Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2338 ..
MR CORBELL (continuing):
a provision for self-insurers is included, which sets the levy at not more than 10 per cent of the estimated premium that would have been payable by the self-insurer.
In this context, the Western Australian scheme, which is significantly larger than that in the ACT, has established a pool of $25 million to fund workers' entitlements in the event of an act of terror. A 10 per cent maximum rate would enable the fund manager to collect the Western Australian equivalent in 21/2 years. A maximum rate of 10 per cent would be the same maximum rate which could be charged under the Workers Compensation Supplementation Fund Act, and would maintain consistency across both acts.
Mr Speaker, in moving these amendments, I am also moving further consequential and transitional amendments to the bill. These amendments are to facilitate the commencement of the new ACT workers compensation scheme on 1 July this year. These amendments, like the amendments in the bill, are technical in their nature. They address a number of changes in wording, punctuation and phrasing, resulting from the inclusion into the Workers Compensation Amendment Bill 2001 of a number of draft regulations.
I commend the amendments to members.
MR PRATT (12.40): Mr Speaker, we support those amendments.
MS DUNDAS (12.41): I thank the minister for tabling some amendments and for taking consultation on this issue. However, these amendments do not go to address the concerns raised in my first reading speech. I still have many questions about this piece of legislation and the impact it will have on taxpayers in the ACT. These amendments do not fix those matters.
Mr Corbell has noted that I spent a number of months working for a union, prior to my time in the Assembly. As I said in my speech, I fully support workers being covered by workers compensation. However, if workers, as taxpayers, are taking on the burden of a bill that should be footed by insurance companies, and perhaps the federal government, then I am not happy with this bill as it stands, even with these amendments.
Amendments agreed to.
Bill, as a whole, as amended, agreed to.
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
Sitting suspended from 12.42 to 2.30 pm
Questions without notice
MR HUMPHRIES: My question is to the Treasurer. In your budget handed down only two days ago you claimed that new expenditure amounts to a net $116 million for the next year. However, the government has also imposed cuts on departments, in particular about $10 million for what you yourself have called productivity savings. Treasurer, on