House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Compulsory Third-Party Insurance COMPULSORY THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE Mrs VLAHOS House of Assembly Taylor COMPULSORY THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE Mrs VLAHOS (Taylor) (15:07): Can the Treasurer outline to the house the government's reform agenda for compulsory third-party reform and provide an update on who is supportive of the changes? The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly Playford Minister for Workers Rehabilitation Minister for Defence Industries Minister for Veterans' Affairs COMPULSORY THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Treasurer, Minister for Workers Rehabilitation, Minister for Defence Industries, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (15:07): I would like to thank the member for Taylor for this question. I am pleased to report the government's proposed reforms to the compulsory third-party insurance scheme so that all severely injured motorists are covered and motor registration premiums become cheaper. The reform scheme will make it fairer for all South Australians and ease the burden on South Australian motorists and taxpayers. The new scheme will be more affordable for motorists. For the average household of two cars, there will be savings of more than $300 over two years. By moving to a no-fault scheme— Mrs Redmond House of Assembly Mrs Redmond: If you have two cars per year? The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: If you have two cars, over the two years you will save more than $300. Mrs Redmond interjecting: The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: For one car you would save less because you only have to pay for one registration. Mrs Redmond interjecting: The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: That is correct. Many South Australian families need to have two cars, for various reasons and they have to register their car twice; that is my point. By moving to a no— Members interjecting: The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: Well, the member for Norwood may well have more than two cars in his personal garage; I don't know. I don't know if you register yachts, I don't know. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: By moving to a no-fault scheme, all motorists, regardless of fault, will be covered in the event of an accident resulting in catastrophic, permanent injury. Those who sustain minor industries in an accident will still have their medical care and treatment needs met and income from days off work covered. Our main goal is better recovery, rehabilitation and care for injured motorists and keeping CTP premiums affordable. The main proposed reforms include that injuries that are less than catastrophic will continue to be managed through the Motor Accident Commission on a fault basis, with claims starting under a new points of threshold system. Secondly, compensation will be paid at 80 per cent of past and future economic loss. Damages for future economic loss will be available when the injury is moderate or serious, that is, more than 15 points on the 100-point scale. Finally, legal costs will not be reimbursed for minor injuries (claims of less than $30,000). A maximum $2,500 will be reimbursed for claims between $30,000 and $50,000. Drunken hoon drivers will not be able to sue for any economic loss under the new system. When finalised in July 2014, the full extent of the reforms will see ongoing premiums reduced to an estimated $462, a net benefit to the typical motorist of $50 ongoing on current premiums. The proposed reforms have been supported by no less than the RAA (representing over 700,000 South Australians); the Australian Medical Association; Dr Ruth Marshall, the director at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre; Dr Bill Griggs, the director of trauma at the Royal Adelaide Hospital; and many disability groups. I encourage the state opposition to become involved in the discussion. I would hope that the opposition would put the needs of the South Australian public ahead of very small interest groups being a few plaintiff lawyers. The Liberal Party's lack of support expressed by the member for Davenport was astonishing. Asked whether he thought it was a good idea, he said, 'Well, look, we're not convinced'—not convinced that those who are catastrophically injured should be covered, not convinced— Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: Point of order, Madam Speaker. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! Point of order. Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: The Treasurer is now putting words in the mouth of other members and is clearly debating standing order 98. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Thank you. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I will uphold that. Treasurer, have you finished your answer? The Hon. J.J. SNELLING House of Assembly The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: Yes. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Thank you. The member for Hammond.