Page 1601 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 14 May 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
and Investment) (4.40): I move amendment No 11 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1645]. Both this amendment and amendment No 12 provide further processes around an injured person’s estimated whole person impairment at four years and six months, where their injuries have not stabilised. To ensure that an injured person whose injury is not stabilised at this point—and they may have a common-law claim—can proceed with a claim if they are eligible, the bill provides for the estimated whole person impairment assessment.
There have been comments made that this estimate process is an unfair one. It is refined, with these amendments, to provide an injured person an option. If an injured person’s estimated whole person impairment is five per cent or more and the injured person is eligible to make a common-law claim—that is, they are not at fault—the injured person may either choose or accept their estimated whole person impairment assessment or make a common-law claim and stay proceedings until their injuries have stabilised and they can have another whole person impairment assessment. This responds to concerns that were raised in relation to the exposure draft.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (4.42): The Greens support this amendment and the associated amendments, Nos 12, 13 and 14. This gives the injured person a choice in relation to their estimated WPI when their injuries have not stabilised around the four year and six month mark, and it sets out the process around this. Essentially, this series of amendments means that the injured person can either agree to use their estimated WPI, and that estimate is taken to be their WPI, or lodge a common-law claim and stay proceedings on the basis that their WPI has not stabilised.
There are some requirements governing when the insurer must provide information to the injured person, including the WPI report, and when an injured person must make a decision to accept the estimated WPI or make a common-law claim and stay the proceeding. When a person applies to stay a proceeding on the claim until their injuries stabilise, they must then inform the insurer when their injuries stabilise. At this point another WPI assessment is conducted, which will determine whether the person’s WPI is 10 per cent or more and whether they can proceed with a claim. These amendments set out the processes that must be followed under these circumstances, including the requirement of the insurer to offer the injured person the relevant quality of life benefits. Overall this seems like, all things considered, a reasonable process. Thus we support this series of amendments.
MR COE (Yerrabi—Leader of the Opposition) (4.43): The opposition does not support this. We do not think that using an estimated WPI is the best way forward. We of course prefer our amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
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) (4.44): I move amendment No 12 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1645].
Amendment agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video