Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Sunrise -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) themselves and we don't do that. As soon as you log on, be wear, thank you. Insurance companies are under fire after it was revealed some are refusing travel insurance to older Australians. The Federal Government has described it as discrimination. But what can be done? Financial Services Minister Bill Shorten joins us. Good morning. Bill, give us some examples Since we talked about it yesterday, we have been swamped by older Australians giving us examples. It is rampant. Are you surprised. I am surprised. I read about the issue in the newspaper week and mentioned it to a couple of my staff rb one told me her very issue in the newspaper the other

healthy father in his later years couldn't get insurance to travel to America so he won't travel because he is a prudential sort of chap and wants travel insurance. As soon as you start testing it with older people, insurance companies are just saying, working on the very old-fashioned view that once you are at retirement age, you are basically such a big risk it is hard to get insurance. What are the facts though, Bill? Of course insurance companies match your premium to the rich risk but are older Australians riskier, propositions when they travel? They don't go to full-moon parties, do they some No, insurance companies do have an exemption to be able to discriminate on the basis of age. If there is acchowarial or statistical data. That is the big if, if the evidence is there. First of all, with non-medical-related travel insurance, if you lose your baggage, who cares how old you are when you lose your baggage? Or recently the volcano in Chile and people had the plans ruined, it has got nothing to dowith age. Secondly, let's start examining some of the information which says that people of certain age are too risky. I don't buy that. There is a lot of healthier older people and a lot of unhealthy younger people around. I think it is too blunt and insurance companies need to become more consumer savvy. What are you doing? Are you giving the insurance companies a deadline to get back to you with a please explain? First things first, we have written to them and want to meet with the insurance industry, you will get some good outcomes with rational discussions with people of good will. But we are going to raise with the industry they have a simple plain English key facts statement like we have done with flood insurance. But there are legislation or regulatory tools, I would rather talk than regulate. But the human right commission has powers on receipt of a complaint, if the

insurance industry tells us to go away week look at that. Also, talking about homework, can you bring us tupe date on changes to flood insurance? We had you bring us tupe date on the you on a few month ago, you were starting the process with insurance companies, how were you going? The companies, how were you going? The insurance industry worked well with us on the matter. For the last 40 years e we had many different definitions of what is a flood. But as we saw in the tragic floods last summer, if the water is coming over the floorbords you don't care if it-size from a river or storm or man made. You think if you have got flood cover it should cover it. We have one definition of a flood, down to 42-word definition, it still sounds long but compared to the forests that have died to cover the pages for the small print it is a big improvement. We have tabled in the parliament. So we have got a common definition of flood so big improvement. We have tabled it

hopefully people living in hopefully people living in the same street with flood insurance will gate payout. More information, a different matter, the ALP conference had a lot of big issues. Your built was over looked on the national insurance disability scheme. A lot of people interested just explain it? The government has decided and Prime Minister said it in her The government has decided and the opening speech, but the government decided before the last election, the people with disability and carers get a second-class deal. They should get resources as of right, not explaining did I get the injury at car crash or at birth. I am talking about severe and profound impairment. So we want to create a scheme where all Australians can access funding in a timely fashion. Jenny maclen is the senior minister looking after this. We are creating the initial infrastructure to set up the insurance scheme. It is an important as the minimum age, Medicare, it is a 5th pillar, meaning just because Aussies have an impairment doesn't mean they have to live a second-class life their whole life.