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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 2778 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

However, against that danger I would like to say that, as far as I am aware, we have not had a problem with sharp credit providers in the ACT. I believe there has also developed, or perhaps is still developing, a culture of greater compliance with the law and greater accountability amongst credit providers generally. I trust that that will continue to be the case. The negative licensing aspect of the scheme is something that needs very careful monitoring, and I trust that the Consumer Affairs Bureau will be undertaking that task with some zeal in order to protect the consumers from any improper practices or any exploitation which might tempt some of the less scrupulous credit providers. Having said that, I believe that the Bills ought to be supported. I note also that, as well as the licensing scheme, there is some scheme of registration - perhaps a double-check, in many ways, on the people who are to be regulated under these Bills.

I think the achievement of uniform credit laws is a major issue, not just for the ACT but for Australians. It has been very difficult to negotiate and to get agreement on uniform credit laws. It is something which I know that our former colleague Terry Connolly worked long and hard on. I am pleased to see that the present Government has now taken up the cause and is presenting us with what should be the finishing touches to the whole scheme of uniform credit laws for the ACT. Mr Speaker, as I said, with the reservations I have expressed about the negative licensing scheme and the need to keep that under the very closest scrutiny, I am prepared to support the Bills.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (12.17), in reply: Mr Speaker, I thank Ms Follett and the Opposition for their support of the legislation. This Bill is part of a package which is very significant in turning around the level of protection and particularly the level of uniformity in the Australian credit industry and will be a significant benefit to people who are in need of the provision of credit. Ms Follett rightly points out that it has taken a long time to reach the point where this legislation is being enacted nationally. From memory, the commencement date remains as 1 November. That will therefore be a very significant landmark in the development of national uniform laws, not just in this area but across the country. This was one area which was significantly subject to variations, idiosyncrasies, between jurisdictions. To have achieved a level of agreement in this area, albeit it over a long period of time, is a significant landmark.

I want to comment on the issues raised by Ms Follett concerning the negative licensing scheme. I confess that the Government grappled with this issue for some period of time. In fact, we initially decided on a positive licensing scheme and ultimately were persuaded that a negative scheme was as appropriate. Clearly, any scheme which deals in this area has to come to grips with the legacy of the not so distant past of credit providers getting into difficulties and producing significant problems for those who have made investments in them. The Pyramid Building Society in Victoria springs to mind particularly. No-one wishes to see an experience like that revisited on anyone in this jurisdiction. We have to think very carefully about how to avoid those sorts of situations. It is true that, with the advent of a number of national securities and corporate surveillance mechanisms, the likelihood of those sorts of things occurring again is probably greatly diminished, although of course States and Territories themselves have a role to play in making sure that we are able to draw the line and keep the level of protection to the community at a very high level.

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