John Smith wrote on Jul 26
th, 2012 at 9:12pm:
salad in wrote on Jul 26
th, 2012 at 9:07pm:
adelcrow wrote on Jul 26
th, 2012 at 6:26pm:
To whom do we pay a medicare levy?
Quote:Federal government
The Commonwealth (or Australian) Government (also described as the federal government) is based in Canberra and is probably the most visible of the three levels of government. Its responsibilities are written in the Australian Constitution.
The Commonwealth handles ‘big picture’ issues. These include:
advertising regulations
broadcasting
currency
defence
immigration
international treaties and policy
marriage
quarantine
telecommunications
trade.
When Commonwealth responsibilities overlap with those of state or territory and local governments, the Commonwealth usually takes a national role. For example, it handles:
roads by managing national highways
public health by managing Medicare and drug control
education by funding universities and the National Library
sport by supporting national teams
taxes by collecting income tax and various levies and excise (such as tobacco, alcohol, fuel)
environment by enacting policies regarding large environmental and pollution issues.
http://www.actnow.com.au/Tool/Federal_state_localwhos_in_charge_of_what.aspx
I don't see anything there about licensing for tradespeople .... thank you
NSW its Dept. Fair trade
Qld it's Building Services Association
don't know the other states, but if it was federal, NSW and QLD would be the same.
"Announcing the insulation program’s cancellation, Garrett blamed “unscrupulous, sometimes illegal and shonky operators” for the problems in the scheme. However, before the program even got fully operational, the government ignored multiple warnings last April by regulatory agencies that people could die and houses burn down, because the rollout would be effectively unregulated, with no-one to carry out safety or quality inspections.
On Friday, Garrett finally released secret legal advice the government had received last April warning that the program could result in house fires and fraud, and might be of little benefit to the environment. Garrett also revealed that audits had shown a risk of dangerous faults in up to 90,000 homes and that poor quality batts were fitted in 180,000 homes, out of the 1.1 million homes insulated. At-risk homes will be inspected at the rate of 400 a week, potentially taking years.
There is no doubt that the government’s scheme demonstrated its callous indifference for the lives and safety of insulation installers and home owners. In the scramble to take advantage of the $1,200 (initially $1,600) on offer for each installation, contractors recruited inexperienced young people for technical and dangerous work, with no regard for health and safety.
The accreditation process for the 7,500 or so employers who rushed into the insulation market was obviously inadequate—it could be completed on the Internet and over the phone. Serious fire hazards were caused when operators installed insulation too close to electric cables, ceiling fans, lights and transformers."
Forum
Pages: 
