Stewart McCulloch, the secretary of the GTA Technical Committee, sent a note to GTA subscribers today containing an update on proposals for the future mechanism by which the annual rate review is carried out and also announcing there is a proposal that there will be no change to GTA rates this year. The text is re-printed below:
The GTA Technical Committee continues its detailed consideration of the structure of an independent rate review in order that there might be cross industry agreement on a firm foundation for the future assessment of rates on an annual basis. Further updates will be released as that review develops.
Whilst the Technical Committee has now appointed an independent organisation to consider how rate reviews should be conducted in the future, there have been inevitable delays due to the Covid-19 coronavirus pandemic. In view of the independent review currently being conducted, the Technical Committee concluded that no changes should be made to existing daily settlement rates and charges in the interim. As a result, charges under Section 5 of the GTA in all categories will remain unchanged for the forthcoming GTA year being 1st July 2021 to 30th June 2022.
If approved this proposal will apply to all GTA claims. No changes will need to be made to the wording of the GTA to bring this proposal into effect.
Comments are now invited from all subscribers before the changes can take effect. You are requested to send comments to one of the three persons mentioned below no later than 5pm on 22nd June 2021:
Peter Gomes on behalf of CHO subscribers by email at email@example.com
John Hall on behalf of Insurer subscribers by email at firstname.lastname@example.org
Alternatively, you may provide your comments to Stewart McCulloch by email at email@example.com.
In responding, you must confirm the name of your organisation and that organisation must be a current subscriber to the GTA. If you wish to have your comments presented to the Technical Committee anonymously they must be sent to Stewart McCulloch (rather than Peter Gomes or John Hall) and it will be your responsibility to ensure the response is clearly flagged that you require the comments to be anonymous.
If you do not respond in the time frame set out above and in the method set out, your comments will not be considered. No response will be interpreted as your consent to the proposal.”