Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Just A Thought Regarding The Victorian Fires..

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by 2up, Feb 16, 2009.

  1. It's alleged that the fires in Kinglake were started by a power company due to neglect...just wondering if the boss of the power company will get the same sentence as the arsonist in Morewell ??? His company did kill over 100 people and destroy many homes. (allegely)
    Probably not !!!!!!!

  2. Not sure what laws would apply, if a company is negligent and kills an employee they bosses can face charges, not being a legal eagle i'm not sure what the rules are for this sort of thing, would it be classed an industrial accident etc, i highly doubt you will see a big boss of a power company doing any time or facing charges, they wil have there lawyers blaming the winds unprecedented heat etc,
    however a accident from fallen powerlines however tragic is still a long way off a deranged madman deliberately lighting fires with full knowledge of the potential for it to kill people
  3. The electricity company "allegedly" involved is SP Ausnet which is pretty much fully owned by the Singapore government. Unfortunately under the terms of the Electricity privatisation SP Ausnet's legal liability is capped at $100M the remainder of liability s carried by Mr and Mrs tax payer Victoria. :(

    Personally I believe if this proves to be negligence due to improper maintenance we should ream the Singapore government until their nose bleeds. Profit taking and limited liability what an immoral deal for them. We have been poorly served by our elected officials yet again.
  4. #4 Seany, Feb 16, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2015
  5. :WStupid:

    if they cant keep things up to standard, they face the music. end of story.
    i dont know how the Gov can justify such limited legal liability in the contract, saying they'll cover the rest if shit hits the fan. why the hell should i pay for someone else's mistake? especially something foreign owned/controlled.
  6. Personally I think it would be appropriate to let the investigative process (which, given the circumstances, will be long, painstaking and thorough) take place unhindered and undistracted before the fingers of blame get pointed and the ambulance chasing lawyers start lining their own pockets.

    I suspect that there will be plenty of responsibility to go round to everybody on this one. Neither the victims nor the survivors, nor the community at large will benefit from jumping the gun.

    But yeah, limiting the liability of a private company to a piffling (in this day and age) $100m sounds decidedly sus.
  7. There are limited liability arrangements in many government contracts simply because a number has to be nominated so that the liability insurance can be costed.

    What probably happened was that the Victorian government of the time thought they could save some $ in the costings compared to say 1000 million in liability cover (which the power company would have costed higher).

    The fact that anything over that is covered by the government suggests that the power company wanted a higher figure covered by the costings in fact, so I'd put this one squarely at the foot of the government of the time.
  8. It has always been legal to kill people in Australia. So long as the one responsible is a company in the pursuit of profit. :evil:
  9. If our own governments never face up to their responsibilities, what chance do you have to enforcing any sort of accountability on a foreign government?
  10. It will be interesting to find out how the powerlines failed - If it happened due to company neglect, ream them with a two inch tapered bit.

    I must admit, I do admire these aspiring law firms; the fires aren't even out and they're already screaming "Sue! Sue!" Good old US of Australia.
  11. And why is it so bad for our government to own things but OK if a foreign government buys them? :roll:
  12. I find this class action really distasteful.

    its easy to point the finger in a lot of directions, worse the cause of the fires haven't even been determined and this has been started.

    no doubt getting investment in a project is difficult enough. there are many unforseens running big companies and if a $500 million (random numbers for examples sake) company is potentially going to be brought down by a $10million investment, then they won't bother with it.
  13. Ambulance chasers :roll:

    I'm all for bringing pain to genuine culprits, BUT... if it's a case of electricity company's being held to task for not guaranteeing that every line is beyond the possibility of failure, forever, even in 100kmh wind and 47 degree heat, and getting the public to agree to pay for the enormous cost of upgrading the system to those specifications, then I'm not so sure.

    If there was a known weakness that wasn't dealt with... if routine maintenance was downgraded... if inspections were not done, then hit them hard. But sometimes shit just happens. Looking for a culprit for the purpose of extracting cash, especially when the whole population is getting behind the rebuilding, may not be entirely the right way to go IMHO.

    I've got no particular sympathy for the Singapore government, but let's see if they really did anything wrong before we string them up.
  14. I think you may be hard pressed to buy a paper shredder in Singapore today. Some company bought the lot on Monday.... :grin: :grin: :grin: