❓ Question regarding the Minister's actions to encourage Dexta Corporation's return to the home indemnity insurance market, compared to actions taken in NSW and Victoria. The Minister defends WA's approach, highlighting the profitability of its scheme.
AnsweredQoN 918Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the decision by the Governments of New South Wales and Victoria to act as temporary reinsurers to enable Dexta Corporation Ltd to get back into the home indemnity insurance market, which decision has won praise from both the building industry and the insurance sector, and ask - (1) Does the minister recall telling this House on 10 April - . . . Dexta may be able to obtain reinsurance and return to the market. We hope that will happen and we will do what we can to encourage it. (2) In view of the minister’s commitment to do what he can to get Dexta back into the market, how does he excuse his failure to achieve the same result as his Labor counterparts over east? Mr KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
(1) Does the minister recall telling this House on 10 April - . . . Dexta may be able to obtain reinsurance and return to the market. We hope that will happen and we will do what we can to encourage it. (2) In view of the minister’s commitment to do what he can to get Dexta back into the market, how does he excuse his failure to achieve the same result as his Labor counterparts over east? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
(1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
(1) Does the minister recall telling this House on 10 April - . . . Dexta may be able to obtain reinsurance and return to the market. We hope that will happen and we will do what we can to encourage it. (2) In view of the minister’s commitment to do what he can to get Dexta back into the market, how does he excuse his failure to achieve the same result as his Labor counterparts over east? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
(1)-(2) The question is predicated on false information or on a misunderstanding of the information. On all the reports, the fact is that Western Australia has a home indemnity insurance scheme that runs at a profit for insurers; whereas the schemes in New South Wales and Victoria have run at a loss. Insurance companies set national policies. Western Australia therefore has suffered to an extent because of the high cost structure in the other States. The member’s question did not acknowledge that New South Wales and Victoria have worked jointly on a range of measures, of which the member alluded to only one. However, those States took a more fundamental measure to change their home indemnity insurance scheme to fall in line largely with the schemes in WA and South Australia. They, in fact, further watered down their scheme in some respects. They have seen that the Western Australian scheme is better than theirs and they have changed theirs so that it is more in line with what we have in Western Australia. I am yet to meet with members of Dexta. I understand they are keen to come back into the market in Western Australia and I have said that I am happy to meet them. However, we are working with all the industry players to see whether we can implement a scheme that suits the needs of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building and construction industry. A forum was held this morning comprising officers from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association, major insurers, the Insurance Council of Australia Ltd, the Builders Registration Board of WA and others. A range of proposals was put forward at that forum, and the officers will be giving me recommendations on those proposals in the near future. They are going to a national conference in Adelaide tomorrow. There is an interest in ensuring that there is some uniformity across Australia. We will then decide whether we need to adopt some of the measures that are happening in other States, either on the basis that they suit the particular needs of WA or that there would be a benefit in having uniformity across Australia. Although uniformity would be an advantage, it would come second to looking after the interests of Western Australian consumers and the Western Australian building industry.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.