Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 6 Hansard (16 May) . . Page.. 1772 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

a trustee. The point he made was in relation to a lawyer in the ACT. Although I understand the point, it is virtually impossible to define the circumstances of an investigation as routine in nature and therefore warranting that a trustee remain a trustee. It is very difficult to determine the circumstances in which an investigation would either warrant someone stepping down as a trustee or would not warrant a person stepping down as a trustee.

It would be in the interests of making sure the management of the trust continues in an appropriate way that any circumstance in which a trustee is under investigation by a relevant professional body means they have to step down and no longer be a trustee. Of course, if they are subsequently cleared of any wrongdoing in any of those circumstances, there would be no impediment to them again becoming a trustee. I think that is an appropriate safeguard. Whilst I appreciate the circumstances that Mr Humphries raised, I think it is very difficult to define where such an investigation would or would not be appropriate in terms of whether or not trustees step down.

The legislation has been drafted, as I have already indicated, in a timely manner in order to respond to the circumstances that we face in the community at the moment. It is not the government's preferred approach to dealing with legislation, but the circumstances are unusual and warrant a prompt response from the Assembly.

If the legislation is passed this evening, which it appears it will be, I would like to thank members for their support, qualified though that has been. I would like to ensure members that the government is paying close attention to the diverse range of issues that have been raised in the preparation of the legislation and that the prudential requirements that are being set in place will ensure the effective protection of funds in any trust and the effective operation of the scheme in the future.

That is the most important point. We are establishing a regime that is not for profit and that provides much needed stability in what is an increasingly unstable industry-stability on an even playing field and stability that allows industry to go about its work knowing that this will be an ongoing arrangement if it needs to be.

It could prove to be an interim arrangement; we could find that the market will go back to insurance companies. Equally, builders may choose to use this form of consumer protection as it is more appropriate to their needs. If they choose to do that, we will have provided a framework for stability and ongoing confidence in the sector, and that is extremely important.

I understand there are a number of amendments, and I will speak to those when they are moved. I thank members for their support and again extend to members the offer of further discussions on the detail of the regulations if they would like to see particular items addressed prior to those regulations being enacted.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .