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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 1589 ..

(3) The answer to this question is not known. This is a matter for insurance companies themselves to answer. As the member may be aware, the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) has not provided the ACT Government with testable data to support claims of particular increases in premiums as a result of the imposition of this levy.

(4) The Registrar-General's Office has advised that 1,696 unit plans have been approved in the ACT. Of these, approximately ten have been cancelled. A small number of developments encompass more than one unit plan.

(5) If the insurance policy taken by the body corporate falls into the first category in my response to question 1, it should attract the same rate as other houseowners' and householders' insurance policies. However, if the policy has been negotiated to take advantage of a particular premium rate, it may be regarded by the insurance company as coming within the second category if that is their commercial decision. The Bill does not compel an insurance company to treat bodies corporate in a specific manner.

(6) Until returns are provided by insurers and property owners (in the latter case, in respect of a policy taken out with a foreign insurer) or until the ICA complies with the Government's many requests to supply testable data, it will not be possible to provide an accurate split between the categories of insurance.

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