Page 1591 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 14 May 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
for many people, whether they are on a pension or whether they are a self-funded retiree, that cost of living concerns are the number one top-of-mind issue for them, along with health.
They fear losing the income they have saved for over the course of their working life, the holidays they might have done without so that they could put money towards their retirement. That is why there is deep concern over proposed changes to share dividend refunds, a so-called retiree tax that will especially impact those on lower incomes.
They fear for their quality of life—what they have scrimped and saved for their entire working life. It is a cruel blow to those people who have gone without so that they can plan for their retirement. They say to me, “I could have spent some of that money and gone on a holiday every year, but I chose to put it aside.” Now the very real possibility is that those rules will be changed and that will dramatically impact on their lifestyle. They are afraid about not just that impact on their lifestyle but the uncertainty of what might happen next to erode the lifestyle they have worked all their lives towards.
Discussion concluded.
Motor Accident Injuries Bill 2019
Debate resumed.
Clause 106.
MR COE (Yerrabi—Leader of the Opposition) (3.55): I move amendment No 17 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 1635]. This amendment to clause 106 seeks to remove the offence provisions in relation to failure to notify an insurer of a change in circumstances and extends the prescribed period to 20 working days. An injured person commits an offence under the current bill if the person has a change in circumstances and does not notify the insurer within the prescribed period, being 10 business days. I think this offence is overly harsh and the prescribed period is too short.
MR BARR (Kurrajong—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Social Inclusion and Equality, Minister for Tourism and Special Events and Minister for Trade, Industry and Investment) (3.56): The government will not be supporting the amendment because it removes the onus on an injured person to tell an insurer as soon as possible when they return to work. By removing the offence, an injured person may be encouraged to double dip from their employer and the scheme. The government’s view is that the offence, as drafted, has appropriate safeguards and the insurer is obliged to tell the person to notify of a change in circumstances. The New South Wales compulsory third-party scheme has a similar offence.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (3.56): The Greens will also not be supporting this amendment. I must admit, coming from a party that instituted robodebt, it is hard to see how they would feel this was relevant.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video