Kate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The first point I need to make is that for the opposition senators to stand up and say the warnings were ignored is patently untrue. Systematically the minister, as problems came to light and were reported to him, made changes to the Home Insulation Program as those problems were brought to light. That has been demonstrated now in the forum of Senate estimates committees and the forum of inquiries repeatedly in the parliament by Minister Garrett and Minister Wong. So to stand up and say that is genuinely misleading on the facts as they have now been established.

I am not saying that the opposition cannot come in here and purport all sorts of things, but the difference between the government and the opposition is that, for us, actions speak louder than words. In stark contrast to the conduct of the former government, we have acted quickly, whenever information has been made available, to resolve the problem. The culture of the Labor government is to do exactly that. When we know of a problem, we move to fix it. There is no skulking or hiding or thwarting inquiry. It is about putting it out there and being upfront about fixing the problem, and that is what you have seen from Prime Minister Rudd right through the front bench and right through to committee members of the Labor government in resolving this problem.

I am really proud of the way the government is dealing with this. I come from the building industry. I am extremely sensitive to the challenges and difficulties in trying to uphold occupational health and safety laws in the building and construction industry, and I think there is no tougher problem to solve than making sure that those laws are enforced. We know, as Minister Combet, the Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, has made very clear, that at least a proportion of the problems here occurred because the right thing had not been done by several of the businesses engaged with the government program. I think it is critical to make that point. I remember many, many years of campaigning from the other side of the chamber in opposition about the impact on occupational health and safety laws of the former government’s Work Choices, so I find it quite galling that suddenly the opposition are purer than the whitest snow in arguing for the protection and safety of households and workers. I wish they had felt so strongly about these issues when it mattered—when the laws were being changed, under the Howard government, to undermine the capacity of unions and workers to represent their members on occupational health and safety issues.

As I said, actions speak louder than words; and a series of actions that the Labor government has now put in place to resolve these problems do speak for themselves. Our first priority is, appropriately, safety. Given the safety advice received by the government, we have agreed that all houses that have had foil insulation installed under the Home Insulation Program will be inspected and given the chance to have that foil removed or to have a safety switch installed. As I am sure has been said many a time, there will be more statements about how this will proceed, but the bottom line is that if people want an inspection, they will be able to ring and organise that. If they have foil insulation, they can organise an inspection right now by contacting a licensed electrician.

So, I challenge Senator Nash very specifically on this point of fact: she said that people would not be able to get inspections. That is not true. If they are concerned, there is a course of action they can take to allay their fears. I take objection to the almost gleeful fearmongering that is occurring across the chamber. I have said before that I find it quite galling. Those opposite do not even have the wherewithal or the political gumption to acknowledge that action has been taken. By all means hold the government to account on how that action proceeds, but do not come into this chamber and mislead and fearmonger about us not being committed to resolving these problems and putting householder safety up front as the priority.

I will say a couple more words about fraud. As a government, we are disgusted at the reports of alleged fraud under the program. I know this issue was touched on by Senator Ryan in his question, and I will conclude by quoting Minister Combet in this regard:

For the hardships caused, for the loss of value of legitimate businesses, for the extent of safety and fire hazards and for the loss of consumer confidence, the failure of duties of care and regulatory compliance, the government attributes a burden of responsibility to the minority of companies involved in the program that cut corners to achieve a quick buck.

(Time expired)