More insulation debate information

A couple more media articles have emerged discussing the insulation debate/rebate/debacle rationally and with some statistical precision. Though difficult to be exact about the numbers these 2 articles make interesting reading.
First look at:

Did the insulation program actually reduce fire risk? by Possum Comitatus , Pollytics blog on Crikey.com on Feb 24. Complete with figures and reasoned arguments.

Secondly look at :

Insulation fire risk was worse before rebate by John Watson in "The Age" today, 4 March.

I agree with his comments - "If the program has proved anything, it is that Australia abounds with shonky businesses, ''she'll be right'' tradesmen, hypocritical politicians who habitually sacrifice workplace safety on the altar of business-friendly policy, and careless, pack-hunting journalists. That, I'm afraid, is not much of a revelation at all"

I hope soon to hear of successful prosecutions of shonky insulation dealers. However, the sensationalist reporting of these issues by many in the media are of just as much concern. Who can govern well with such insidious attacks and misrepresentations? And what are most people exposed to - reasoned arguments or hysterical mis-representation??

Another take on the insulation debacle

After watching the savaging of Peter Garrett over the home insulation program I was pleased to see Kevin Rudd taking responsibility for part of the problem. We all knew the program had been rushed ahead with several other stimulus packages to cope with the GFC.
I was starting to get confused with all the attacks into thinking the points made by Garrett in his defense were perhaps overstated. However, in todays Financial Review (AFR- page 3) paper I have found a well reasoned article "Insulation fears: more hype than actual fires" by Geoff Winestock which has restored (somewhat) my faith in the ability of media to actually discuss facts rather than emotional hysteria as well as restored some trust in the Minister.

I would be the first to admit that if I had lost a son in an industrial accident, I would be extremely emotional, even hysterical.

However, the AFR article points out "based on data from fire brigades for NSW, Queensland, South Australia and metropolitan Melbourne...has found there were 115 house fires in 2009 attributed to faulty insulation. ...It was only slightly higher than the 75 house fires caused by faulty insulation in 2007... In the meantime about 1.15 million houses have been fitted with insulation, ..compared with an average of about 60,000 installations in 2007" So in terms of fires per installation the risk has fallen dramatically.

It would be extremely interesting to see if the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) or some other proper statistical agency, can confirm these numbers as it does back up Peter Garrett's claim to have introduced training and standards into the industry.
The Financial Review had a number of excellent articles - on page 30 "Flawed model, muddled message" by John Breusch on the problems with selling the Emissions Trading Scheme, and page 21 "Safe as houses" by Andrew Cornell which details why I would not be able to keep up with the housing market on a librarians salary!

So thanks AFR for an informative lunchtime read.