rate this ouit of a b c
The first major legal alternative, according to the ACCC's perspective, suggests changing legislation to provide additional government funding opportunities, which would allow for more authority to combat anti-competitive behaviour. On the other hand, the consumer's perspective suggests implementing a "victim insurance scheme," wherein financial compensation and support services are provided by the government or overseas administration in cases where consumers are victimised.
To ensure both equitable outcomes has achieved for both ACCC and consumers, changing legislation to provide more government funding would effectively protect consumers from scams, whereas “victim insurance scheme” primary benefits consumers. This decision would achieve equality of rights as strengthen regulatory power. This will improve this current situation by enforce consumer protection further against fraudulent business or individual law.
In the legal issue of ACCC not being able to protect consumers, it has been recommended to change the legislation and provide further government funding as an addendum to the current legislation of Australian Consumer Law (2011). This will rectify the application of the act in the future legal system.
I would rate this passage a B. The information is clear and the arguments are well presented, but it could benefit from more specific examples or evidence to support the claims made.
It seems like you are presenting a two-fold solution to address the issue of protecting consumers against anti-competitive behavior and scams. The first proposed solution is to change legislation to provide additional government funding opportunities, which would enhance the authority of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) in combating anti-competitive behavior. The second solution involves implementing a "victim insurance scheme," where the government or overseas administration would provide financial compensation and support services to consumers who are victimized.
Both solutions aim to achieve equitable outcomes for both the ACCC and consumers. Changing legislation to provide more government funding would protect consumers from scams, while the "victim insurance scheme" would primarily benefit consumers. These decisions would ensure equal rights and strengthen regulatory power, ultimately enhancing consumer protection against fraudulent businesses or individuals.
To address the legal issue of the ACCC's inability to protect consumers effectively, it is recommended to amend the existing legislation of the Australian Consumer Law (2011) by providing further government funding. This amendment would rectify the application of the act in the future legal system.
Based on the given information, it is difficult to provide a rating as it depends on various factors such as effectiveness, feasibility, and potential drawbacks of the proposed solutions. A more detailed analysis would be needed to assess the impact and potential success of the suggested measures.