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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 12 Hansard (14 November) . . Page.. 3676 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

Funds have not been sought since 1986, as the fund has always had funds surplus to requirements. The former Liberal government made a $30 million contribution to the fund to cover the liabilities of the HIH collapse, and it does not appear that at this stage the fund requires topping up to fund liabilities over and above those the former government contributed for. Therefore, any move to impose a surcharge at this time would simply be an attempt by the government to unnecessarily and unfairly take money from the pockets of ACT businesses-pilfering, if you like-without having a clear justification to do so.

I have asked for the original actuarial assessment to be tabled as well as any other information relating to the liabilities of the fund as a result of the liquidation of HIH. I look forward to the minister providing that information to me. Any move to impose a surcharge would clearly lead to a questioning of the government's motives for imposing such an impost on business at this difficult time.

We are concerned at the lack of consultation undertaken by the government in relation to this legislative change and the potential for the surcharge to be imposed in the short term. It appears that the government has tried to sneak this legislation through without seeking the views of the people it will impact on.

While the opposition may have found out fairly late about the concerns held by the business community, at least we found out. The government did not bother to ask the major business stakeholders what their concerns were and what the implications for them would be as a result of this amendment to the act.

Already the disparity between the workers compensation insurance regime in the ACT and those in other states continues to widen, with the result being an increasing risk that manufacturing businesses will move operations out of the ACT and into New South Wales in order to save significant funds. Information provided to the opposition shows that there are numerous businesses currently examining this option. In one case it would result in a saving of $1 million annually and would turn a currently unprofitable business into a profitable one. Any further increase to their premiums would make that decision much easier to make.

Businesses in the ACT have been hit hard by a number of events out of their control in the last 18 months. In addition to the collapse of HIH last year and the readjustment by the rest of the insurance industry to revalue their policies, the attacks on September 11 have had a significant inflationary impact on workers compensation insurance premiums. ACT business cannot afford, nor does it deserve, to be hit again with a government pilfering their cash flow.

It is not surprising that the government has attacked the opposition for wanting to investigate the consequences of this legislation. They have got something to hide. Their fear of being caught out no doubt contributed to their lack of consultation with anyone in relation to this legislation. The imposition of a further surcharge on business would surely interest the Canberra Business Council. Were they consulted? No. It would also no doubt interest the ACT Chamber of Commerce. Were they consulted? No.

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