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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2017 Week 13 Hansard (Thursday, 2 November 2017) . . Page.. 5011 ..

monthly TCCS construction updates; and

media releases were issued leading up to the closure of Hibberson Street advising of traffic impacts and bus movements around the Town Centre.

(2) (a) Yes (b) Yes (c) Yes.

(3) The works will continue until approximately the end of March 2018, though some works may be undertaken until system operations commence.

(4) Yes.

(5) Yes.

(6) Yes.

(7) Gungahlin Place between Hibberson Street and Efkarpidis Street has been closed since 23 May 2017 and reopened on 6 October 2017.

(8) Gungahlin Place between Hibberson Street and Efkarpidis Street and reopened on 6 October 2017.

(9) It is not the current policy of the Territory Government to pay compensation to businesses which may be impacted by the construction of public infrastructure.

(Question No 681)

Ms Lee asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 22 September 2017 (redirected to the Acting Treasurer):

(1) Given that documents available on the yoursay.ctp website state that the reason ACT residents pay different Compulsory Third Party Insurance (CTP) premiums to other jurisdictions is largely because of the benefits structure and the court based model of resolving claims, does the benefits structure reflect the higher average weekly earnings (AWE) of Canberrans compared to AWE in other jurisdictions; if not, what is the reason for the current level of ACT CTP premiums.

(2) Do most claims settle and not go to court to be resolved.

Ms Fitzharris: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) CTP insurance schemes exist in every state and territory but they are different in design and offer different levels of coverage, benefits and premiums.

The ACT has an at-fault common law scheme, which means that an injured person can sue another person for negligence and seek compensation. While some other states also have common law schemes, they are different from the ACT scheme because they define or have limits or thresholds on the benefits that are payable for different types of injury. Some other states operate their schemes on a no-fault basis, in some cases with limited common law access. A no-fault scheme provides some benefits regardless of who was at fault for the accident, without the need to sue and go to court.

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