Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Avani Terraces - Greenway
Life is looking up

Third Party Insurance Revisited

By cranky - 10 August 2008 37

The SMH is reporting that the NRMA has slipped $225,000 into NSW Labor coffers over the past year or so, unfortunately without notifying the relevant interested parties.

    “In 2006 Mr Evans told the annual general meeting that the group believed that “we have an obligation to be involved in the political process in order to advance the interests of our members”.”

Would similar occurences, of which I had heard a rumour, have occured locally? (The rumours related to funds put into local ‘road safety programs’ by the NRMA).

Would this be why there appears to be no progress on widening the TPI scheme to other insurers locally?

Motorists continue to be milked by this cosy arrangement. It’s time to open the system up.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
37 Responses to
Third Party Insurance Revisited
tom-tom 9:32 pm 10 Aug 08

johnboy; just out of curiosity what sort of standards are you applying to ‘news’ posts like this?

i know you’re quiet keen on getting credit for any stories riotact breaks; and it has often being mentioned that this site is well read by local media. do you think that when riotact acts as a defacto news service like this that posts need to have a little more substance? at the moment it just seems as if its far too easy to put a smear up without any backing (take this; or the headline in the katy gallagher post active atm for example)

johnboy 9:18 pm 10 Aug 08

Interesting debate guys, if you can stop impugning each others’ motives I won’t have to send anyone to the sin bin.

tom-tom 9:14 pm 10 Aug 08

at no point have i in anyway advocated the nrma monopoly, all i’ve done is call you out for making offensive smears. the fact you are trying to attack me for this without addressing my call for evidence really says a lot about you.

your original post attempts to insinuate that there is some kind of corrupt deal between the nrma and the act govt. if you have evidence then post it, if you dont then shut up, doing anything else would be shameful and pathetic.

and imhotep; there’s no evidence thats my point. and theres smoke…. would that perhaps be because someones making smears on a local news and opinion website? hmmmm

oh and i’m not even going to waste my time on your last point; if you cant even stay on topic in your attempts to discredit me then i’m not going to bother responding

VicePope 8:55 pm 10 Aug 08

I’ve been lurking and looking. First, I think the question was whether the NRMA had sought to influence the ACT Government. Tom-Tom’s response makes some sense there – there is no evidence of it on the only place it would be required to be shown. If there ain’t no smoke, the odds are pretty good that there’s no fire. Anything will hve to be disclosed, and that’s a good thing.

Second, there may be policy arguments for a single third party insurer. I can think of one analogy – the public is not especially well served by health insurance, which is highly competitive, but rather more efficiently by Medicare, which is not at all competitive. There are costs as well as benefits in competition. If prices go down with competition, does that occur for all buyers, or is it because the market gets fragmented and becomes easier for some and harder for others? How would competition affect the nominal defendant scheme? Does this break the administratively helpful nexus between registering a vehicle and getting third party insurance? This is not to say that there may not be good arguments for an open field, but to say that there are some arguments against it.

Third, no idea what this thread had to do with ACT Government advertising. I object to it, for the same reasons that I objected to last year’s Federal ad blitz. It’s an abuse of taxpayer funds. It confuses the business of government with the interests of the governing party. There’s a difference between genuine information and feel good/political message stuff. I’m sure someone could set up a good thread on this (I’m not volunteering).

cranky 7:40 pm 10 Aug 08

Imhotep,

Thank you. Head, brick wall, get my drift.

imhotep 7:36 pm 10 Aug 08

I think the whole point of the SMH article, and cranky’s comments, was that the NRMA has a policy of not ‘officially’ donating anything to a party, but to find other, more subtle ways, to express ‘support’. Thus, Tom, Tom, the whole point is that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, only smoke…

BTW Tom, since you appear to be completely up to speed with all things Labor in the ACT, could you tell us who is funding the current advertising blitz by the ACT Government? (You know, the ones telling us how much they are about to improve health care etc.)
Can you give an assurance that taxpayers aren’t funding this blatantly political claptrap?

.

cranky 7:27 pm 10 Aug 08

I have stated my case. That your motives result in the motorists of the ACT paying a huge, monopolist supplier, monetary benefit to the NRMA, requires an explanation.

I am puzzled that anyone can advocate a wholesale ripoff of the motoring public.

tom-tom 7:12 pm 10 Aug 08

i’m not advocating it, i’m just saying that you have no evidence for the outrageous insinuations you make in your post.

you’ve suggested corruption without even a shred of evidence and you should be ashamed of yourself for that.

either post some evidence or shut up.

(btw, i like the attack on what my motives are; it really shows the strength of your position)

cranky 6:22 pm 10 Aug 08

I’m puzzled that over 12 months after a policy was announced that would reduce the cost to ACT motorists, nothing has eventuated.

I believe the article from the SMH illustrates a policy by the NRMA to further the return to their shareholders.

Evans has not said that the NRMA has paid off the ACT Gov. I wouldn’t expect him to. $30 odd mill is a lot of hush money.

Your apparent advocacy of the single supplier model of TPI, with it’s demonstrated overcharging of all ACT motorists, has me wondering where you come from.

tom-tom 6:03 pm 10 Aug 08

do you actually have any evidence that the nrma and the act govt engaged in a quid pro quo sort of arragement like the kind you are insinuating? didn’t think so. You should hang your head in shame.

imhotep 4:47 pm 10 Aug 08

cranky said :

“The ACT Gov should hang it’s head in shame.”

If we re-elect them, we should hang our heads in shame.

.

cranky 4:02 pm 10 Aug 08

Tom Tom,

You do not appear to have read the article

“It is important to note that we do not ‘donate’ money to political parties. Instead, we purchase tables at political functions and events that are attended by members of parliament at both a state and federal level,” he told the meeting.

“Internally we have a set of rules that govern this process, namely that what we give to one side of politics we give to another in order to ensure fairness and that we only attend those events at which there are representatives from the areas of relevance to our members.

“Unfortunately, this is a reality of being involved in the political process today.”

Quote from Alan Evans, NRMA.

A few bucks into a “road safety campaign” in the ACT, has resulted in a massive payout.

The ACT Gov should hang it’s head in shame.

tom-tom 3:43 pm 10 Aug 08

if you look on the act electoral commissions website you can see a list of who has donated to every party; the NRMA doesn’t figure. If you are going to hint at corruption that would have been a good place to check.

cranky do you have a source for these rumours? because without one it looks an awful lot like you are trying to smear people without any evidence.

cranky 1:20 pm 10 Aug 08

A quick check on past posts show Sonic first announced that the scheme would be opened up in June, 2007.

Lets see. Say $100 saving per car, about 280,000 cars registered, a bit over a year – Wow, a cool $30 mill or so that the NRMA has pocketed with the lack of competition.

Nice work if you can get it.

Vic Bitterman 1:08 pm 10 Aug 08

Wasn’t there some ministerial announcement a few months ago, that the guvmint *was* going to open the CTPI market to other insurers?

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site