 1 program?  It has been scrapped. 

And by the way there is nothing hateful in my post; there are just pure facts. 

---

I don't know, this is just a thought, but when someone dies or is injured through negligence, generally, someone is held accountable and financial compensation is made.

Is it possible that with the new Negligence Laws, the new Worker's Compensation Laws the new Insurance Laws and the new NDIS that some kind of precedent needs to be established as to who pays this compensation in the future?

It is the entity who owes the Duty of Care that is held to be negligent, Has it been determined who owes that duty of care?

Have these 4 men's lives been compensated for? Are there other claims for injuries? Has it been established who has to pay for these?

I'm wondering if it has something to do with any of that, to find out who will be responsible for compensation claims via insurance companies vs eligible for NDIS in the future, but this cannot be determined until it is established who owes the duty of care.

I mean this for all future negligence claims. We have written new laws in this area, and as yet, they are not clear, the framework we have atm is an attempt to fill in gaps in the new legislation with that of the past.

Just one of the smaller considerations recommended by the Ipp Report, but disregarded so far - working out who owes the Duty of Care, what that Duty of Care is and who pays for what.

[i-need-a-martini]

The new laws are very clear - the duty of care lies with the person/company undertaking the work and health and safety lies wholly with that person/s.

BUt that hasn't changed much from how it was before.