Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 3 Hansard (13 March) . . Page.. 1093..
Answers to questions
(Question No 381)
Mr Pratt asked the Minister for Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 19 February 2003:
In relation to the WorkCover Annual Report 2002:
(1) Supplementation Fund (Annual Report p.101):
A total of $64 million was predicted to be the liability in relation to the 757 claims made against the liquidator at an average of $84,500 per claim.
(a) Given that in the first full financial year, 485 claims have been finalised for a total expenditure of $7.3 million, or $15,000 per claim, leaving a balance of 272 claims with total allocations of $56.7 million or $208,000 per claim, is this figure still accurate or is it likely that performance will be significantly better than originally predicted by both the actuary and ACT WorkCover;
(b) How does the actual settlement amounts compare with HIH's own original estimates at the time of the collapse;
(c) Given the Minister's admission on 20 November that the actuarial report was prepared on less than complete data, how reliable are these figures included in the annual accounts?
(2) Administration Expenses (Page 106):
Administration expenses associated with the Supplementation Fund total $601,322 (or $639,316 on page 108).
(a) How many staff does this expense cover and is this not high compared with insurance industry average workloads, given that there is also the involvement of a supervising insurer;
(b) In addition, why is there a discrepancy between the figures in the Statement of Financial Performance (p.106) and the Statement of Cash Flows (p.108)?
(3) Nominal Insurer Advisory Committee (Page 14):
(a) Given that ACT WorkCover as the Nominal Insurer also sets and collects the levies from insurers and self-insurers based on claims costs, what transparency is there in place to ensure that claims are managed for the best possible outcome to keep levies down?
(4) Construction Industry Safety (Page 23):