Motions

Motor Accident Commission

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (16:14): I move:

That the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, as part of its current inquiry into the Motor Accident Commission, ensures that it investigates current regulatory arrangements and any proposed changes to those regulatory arrangements.

I referred to the background to this particular motion in my contribution to the government's Compulsory Third Party Insurance Regulation Bill yesterday, concerning the introduction of the independent regulator. As I outlined then, and I do not propose to outline in great detail today, the Liberal Party's original proposition was to refer that government bill at the second reading stage to the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, which is currently taking evidence on an inquiry into the government's proposed privatisation of the Motor Accident Commission.

However, that is not possible and therefore this particular device has to be considered and we suggest be used, and that is, that the Liberal Party will seek to adjourn debate of the government's legislation at the second reading stage at an appropriate time and await the results of the Statutory Authorities Review Committee inquiry into the government's privatisation.

This motion is simply seeking to ensure something which is in part already occurring. It ensures that part of its terms of reference be that the current inquiry—the evidence that the committee takes—will look at the current regulatory arrangement as it relates to compulsory third party insurance and any proposed changes to those regulatory arrangements.

As I said, the committee has already taken some evidence on that. I am sure we would have been taking further evidence, but the government has legislation before the house which proposes a particular model. I have raised a small number of questions there, but as a member of the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, I would hope to be able to raise many more questions as we take evidence.

One of the questions that I put on the public record yesterday was why the government was proposing to remove the requirement for premium increases in the future to be fair and reasonable, which is a current requirement under the existing legislation. The government's proposal is to take away fair and reasonable as being a guideline for CTP increases and that clearly, I think, should be an issue that the committee would need to address.

As I said, I spoke in greater length as to the reasons why I would be moving this motion today. I give notice to members, but I will send the usual email around to members and their officers that, given that this inquiry is already taking evidence, there is therefore some urgency for the council to either agree or not agree with this particular motion. I propose bringing it to a vote at the next Wednesday of sitting.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.T. Ngo.