Accident Compensation Amendment Bill

I move, That the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill be now read a third time.

New Zealand’s no-fault accident compensation scheme has been a source of national pride and this Government is committed to ensuring that the accident compensation scheme remains fair, transparent, and accessible for all claimants. Overwhelmingly, people who are injured receive an excellent service from ACC in terms of their treatment and their rehabilitation. This bill makes a series of changes to boundaries rather than the core of the scheme in order to maintain and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory systems into the future. There are four main components of the bill, which I will now cover.

The bill amends the interface between weekly compensation and superannuation in several areas to improve fairness. The first of these provides for fairer transitions for those who are injured close to retirement age. These changes mean that people will be able to receive up to two years of weekly compensation and superannuation before transitioning on to superannuation. This will provide a fairer, more consistent relationship between weekly compensation and superannuation to provide for fairer transitions for those people who are injured near the end of their working life.

A further amendment will mean that a client’s entitlement to weekly compensation as a surviving spouse or partner will no longer be affected by whether they are also receiving weekly compensation. Most surviving spouses or partners, including those of superannuation qualification age or older, will be entitled to a maximum of five years of weekly compensation based on their deceased spouses’ or partners’ earnings at the time of the fatal injury. I am pleased to be introducing this important amendment, which ensures consistency and fairness between the entitlements received by surviving spouses regardless of age.

The second component that this bill addresses is a gap in ACC coverage for families of employees who are posted overseas in the course of their employment. I believe there is a vital change to make as we do not want to stop people from representing New Zealand’s interests abroad because of concern about the medical coverage of their families.

Thirdly, the bill disestablishes the historic Accident Compensation Appeal Authority, which dealt with appeals under the repealed 1972 and 1982 Acts. Given the low number of appeals to the authority, it is no longer cost effective to maintain it. All new appeals under the repealed Acts will be heard by the District Court, which will ensure that claimants’ rights are maintained. The bill also contains some minor and technical amendments that will increase ACC’s operational efficiency and improve processes for the biennial levy rounds.

I thank members of the Education and Workforce Committee and its chair, Parmjeet Parmar, for their work and consideration of the bill. This also extends to those who made submissions on the bill and those who helped to facilitate its progress. I’d also like to note the work of the Hon Michael Woodhouse, as the previous Minister for ACC. Many of the policy proposals in this bill were developed and worked on during his time as Minister. They provided a clear focus and direction in which to move forward with these important regulatory maintenance changes. It is vital that we take this opportunity to work together in order to maintain and improve the ACC system.

In closing, this Government is proud to work towards creating more equitable outcomes within the accident compensation scheme framework. It is a vital component in our social contract and we look forward to improving outcomes for New Zealanders into the future. I commend this bill to the House.

Kia orana, Madam Assistant Speaker. During the committee stage of the debate on this Accident Compensation Amendment Bill, I asked the Minister for ACC several questions about it, which he chose to ignore, and, as he customarily does, he chose instead to abuse me and to ignore the questions. He has just outlined the main provisions of the bill, so I acknowledge that, but, unfortunately, those questions went unanswered and there won’t be any opportunity for them to gain answers now.

He has, of course, today been celebrating the fact that some levy reductions for ACC earners and payers are possible. That, of course, is thanks to the responsible stewardship of the previous National Government, and I was pleased that he has just acknowledged that much of the work on this particular bill was brought about by the Hon Michael Woodhouse. He didn’t, however, of course, today acknowledge that about two-thirds of New Zealand motor vehicle owners now face an increase in their levy—in the ACC levy.

💬 Hon Iain Lees-Galloway: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is the third reading of a bill. The point of the third reading is to summarise the policy contained within the bill, and I encourage the member to actually address the bill that is before the House currently.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): You are correct. I was looking through the bill and I was struggling to find the section on the levies within it, so if we could come back to the third reading of this particular legislation, that would be great.

Of course. It is a very minor, technical bill. It originated under the National Government. As I’ve just acknowledged, the Minister has outlined what its main provisions are, but I am very disappointed that he failed to answer any of the questions, and now he’s trying to interrupt my contribution.

So I’ll just make some very brief points. The first is that because it is a bill that originated under the National Government, of course we will continue to support it. The fact that it is such a minor technical adjustment means that most New Zealanders won’t even notice that it’s passing this afternoon. More importantly, this Minister has indicated in the past that he intends to make more substantial changes to the legislation. I have been hoping, through this particular process, that he would tell us what those are, because those who came along to submit to the Education and Workforce Committee asked those sorts of questions and they’re still waiting to hear the answers. Well, clearly they’re not going to get them today, but there’s no reason to delay the passage of this particular bill, so I too commend it to the House.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. I’d describe that as a rather grudging and snippy contribution from the member on the other side of the House, Tim Macindoe, who couldn’t quite work out whether it was a minor and technical bill or whether it was a great contribution from the former Government.

I have a couple of comments to make on the third reading of this, the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. It’s great to actually have it at third reading. I’m sure the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety is very pleased about that. He described it as being about the boundaries rather than the core, and that’s a good description, but I don’t want to diminish the importance of it. While the changes being proposed here are about the boundaries, they will make a substantive impact particularly on the surviving spouses or partners who have been forced to choose between New Zealand’s superannuation and the ACC survivor’s payments, which was discriminatory on the basis of age.

This bill really does respond to that, which was a declaration by the Human Rights Review Tribunal, and I think that is a really significant and substantive change that is being made in this bill. While it might not have impacted on massive numbers of people, it is a matter of principle, as is addressing cover for spouses, partners, and dependants of the New Zealand workers posted overseas, because that is an important fix to ensure that the people with dependants aren’t disadvantaged when they work overseas, or their companies, by maintaining long cover arrangements. We understand from agencies with staff overseas, such as Immigration New Zealand and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, that this is a pressing problem.

Ultimately, these changes—and there are some other minor changes that the Minister mentioned—make our world-famous, important accident compensation scheme kinder to several groups who miss out on entitlements. That is a really big deal. In every opportunity we get, everybody in this House should say that the ACC—our accident compensation scheme—is something that New Zealanders should be immensely proud of. Nearly one in three Kiwis made an ACC claim in 2016-17, and most received excellent treatment and rehabilitation. This is an important scheme. This is a bill which is about the boundaries rather than the core, but it doesn’t diminish the important principles behind it, so I commend the bill to the House.

I’m taking this call to support this bill, which we have already heard about. It’s actually making small changes but changes that are really important and will actually positively impact a number of families. So the number of families that will be impacted through this may be just in the hundreds, but it’s about making the ACC scheme fair. It’s about meeting people’s expectations. It’s important that we make sure that the ACC scheme extends to those who accompany individuals that go overseas on employment, as long as their remuneration is considered to be derived from New Zealand for New Zealand’s income tax purposes.

Debate interrupted.

The House adjourned at 6 p.m.