Motor Accident Commission | Motion
01/07/2015
Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. R.L. Brokenshire:
That the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, as an urgent priority, investigate and examine—
1.The proposal for privatisation of the Motor Accident Commission including , but not limited to, the alternative to privatisation as put forward to the state government by the MAC board;
2.The PricewaterhouseCoopers’ economic predictions and the report by Finity Consulting on the MAC board proposal;
3.Treasury involvement in the decision to privatise the MAC;
4.Other states that have privatised and the impact that has had on CTP costs and injury compensation; and
5.Whether the authority and its operations provide the most effective, efficient and economical means for achieving the purposes set out within the act including, but not limited to, whether purposes of the fund noted in section 25 of the Motor Accident Commission Act regarding the Compulsory Third Party Fund are being appropriately administered in accordance with the act.
(Continued from 17 June 2015.)
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Very briefly, on behalf of Dignity for Disability I indicate our support for this motion—
The Hon. S.G. Wade: Unanimous.
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Yes, I think we have just ticked over unanimous—and I do so saying: I hate to say I told you so. Members may remember that when changes to the compulsory third-party insurance laws were changed and the ensuing changes to the MAC were mooted, Dignity for Disability was the only party to stand against those changes. The advice we received and the research we had done clearly illustrated that there were huge problems with these changes that would result in less comprehensive cover for injured motorists. Perhaps if other members had had the guts to follow that advice, we would not be having this debate at all. But having said that, we are happy to support this and any other measure to look at these changes and how we can better protect injured motorists. We support the motion.
