ACT Compulsory Third-Party Insurance Regulator

Transmittal Certificate

Organisational Overview and Performance

B1. Organisational Overview

The Australian Capital Territory Compulsory Third-Party Insurance Regulator (CTP regulator) is an independent Territory authority established under section 14 of the Road Transport (Third-Party Insurance) Act 2008 (CTP Act) to regulate compulsory third-party (CTP) insurance in the Territory.

The CTP Act is administered by CMTEDD. Under section 14 of the CTP Act, the Minister must appoint a public servant as the CTP regulator for up to 5 years. The Executive Group Manager of the Economic and Financial Group (EFG), CMTEDD was appointed by the Minister as the CTP regulator for a period of 5 years commencing from 9 June 2015.

The functions of the regulator are supported by the Financial Framework Management and Insurance Branch of EFG, CMTEDD. The regulator’s stakeholders include the members of the ACT community, particularly persons injured in motor vehicle accidents, motorists who are legally required to purchase CTP insurance, the licensed insurers, and the legal profession.

The Motor Accident Injuries Bill 2019 for the new Motor Accident Injuries (MAI) Scheme was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 16 May 2019. When the new MAI Scheme commences on 1 February 2020, the CTP regulator will be replaced by the MAI Commission. The CTP regulator obligations for accidents that occur before the MAI Scheme commences will become the responsibility of the MAI Commission. These obligations include overseeing and monitoring the CTP regulation and procedures, as well as compliance with the CTP legislation.

Principal Objectives

The role of the CTP regulator is to regulate the CTP insurance scheme in the ACT under the CTP Act. The objectives of the Act under section 5A are to:

• continue improving the system of CTP insurance, and the scheme of statutory insurance for uninsured and unidentified vehicles operating in the ACT;
• promote competition for CTP premiums;
• keep the costs of insurance at an affordable level;
• provide for the licensing and supervision of insurers;
• encourage the speedy resolution of personal injury claims;
• promote and encourage the rehabilitation of people injured in motor accidents;
• maintain an accurate register of motor accident claims to help the administration of the statutory insurance scheme and the detection of fraud; and
• promote measures directed at eliminating or reducing causes of motor accidents and mitigating their results.

Functions

The functions of the CTP regulator are specified in section 14A of the CTP Act and include:

• regulating the licensing of CTP insurers;
• monitoring the behaviour of licensed CTP insurers in relation to their obligations under the Act;
• improving health outcomes for claimants;
• monitoring the efficiency of the CTP scheme under the Act and identifying areas for amendment; and
• ensuring that all premiums meet the fully funded test and are not excessive.

Highlights

Competition and CTP premium reductions

Since July 2013 there have been four licenced insurers in the ACT CTP insurance market, NRMA Insurance and three Suncorp brands being AAMI, APIA and GIO. In addition to competition delivering products with alternative offerings and product choice, during 2018-19 motorists continued to benefit from further reductions in premiums, as shown in Figure 1. From July 2013 when competition commenced in the ACT CTP market until 30 June 2019, the average private passenger vehicle premium has fallen by $58.98, or 10.0%.

Figure 1 – Fall in CTP premium prices since the introduction of competition

Review of the operation of the CTP Act

During 2018-19 a review of the operation of the CTP Act was undertaken by the CTP scheme actuary. This review is required every 3 years under section 275 of the CTP Act. The review report was circulated to all Legislative Assembly members out-of-session by 31 March 2019 as required under the CTP Act, and was formally tabled in the Legislative Assembly on 2 April 2019.

The report highlighted some issues around the design, efficiency and effectiveness of the current CTP scheme. Some of the key findings of the review regarding CTP insurance include that:

• competition has been effective, resulting in reduced CTP premiums over the last 5 years, and the delivery of greater choice and coverage;
• there appears to have been no material improvement in the speed of claims finalisation;
  • on average, small claims (up to $100,000) take 1.5 years to finalise, while larger claims ($100,000 or more) take an average of 3.7 years to finalise; and
  • claims finalisation is impacted by legal representation and litigation, which is likely to be linked to issues around claims severity and disputes over fault;
• for claims finalised in the ACT between 2014 to 2018, 32% of expenses are for general damages; 24% are for legal costs (includes plaintiff, defendant and investigative costs, but does not include solicitor-client costs); 22% are for treatment and care; and 21% are for economic loss; and
• ACT insurers’ estimated achieved profit margin from 2016 to 2018 decreased from 17% to just under 10% (this compares favourably to profit margins in Queensland and is in line with those in NSW).

A copy of the full report can be accessed at: https://apps.treasury.act.gov.au/compulsorytpi/ctp-publications.

Members of the Legislative Assembly had the opportunity to consider the key findings of the 2018‑19 review of the operation of the CTP Act before debating the Motor Accident Injuries Bill
2019 (the MAI Bill) (see below).

Motor Accident Injuries Scheme

The MAI Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly in March 2019 and was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 16 May 2019. The Bill implemented the scheme chosen by the ACT’s first Citizens’ Jury on improving CTP insurance with amendment following an Assembly Committee inquiry into the proposed legislation and further consultation. The new scheme will commence on
1 February 2020.

The new MAI Scheme will deliver the following improvements to motorists in the ACT:

• everyone injured in a motor vehicle accident will receive up to five years treatments, care and income benefits, regardless of who was at-fault;
• quality of life benefits, which provide compensation for non-financial loss, will be available for all people who meet injury thresholds; and
• anyone whose injury was caused by someone else’s negligence and who is more seriously injured will still be able to access additional common law benefits.

Personal injury claims arising from motor vehicle accidents occurring prior to the commencement of the new MAI Scheme will continue to be dealt with under the current CTP scheme arrangements. The CTP regulator will be replaced by the MAI Commission when the new MAI scheme commences, with the CTP regulator obligations for accidents that occur before that time becoming the responsibility of the MAI Commission.

During 2018-19, the CTP regulator assisted CMTEDD in:

• understanding how various technical matters currently operate in relation to CTP schemes both in the ACT and interstate to inform the development of the MAI Bill; and
• developing the design and insurer reporting requirements for the collection of motor accident injury claims and payments data, as part of the new Information Technology System (ITS) for the MAI Scheme.

The CTP regulator will continue to assist CMTEDD to implement the new MAI Scheme.

Autonomous Vehicles

The National Transport Commission (NTC) is leading a number of workstreams in relation to the legislative, regulatory and policy environment in which autonomous vehicles can be safely deployed in Australia. One of these streams includes the potential for using existing motor accident injury insurance (MAII) schemes to cover injuries from motor vehicle accidents involving autonomous vehicles .

The NTC, in conjunction with state representatives, developed a policy paper[1] in the second half of 2019 on this issue. The policy paper proposes that MAII schemes be extended to cover autonomous vehicles, and that there be a recovery rights mechanism requiring manufacturers and ‘other parties’ [2] of automated driving systems (ADS’) to pay for personal injuries when an autonomous vehicle that malfunctions is at fault. This will be the case when the ADS was engaged (in control of the vehicle at the time of the accident).

Officers from MAII schemes, including the ACT CTP regulator, are discussing options for a recovery rights mechanism. The ACT will continue to work with the NTC; other MAII schemes; and other relevant parties on this project.

Autonomous Vehicle Trial

The CTP regulator, in conjunction with a range of other directorates, including the Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate and the Justice and Community Safety Directorate, worked with the Illawarra Retirement Trust Kangara Waters (IRT) and EasyMile (the operator of the trial autonomous vehicle) to approve the first autonomous vehicle trial on public roads in the ACT.

The autonomous vehicle trial was conducted within the IRT retirement village in Belconnen over the period 9 to 24 May 2019 using an EasyMile EZ10 Gen1 autonomous vehicle shuttle bus. The EasyMile autonomous vehicle transported approximately 300 passengers over 250 kilometres with no accidents or resident injuries.

The regulatory process involved granting the approval based on IRT/EasyMile meeting the requirements outlined in the NTC’s Guidelines for Trials of Automated Vehicles in Australia. From a CTP insurance perspective, this involved ensuring that suitable arrangements were in place to cover any personal injuries arising from the trial.

As part of the trial, insurance arrangements included: that anyone injured by the autonomous vehicle would be treated in the same manner as if they were injured by a human-operated vehicle; the operator indemnified the Territory for costs associated with injury or death of any person; and the operator had the requisite public and product liability insurance in place.

The trial was very well received, with IRT residents welcoming the opportunity to access the new technology and break down mobility/travel barriers.

Road Safety initiatives

In 2018-19 the CTP regulator contributed a further $23,000 towards road safety initiatives targeting motorcyclists, given their continued over-representation in injuries and fatalities in the ACT. The CTP regulator is currently liaising with the Justice and Community Safety Directorate to finalise the details of the campaign.

Other highlights

The CTP regulator also:

• met with Heads of Motor Accident Injury Schemes (HMAIS) to discuss a range of national and strategic issues and to share information on issues facing individual CTP and LTCS schemes;
• attended Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority meetings with officers from other privately underwritten CTP schemes to discuss regulatory and supervisory matters regarding CTP insurers;
• met with the ACT CTP insurers, the ACT Nominal Defendant and the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) to share information and discuss a range of topical issues, with the aim of continually refining the operation of the CTP Insurance scheme; and
• maintained the CTP website and responded to feedback from the public received by way of telephone calls through Access Canberra, via the CTP website at http://apps.treasury.act.gov.au/compulsorytpi/feedback, and general written correspondence.

Market Share

Market share indicates the proportion of the CTP market held by each insurer. It provides an indication of how the ACT community is responding to a competitive market.

Figure 2 shows the average market share over each of the financial years from 2013-14 when competition began, through to the end of the latest financial year of 2018-19. Market share is based on premiums collected by insurers. Over the 2018‑19 financial year, NRMA and the Suncorp Group held 56.0% and 44.0% of the market respectively.

While Suncorp’s brands (and in particular its leading brand GIO) achieved significant gains in market share over the period 2013-14 to 2016-17, this share has stabilised for the more recent financial years of 2017-18 and 2018-19. Relative to the 2017-18 market share:

• NRMA’s market share was largely unchanged at 56.0% over the 2018-19 financial year (a decrease of 0.3 percentage points (pp) compared to 56.3% over the 2017-18 financial year);
• GIO’s market share was also largely unchanged at 35.4% over the 2018-19 financial year (an increase of 0.1 pp compared to 35.3% over the 2017-18 financial year); and
• AAMI and APIA continue to hold relatively small market shares at 8.1% and 0.5% over the 2018‑19 financial year respectively

Figure 2 – Movement in insurers’ average market share since the introduction of competition

Premiums and scheme affordability

One of the objectives of the CTP Act is to keep the costs of insurance at an affordable level.

The premiums charged by insurers reflect the benefit structure underlying the ACT’s CTP insurance scheme. The ACT’s current scheme design differs from that of other state CTP schemes which tend to contain limits on benefits. For example, other CTP schemes limit access to common law and damages for non‑economic loss (general damages and pain and suffering) to severe injuries – the current ACT scheme has no such restrictions. These arrangements feed through to higher premiums and hence impact on the relative affordability of the scheme.

As shown in Figure 3, affordability, measured as premiums as a proportion of ACT average weekly earnings (AWE) improved. This reflects average premiums falling as a proportion of AWE by 6.1 percentage points over the period 2013-14 to 2018-19. Affordability has improved despite low wage growth.

Figure 3 – Average Premiums for Private Passenger Vehicles and as a Proportion of ACT Average Weekly Earnings

Notes:

• The average CTP premium is for a class 1 passenger vehicle based on a 12 month policy.

Premiums are expected to reduce under the new scheme compared with current CTP premiums, although the final premium savings will not be known until the private sector insurers who underwrite the scheme lodge their premiums for regulatory approval by the MAI Commission.

Average cost of claims and claims frequency

The average cost of a claim and claims frequency are important drivers of CTP insurance premiums. The higher the average cost per claim and claims frequency, the more funding insurers need to cover future claim payments and hence the need to set higher premiums.

The average claim data in Figure 4 are based on both finalised and open claims - comprising reported claims, historical payments and case estimates, by accident year^[3]. The inclusion of both finalised and open claims provides a complete picture of the scheme experience for accidents occurring in that year.

While case estimates reflect the best estimate of the future cost of open claims, they will inevitably differ from the ultimate cost of the claim. Generally, where there is more information available on the claim, that is, they are more established claims for older accident years, case estimates are considered to be better estimates of the ultimate cost.

Given this, to present a reliable view of the average cost over time, Figure 4 provides data only up to 2015‑16, as the data for the accident years of 2016-17 and beyond are currently too underdeveloped to reflect costs for these years with sufficient accuracy.

Figure 4 demonstrates that the average claims cost over the period 2008-09 to 2015-16 generally ranged from $100,000 to $125,000, except in 2012-13, when the cost was just above $145,000. The average cost over the 8 year accident period was $112,689.

The average claim cost is driven by total claims costs (largely reflecting the overall severity of the accident injuries) and the number of claims.

Figure 4 – Average claim cost, by accident year

Notes:

• Payments made in earlier years have not been indexed to reflect 2015-16 values.
• The average cost per claim by accident year is based on both finalised and open claims comprising reported claims, historical payments and case estimates. Payments are gross amounts and claims numbers reflect only those claims with a combined gross cost greater than zero.
• Accident years are on a financial accident year basis.
• Data for all years are subject to change and reflect ‘best case estimates’ given all years comprise both finalised and open claims, with the open claims (and where applicable re-opened claims) containing varying proportions of case estimates. Further, the data only reflect actual claims made to date.

Claims frequency (also known as the ‘accident rate’) is an important measure as it indicates the proportion of the Territory’s motor vehicles that are involved in a motor vehicle accident and make a CTP claim. It is calculated by dividing the number of CTP claims (by accident year) by the number of registered vehicles with a CTP policy.

As shown in Figure 5, the number of claims and frequency of claims at a broad level move together. For the latest years, from 2016-17 to 2017-18:

• the number of claims fell by 10.1% to 854. This was lower than the average number of claims over the 2009-10 to 2017-18 period of 905 ^(a);
• claims frequency fell by 4 percentage points to 29.1 claims per 10,000 vehicles. This is below the average frequency of 33.4 for the 9 year period ^(a); and
• claims frequency has remained within a fairly tight band over the 2009-10 to 2017-18 period, between a low of 29.1 and a high of 35.5 (that is, 30 to 36 in every 10,000 motor vehicles were involved in an accident)^(a).

Data for 2018-19 are not shown as they are not sufficiently developed at present.

Figure 5 – Number of claims and claims frequency, by accident year

Notes:

• ^(a) Data from 2008-09 are excluded from this analysis given that the number of claims and claims frequency are understated. As the new CTP Act became effective 1 October 2008, claims data for 2008-09 reflect a part-year effect.
• Claims data are on an accident year basis (by financial year), that is, claims made during the year the accident occurred.
• In deriving claims frequency, the number of claims are divided by the number of ACT registered vehicles with a CTP policy (excludes trailers and non‑engine caravans / campervans).

Claims payments

Claim payments by heads of damage (HoD) is a useful measure for analysing where a scheme’s funding is being spent and, importantly, the proportion of claims being paid directly to injured persons.

To provide a reliable view of HoD trends over the period 2008-09 to 2014-15, Figure 6 provides HoD payments as a proportion of total payments for those claims that have been finalised, on an accident year basis.

The accuracy of the HoD percentages paid in each accident year is affected by the proportion of claims that have been finalised, with older accident years having a higher proportion of finalised claims. In this context, the time series provided excludes accident years from 2015-16 onwards as these years have relatively low proportions of finalised claims, and the data are not representative of the general trend in the various HoD.

The data shows that over the period 2008-09 to 2014-15:

• general damages was the largest component averaging 34% of total costs over the 7 year period (from a low of 28%, to a high of 37%);
• treatment and care costs averaged 24% of total costs, and had the highest variability over the period shown (from a low of 20%, to a high of 33%);
• economic loss averaged 22% of total costs (from a low of 20%, to a high of 24%); and
• legal costs averaged 21% of total costs (from a low of 18%, to a high of 23%).

Figure 6 – Heads of Damage as a proportion of total payments, by accident year

Notes:

• Payments made in earlier years have not been indexed to reflect 2014-15 values and are in relation to claims finalised.
• Payments are gross payments.
• Treatment and care costs comprise ‘treatment costs’ and ‘past and future care costs’. Legal costs comprise ‘Defendant legal costs’, ‘Investigation costs’ and ‘Plaintiff Legal costs’, but not solicitor-client fees.

Fraud

The CTP Act (and MAI Act) has as one of its objectives, the requirement to establish and keep a register of motor accident claims to assist with the administration of the statutory insurance scheme and the detection of fraud.

The CTP regulator is aware that cold calling practices are continuing to occur in the ACT. The CTP regulator continues to analyse the ACT’s scheme data and work co-operatively with other Heads of MAI schemes and the ACT CTP insurers in regard to fraud issues and monitoring.

In response to cold calling and claims farming practices aimed at convincing motorists to make a CTP insurance claim, a number of states are introducing legislative reforms or improved data collection arrangements to identify and arrest claims farming practices. The MAI Act includes provisions to deter claims farming practices. In addition, the new information technology system (ITS) being developed for the collection of motor accident injury claims data for both the current CTP Scheme and the new MAI Scheme will provide improved analytical capability.

Scheme Data

The ACT’s PIR system is the electronic register of all claims and payments relating to motor accidents involving personal injury in the ACT under the current CTP scheme. The data are collected from CTP insurers and the Nominal Defendant at regular intervals.

During 2018-19, significant work was undertaken in developing a new ITS for the collection of motor accident injury claims data for the MAI Scheme. The current CTP data will also be moved across to the new platform to allow enhanced reporting and functionality. As the CTP and MAI schemes have different reporting structures, the ITS is being designed to accommodate the monitoring and regulatory requirements of both schemes. The operation of the CTP insurance component will need to continue until all claims are finalised, which could take considerable time due to the long-tailed nature of the scheme.

CMTEDD progressed the building of the ITS, with the CTP regulator assisting and liaising with stakeholders, particularly around the specification of data required for the new MAI Scheme. Further assistance will be provided to CMTEDD in 2019-20 to finalise the ITS in time for 1 February 2020.

Profit Margins

Section 46 of the CTP Act requires the CTP regulator to assess the profit margin included in the CTP premium and the actuarial basis on which the profit is calculated. The assessment must be reported on annually. These profits are expected profits at the time premiums are filed.

All the insurers’ profit margins were assessed as being in a reasonable range. The range for the industry as assessed by the scheme actuary in 2018-19 was 8% to 11% (in 2017-18 the range was also 8% to 11%):

• this is similar to the achieved profit margin estimated for ACT insurers as part of the section 275 review of around 10% in the 2018 year.

Premium Determinations

Under section 38 of the CTP Act insurers are only permitted to charge a premium approved by the regulator.

The regulator usually receives a premium filing from licensed insurers at least annually. The regulator makes an assessment of each premium filing, based on expert independent actuarial advice, and may approve a premium if it is assessed that it will fully fund the insurer’s liabilities and is not considered to be excessive. If a premium filing is not received within a year, the regulator has to review and assess the existing premium in accordance with the same criteria.

A premium filing assessment includes consideration of claims frequency, claim size, investment returns, administrative expenses and insurer profit – generally elements that make up the overall cost of service for an insurer participating in the ACT CTP market.

The role of the CTP scheme actuary is to provide expert actuarial advice to the CTP regulator. This role is currently performed by Finity Consulting Pty Limited, under contract.

See B.2 Performance Analysis, performance indicator (a) for details on filings received during 2018‑19.

Licensed Insurers

Under section 184 of the CTP Act, the regulator may license an insurer to provide CTP insurance in the ACT.

No applications from new insurers to become licensed insurers in the ACT were received during 2018-19.

Loadings on Short Term Premiums

The insurer’s lost investment income loading applies to premiums on CTP policies with a duration of less than 12 months (‘Short Term Premiums’).

The CTP Premium Guidelines (PGs) require the CTP regulator to publish the insurer’s lost investment income loading each year in the annual report. These loadings will be applied to short term premiums by the rego.act system in accordance with the formula in section 3.5.3 of the PGs. The amount is determined by the scheme actuary and applies for the relevant financial year.

The loading for the 2019-20 financial year is 0.085% per month (2018-19: 0.187% per month). This reduction is due to the significant decrease in discount rates over the last year.

CTP Average Annual Risk Premium

The regulator is required to publish the average annual risk premium for CTP in the ACT. The risk premium represents the base risk amount that each insurer bears when providing CTP insurance in the ACT.

The risk premium has been derived using a weighted average of data from the four licensed CTP insurers in the ACT and the Nominal Defendant to determine the average risk premium price per policy.

The average risk premium price per policy for 2018-19 was $400.53 (2017-18: $419.84).

Nominal Defendant

The Nominal Defendant is liable for claims against uninsured or unidentified motor vehicles (including unregistered vehicle permits) for which a CTP insurer cannot be identified. Under
section 13 of the CTP Act, the Australian Capital Territory Insurance Authority (ACTIA) is the Nominal Defendant. The annual report of the Nominal Defendant is annexed to ACTIA’s annual report.

Section 3.5.2 of the CTP PGs requires the Nominal Defendant loading (NDL) to be assessed on a yearly basis by the scheme actuary. The NDL that will ‘apply to the next financial year’ is to be published in the CTP regulator’s annual report.

At the request of the CTP regulator, the scheme actuary has undertaken a review of the NDL for 2019-20. On a like-for-like basis, with no policy change, the NDL has been calculated to be 5.2% for 2019-20 (the loading was increased to 4.7% in February 2019).

The key reasons for the increase are:

• the reductions in premiums being passed on to policy holders during 2018-19 — as the NDL is a fixed percentage applied to the base CTP premium, ^[4] reduced base premiums automatically result in a lower amount being transferred to the Nominal Defendant and an increase in the NDL is required to maintain funding; and
• increased inflation — both standard inflation and superimposed inflation.

Given the MAI scheme is a hybrid scheme with a different range of benefits compared to the CTP Scheme, a new NDL will need to be calculated to apply to the premiums for the MAI Scheme.

Outlook

Priorities in 2019-20 relate to the objectives of the CTP Act and include:

• assisting CMTEDD in implementing the new MAI Scheme and putting in place a new information technology system for the increased data requirements;
• working with the NTC and other CTP regulators on identifying how CTP schemes might cover personal injuries arising from accidents involving autonomous vehicles;
• working with other government directorates to facilitate autonomous vehicle trials, whilst ensuring the safety of the community – this will enhance the knowledge of human and vehicle interaction with autonomous vehicles, with a view to reducing the frequency and extent of motor accident injuries in the future;
• monitoring and reviewing the streamlined CTP premium filing process for specified (lower risk) filings to enhance the efficiency of the process for all impacted parties, while also encouraging more affordable premiums through ongoing competition;
• continuing to monitor the scheme’s performance; and
• contributing to targeted road safety initiatives that assist in reducing motor accidents and personal injuries and mitigating their impact.

B.2    Performance Analysis

The ACT CTP regulator’s 2018-19 performance indicators are included in the Statement of Intent and are reported as part of the regulator’s Statement of Performance.

In the 2018-19 financial year the CTP regulator developed and achieved the following indicators.

Explanation of Performance Indicators

a. ACTP Premiums are approved in accordance with the Road Transport  (Third-Party Insurance) Act 2008

The CTP regulator is required to approve or reject a premium application under section 41 of the CTP Act. Under section 42, there are two key grounds on which the CTP regulator is permitted to reject a premium filing: the premiums applied for by CTP insurers are too low (the fully funded test); or are too high (the excessive premium test). Consistent with the streamlining arrangements, the CTP regulator approved premium partial filings if the change in premiums was within the permitted set bands and above the agreed minimum amount.

Premium filings, all of which were assessed and approved in 2018-19 in accordance with the Act, were received from:

• AAMI, APIA and GIO full de novo filings (received November 2018) and approved in December 2018;
• NRMA full de novo filing (received October 2018) and approved in December 2018;
• GIO partial filing (received December 2018) and approved in January 2019; and
• NRMA partial filing (received April 2019) and approved in May 2019.

b. The scheme is fully funded

All premium filings by licensed CTP insurers are reviewed by the scheme actuary to ensure they are fully funded. This ensures that the scheme is able to pay out all present and future liabilities. Where an insurer does not make a premium submission during the financial year, the CTP regulator will request an independent actuarial review of the insurer’s books to ensure that the ACT CTP Insurance scheme will continue to be fully funded. The scheme actuary considered that all insurers’ premiums met the fully funded test in 2018-19.

c. Make guidelines under the Act

The guidelines under the Act were discussed as a standing item at the 2018-19 ICA meeting.

No further changes were made to the Premium Guidelines given the extensive changes to streamline the arrangements over the 2016 to 2018 period.

The Early Payment Guidelines were monitored and discussed during 2018-19, however, revisions were not necessary before 30 June 2019.

No other guidelines have been implemented under the Act in 2018-19.

d. To continue to refine the system of CTP insurance for vehicles in the ACT in conjunction with the insurers

The CTP regulator and insurers met once during 2018-19 at a meeting facilitated by the ICA (there was also out-of-session correspondence with insurers on a range of matters). The meeting and correspondence focused on the insurer implementation arrangements for the new MAI scheme. In addition, issues aimed at improving the operation of the CTP scheme were discussed. Issues covered included:

• the passing of the MAI Bill and implementation of the new scheme by insurers;
• the new Information Technology System for the CTP and MAI schemes;
• informing insurers of the notification of the new Premium Guidelines on 12 July 2018 and the annual bands for partial filings;
• discussing and reviewing data for the three year review of the CTP scheme; and
• examining a proposal received from a club to change the way premiums for Veteran, Vintage and Historic vehicles are set.

e. Promote public awareness of the causes of motor accidents through funding measures directed at reducing causes of motor vehicle accidents

The CTP regulator contributed $23,000 in 2018-19 to road safety strategies aimed at reducing both single vehicle, and multi vehicle collisions involving motorcyclists, given their over‑representation in injuries and fatalities in the ACT.

f. Complaints handling within 10 working days of receipt of the complaint

In 2018-19, the CTP regulator achieved 100% compliance with this performance indicator in cases where no further information was required from another directorate.

B.3 Scrutiny

During the reporting period the CTP regulator did not participate in any Legislative Assembly Committee inquiries related to its activities.

There were no Ombudsman reports with recommendations in relation to the CTP regulator.

The Auditor-General Report No.1 of 2018: ACT Government Strategic and Accountability Indicators made a number of recommendations that were relevant for the CTP regulator. In regard to:

• Recommendation 3 (b), the CTP regulator was requested to amend accountability indicators in order to improve clarity; and
• Recommendation 4, all Territory entities, including the CTP regulator, have been requested to document their procedure for the review, selection and approval of strategic and accountability indicators.

The amendment of accountability indicators [recommendation 3 (b)] and the documentation of procedures for the review, selection and approval of strategic and accountability indicators (recommendation 4) will be undertaken once the new MAI Commission is in place.

B.4    Risk Management

The CTP regulator has a risk management plan. The CTP regulator has overall responsibility for risk management, and for ensuring compliance with the risk management plan.

The risk management plan identifies the key risk areas as operational, financial, legal and reputational risk. The risk management plan has identified the following potential risks:

• CTP regulator not meeting stakeholder expectations;
• insufficient staff and/or resources available to achieve outcomes;
• failure to meet legislative requirements; and
• Personal Injury Register being unavailable on the ACT ICT platform.

These risks are mitigated through the use of appropriate governance structures, application of risk-based management strategies and financial reporting processes.

B.5    Internal Audit

The CTP regulator is subject to the purview of the CMTEDD Audit and Risk Committee.

CMTEDD’s annual report section on the Internal Audit Committee applies to the CTP regulator.

No internal audits of the CTP regulator were undertaken during 2018-19.

B.6    Fraud Prevention

The functions of the CTP regulator are supported by the Financial Framework Management and Insurance (FFMI) Branch of the Economic and Financial Group (EFG), CMTEDD who adhere to the CMTEDD Fraud and Corruption Prevention Plan.

B.7    Freedom of Information

The functions of the CTP regulator are supported by the FFMI Branch of EFG, CMTEDD who adhere to the directorate’s Freedom of Information practices.

B.8    Community Engagement and Support

The CTP regulator does not have any engagement activities to report in 2018-19.

B.9    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Reporting

The CMTEDD’s annual report section on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Reporting applies to the CTP regulator.

B.10  Work Health and Safety

The CTP regulator does not employ any staff. The functions of the CTP regulator are supported by the FFMI Branch of EFG, CMTEDD who adhere to the directorate’s Workplace Health and Safety practices.