DAILY NEWS Jun 8, 2012 3:52 PM - 4 comments

Ontario's Bill 45 defeated at second reading

TEXT SIZE bigger text smaller text
2012-06-08

A controversial private member’s bill designed to prevent insurers from using granulated geographical areas for underwriting auto insurance was defeated in second reading in Ontario’s provincial legislature on June 7.

Bill 45, brought forward by Brampton NDP MPP Jagmeet Singh, was debated yesterday in the Ontario legislative assembly and “lost on recorded division,” meaning that the majority of MPPs voted against the bill.

The proposed legislation recommended changing the risk classification system so that insurance companies could not vary premiums by specific geographical locations, but rather by broad territorial categories.

“Insurance rates should be based on your driving record, not on what part of the GTA you raise your family in,” said Singh, who was encouraging Ontario Liberals to vote in favour of the bill, which passed first reading in March. “It's simply unfair that good drivers in parts of the GTA pay as much as double for insurance than good drivers in other GTA neighbourhoods.”

Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC) was vocal in its criticism of the proposed bill.

“Mr. Singh does not have the expertise in actuarial science to meddle with the Ontario auto system to this degree,” noted Ralph Palumbo, IBC’s vice president of Ontario. “He does not know the consequences of this bill, nor did he consult with the insurance industry prior to introduction. That is reckless.”



Horizontal ruler

Reader Comments

Most recent firstOldest first

Broker

The good intentions behind this bill were true enough. However the reality of the matter is that insurance companies base their rates upon where you live for a very good reason.

Unfortunately if you're a good driver, that doesn't prevent a bad driver from crashing into you. If you live in an area where a very high number of claims occur, the probability of you being involved in a claim is higher than if you live in an area with a very low number of claims.

Think about it like this: If you live in downtown Toronto where there are cars parked up and down both sides of narrow roads, there are a constant stream of pedestrians walking about, some jaywalking, some crossing roads properly at the corners. There are cyclists darting in and out of the parked cars and some not stopping for traffic lights as they are required to.

Now think about living in an area like Kenora, Ontario. A much smaller community (approx. 15,000). Less cars, less people, less cyclists.

Which community do you think you'd be more likely to be involved in an accident in? Which community do you think has less claims per capita?

The Insurance companies think the same, and their rates reflect that.

The problem with insurance rates is not the premium. It's the coverage. The Ontario policy overinsures the typical motorist even at it's bare minimum coverages, because of the extensive coverage built into the policy the premiums are much higher.

Posted July 25, 2012 02:05 PM


Dave

Interesting take on how to help lower the cost of insurance. What is most distrubing in the article is the comment by Ralph Palumbo, "Mr. Singh does not have the expertise in actuarial science to meddle with the Ontario auto system to this degree". Why was the term "meddle" used, was this meant as a 'dig' at Mr. Singh regarding his inexperience in the field of actuarial science? It is interesting to note that Ralph Palumbo was only nominated to IBC in 2009, since the lack of a 'designation' to me implies he would lack the same level of education/experience to 'meddle' with Government Policies.

Posted June 11, 2012 12:14 PM


Bramptonian

Down with liberals....there is no obvious reasons that one with good driving record pays higher just fr living in a specific area..when would you learn liberal morons....glad one person stand for it and he belongs to my riding... Go Jagmeet Go....

Posted June 11, 2012 09:42 AM


Andrew

Thank god this got shot down. I it passed the gta auto rates may have gone down but all the outliers would have been skyrocketing.

Posted June 9, 2012 11:01 AM


FirstPrevNextLast
Horizontal Ruler

Post A Comment

Disclaimer
Note: By submitting your comments you acknowledge that Canadian Underwriter has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that due to the volume of e-mails we receive, not all comments will be published and those that are published will not be edited. However, all will be carefully read, considered and appreciated.

Your Name (this will appear with your post) *

Email Address (will not be published) *

Comments *



* mandatory fields