This report examines the program's governance, design and administration, risk management processes, audit and compliance mechanisms and capacity issues.
Rapid roll out, wide access to the program for both householders and entrants to the installation industry, and ease of transactions were key drivers for program design and implementation. This was appropriate given the key objective of economic stimulus, but it is unreasonable to conclude that a program of this size, operating within a largely unregulated industry could ever be delivered without risk. It is also unreasonable to conclude that all of the issues that emerged from the program could have been anticipated, or that they were easily remediable.
A stronger management structure, earlier implementation of the audit and compliance program, and better targeting of compliance effort early in the program could have mitigated the risks to more acceptable levels, but never to zero.
The high level of risks around safety and quality mean that the lack of a state regulatory structure for the insulation industry was a significant factor in the way the HIP played out. The existing frameworks, particularly for state and territory OH&S, were not sufficiently geared up for the 1 July 2009 start date of HIP proper.
Image: yewenyi / Flickr