Yeah, remember that?
There is, unbelievably, somebody alive in this world still willing to look at facts. This somebody is Possum from Crikey. Read what he writes here. NOW.
Pay particular attention to this bit:
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.
Got that? Good.
7 comments:
I've been seeing other stats suggesting much the same thing, and it's utterly infuriating that this simply hasn't made it into the mainstream media. What is boggling is that the Rudd government would easily have been able to provide such data, back when Garrett and others were virtually being called murdering arsonists. Why didn't they? Why instead were they happy to see Garrett take the fall?
I can only assume it's those focus groups. They were told that people couldn't handle reasonable explanations that might involve thinking, so they didn't even bother to offer any.
Maybe. "Ew maths" syndrome.
Well, didn't see THAT coming. I had Garrett pegged as the Anti-Christ.
Kinda makes you wonder why the gubbermint didn't cough this stuff up...
Apols, didn't read previous comments first.
Duly noted.
Accurate and relevant but unfortunately the government still didn't do enough to regulate the scheme. Too many shonks were involved and they acted too late to address the deaths. It doesn't take a genius to know that government funded service attracts dodgy operators like moths to a flame.
It wasn't Garrett's fault at all. Blame Rudd.
Post a Comment