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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2805 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

What is the opposition's interest in having a smaller, more streamlined board? I think there is a greater interest in having a board which is capable of identifying and addressing the needs of people across the board whose interests the captive insurer is to serve. And whose interests is the captive insurer to serve? The interests of the client agencies within the ACT government.

Mr Quinlan thinks this should be basically a body dominated by outside experts. Well, I think he has missed the point of the objective. It is to create a body, a captive insurer, with a capacity to focus on getting the best deal for the insurance needs of areas of ACT government operations, and I think for that reason it ought to have representatives on it of those very organisations. If you have an organisation which is in the nature of a cooperative, which in this respect the organisation is, then you appropriately have the members of the organisation on the board. This Assembly from time to time has nominated boards with community representatives on them because we have argued that the community's interest has to be reflected in the operation of the boards.

Mr Quinlan: Majority community representatives?

MR HUMPHRIES: No, we are not proposing a majority of members from the client agencies here either. Only two of the six are to be from the client agencies. The government member there would be a representative of treasury and would have an interest in the operation.

Mr Quinlan: Gary-

MR HUMPHRIES: You can call people names, Mr Quinlan, but I am running a serious argument here.

Mr Quinlan: I called you Gary.

MR HUMPHRIES: It is an important argument. Treasury tells me that they believe the best operation of this organisation will be where the clients have a say in what the organisation is doing for them. If we set up boards and authorities in the ACT with representatives of the community on them because we want the community interest to be represented, fine. In this case the interest which is being catered for is the interest of the agencies, and therefore they ought to be on the authority, Mr Speaker.

MS TUCKER (8.15): I have listened to the arguments and Mr Humphries and Mr Quinlan just swap positions. I am going to take Mr Quinlan's amendment on the name change because that is about the fact that this is not going to work as a normal organisation which is maximising returns to shareholders, but I will support Mr Humphries' arrangements for greater membership from the agencies because I believe that is about ensuring that they respond adequately to the needs of the government agencies, as he has just argued, clearly.

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