Chameleon Rudd is double standard

Comments on Dennis Shanahan “Standards sacrificed to save position”, 24/02/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/standards-sacrificed-to-save-position/story-e6frg6zo-1225833635697

Kevin Rudd says: "I think the proper definition of ministerial responsibility is as follows: one, that a minister, when charged by cabinet with the implementation of a program, has commissioned, through his department, appropriate risk assessment as to what measures should be put in place for the proper implementation of the program; secondly, that the minister then acts appropriately in response to the departmental advice that the minister receives in the implementation of that program," Rudd said.

"Against those core measures, I stand by the minister, as I did last week, as I'll do next week."

But Mr Rudd, who should be responsible for those deaths and fires as a result of the implementation of that insulation program? Who should be responsible for the waste of taxpayers’ money either due to the poor work of some insulators or due to the compensations for those good insulators who lost businesses and work as a result of the disastrous program?

Somebody or people must be held responsible for those matters. Is that the cabinet? Is that the minister? Or is that the department?

If no one takes the responsibility for the unfortunate deaths and fires and waste under the Rudd government, is the government a responsible one, or is the government economically conservative?