Government considers ACC for sexual harassment victims

A news report from RNZ

The government is looking into whether it can extend ACC cover to victims of sexual harassment. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister of Justice, Jan Logie, is having informal discussions with Minister for ACC Iain Lees Galloway about widening the provisions.
Under current law, only people who have been sexually violated have access to fully funded ACC support. Mental stress from sexual harassment and bullying such as inappropriate comments is not included.
But Jan Logie's office said she was looking into how victims of sexual harassment can have access to the same support as those of sexual abuse.
A spokesperson said it was an issue that had been raised on a number of occasions with Ms Logie by members of the public.
Co-leader of the Green Party, Marama Davidson, supports the idea, saying the country needed to take sexual harassment seriously.
"It's come from a background, that actually in the workplace ordinary sexual harassment has probably been seen as just normal and just the way things are and may be even celebrated but Jan Logie's work is important to get an understanding that it causes harm," said Marama Davidson.

© 2018 Radio New Zealand

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/358817/government-considers-acc-for-sexual-harassment-victims

Counselling wait lists worsen as sexual violence claims spike

An article from The Manawatu Standard by Georgia Forrester.

Social services are  under strain as more people seek support for incidents of sexual violence.
Abuse and Rape Crisis Support Manawatu (ARCS) manager Ann Kent said the service was at capacity and had extended its hours in Palmerston North and Horowhenua, yet it still hadn't made a dent in its waiting list.
There was a two-to-three-month waiting list at ARCS for its counselling services.
The number of Manawatū people claiming ACC support for sexual violence cases had also spiked in the past year.
Figures released by ACC show there was a 24.2 per cent spike in claims made in the Manawatū District in the past financial year.
People who have experienced sexual abuse or sexual assault can lodge a sensitive claim with ACC and seek cover and entitlements for treatment, rehabilitation and compensation.
The number of sensitive claims made in Palmerston North increased by 16.3 per cent between 2015/16 and 2016/17.
Manawatū District claim costs reached $930,000 in the past year, with $2.5 million in costs paid to claims in Palmerston North.
Palmerston North was just below the national increase, which was up 16.5 per cent.
ACC redesigned its sensitive claim service in 2014 to improve accessibility,  but figures between 2012 and 2017 show a gradual increase in claims in the Manawatū area.
Kent said the ACC system was great,  but the current demand on counselling services was challenging and they were not able to keep up.
"I'm not aware of any agencies that are not experiencing an extra demand."
In an ideal world, counselling services would be offered to people there and then, but it was not realistic, she said.
During the nearly 10 years Kent had been a manager at the service, she had seen staff and client numbers jump.
Client numbers for counselling had remained steady in the past two years, but that was due to services already being at capacity, she said.
The service had expanded over time to keep up with demand, but there was no more funding available for further expansion.
Kent was unable to say whether there had been any increase in incidents of sexual violence.
"We believe that a lot of the increase is due to people being prepared to come forward to get support rather than keep silent about the abuse that they have experienced."
Police figures show reports of sexual assault and related offending tended to fluctuate monthly in the Central District.
There were 553 reports made in 2016 in the Central District, which includes Manawatū, Whanganui and Taranaki.
So far there had been 270 reports in the first six months of 2017.
Although there had not been a national campaign against sexual violence specifically, Kent said the 'It's Not OK' domestic violence campaign likely benefited the cause.
About 40 per cent of cases of violence between partners also involved sexual violence, she said.
Although there was a waiting list, Kent said social work services were still offered to people in the meantime. She encouraged people to come forward and use the services.
"What we don't want is for people to feel alone in this. We don't want them to feel completely isolated."
Green Party spokeswoman Jan Logie understood the pressure services were under, as some organisations had already raised concerns with her about heavy staff case loads.
Research showed only about one in 10 victims of sexual violence were reported.
"What we are seeing at the moment is still the tip of the iceberg."
However Logie said two-to-three-month waiting lists were too long.
A person may have waited 20 years before the trauma became too much and they finally sought help from a service. Those people needed help there and then.
Although preventative work was under way, there was still a lot of work to be done, she said.
A free national sexual violence helpline is scheduled to go live to the public on December 1, rolled out by the Ministry of Social Development.

© 2017 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/97663396/counselling-wait-lists-worsen-as-sexual-violence-claims-spike

Protesters demand changes to way sexual attack survivors dealt with by ACC

An article from the New Zealand Herald

A "small but committed" group of protesters gathered outside ACC's Auckland office this afternoon calling for sexual attack survivors to qualify for ongoing taxpayer-funded counselling without a mental health illness diagnosis. Green Party MP Jan Logie led the demonstration with support from victim advocate, Louise Nicholas.
Up to 14 hours of one-on-one therapy is currently available when someone lodges a sensitive claim with ACC, along with up to 10 hours of social work support. Up to 20 hours of whanau support is also available immediately.
After these are used, ACC decides whether to approve cover for further support, should the person need it. That included victims needing to be diagnosed with a mental health injury relating to the abuse.
"Some survivors feel having to have a diagnosis puts judgment on them," Ms Logie said. "It takes them back to the the feeling that there's something wrong with them; that they're at fault.
"In other cases, survivors who need support are turned down because they don't have a diagnosis, or some don't apply for support because they think they'll be turned down."
She said a small but committed group of about 20 protesters gathered outside ACC's Auckland office at 12pm today.
"What we're asking for is incredibly simple. A counsellor can assess a survivor and whether they need help without them needing a mental health diagnosis."
The Green Party has also begun a petition which will be presented to ACC Minister Nikki Kaye.
Ms Kaye has said she believes the system is supportive of survivors but she will meet with providers to discuss possible changes to the scheme. That would include looking at different ways to assess mental harm to victims.
Ms Kaye said a "mental injury diagnosis" could be provided by any ACC registered and appropriately qualified assessor, which in many cases is the client's counsellor.
Changes were made in 2009 to the way support was accessed through ACC by sexual violence survivors, bringing in the requirement for a mental injury diagnosis in order to access help. After a 2010 review of the scheme and consultation with those working in the sector, further changes were made so survivors could have immediate access to support.

© 2016 NZME Publishing Ltd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11647644

ACC Minister must help sexual violence survivors

A press release from the Green Party by Jan Logie

The Green Party is calling on ACC Minister Nikki Kaye to remove the obligation for sexual violence survivors to be diagnosed with a mental illness before being allowed additional ACC-funded counselling.
Green Party MP Jan Logie and survivor advocate Louise Nicholas today launched a new campaign and petition to demand that survivors don’t need a mental illness diagnosis in order to have their sensitive claims proceed.
“Being the victim of sexual violence is not a mental illness,” Ms Logie said.
“Being subjected to sexual violence is trauma enough. Being a victim of sexual violence on its own should qualify survivors for the help they need.
“It’s great to hear the Minister Nikki Kaye say she’s open to a better way of helping the survivors of sexual violence. Removing the obligation for them to be diagnosed with a mental illness is an appropriate start.”
The petition is available here: http://action.greens.org.nz/remove_the_barriers
Under current ACC practice, in order for survivors of sexual violence to have their ACC sensitive claim approved, they must be diagnosed with a psychiatric condition. Up to 16 hours of one-on-one therapy is initially available when someone lodges a sensitive claim with ACC, however accessing help after that requires a diagnosis.
“In many cases this labelling of sexual violence survivors can be re-traumatising and stigmatising, and is a significant deterrent for those who need treatment.
“ACC needs to change its processes so that people are able to access the help that they need,” Ms Logie said.

More information is available here http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/business/qwa/QWA_03866_2016/3866-2016-jan-logie-to-the-minister-for-acc

© 2016 The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

https://www.greens.org.nz/news/press-release/acc-minister-must-help-sexual-violence-survivors

Being a victim is not illness

An article from the Herald on Sunday by Tess Nichol

Requirements for sexual attack survivors to be diagnosed with a mental health illness to get ongoing taxpayer funded counselling could be reviewed, ACC Minister Nikki Kaye has revealed.
Green Party MP Jan Logie will tomorrow lead a demonstration at ACC's Auckland office protesting the current process, which requires survivors receive a mental injury diagnosis before their claim for further assistance can be approved.
Up to 14 hours of one-on-one therapy is available when someone lodges a sensitive claim with ACC, along with up to 10 hours of social work support. Up to 20 hours of whanau support are also available immediately.
After these are used, ACC decides whether to approve cover for further support, should the person need it. That included victims needing to be diagnosed with a mental health injury relating to the abuse.
"We believe that survivors of sexual abuse should be able to get all the help they need without the requirement of being diagnosed with a mental illness," Logie said. "The advocates are very clear that it is still acting as a barrier, [that] the consequences are harmful and that it's unhelpful."
Logie said she had been told of survivors who had to retell painful details of their abuse to people they had not previously met so they could get the mental health diagnosis they needed to keep seeing their therapist, a process they described as traumatic and revictimising.
Kaye told the Herald on Sunday she believed the system was supportive of survivors. But the minister said she would meet providers this week to discuss possible changes to the scheme. That would include looking at different ways to assess mental harm to victims.
"I'm really keen to work with providers and opposition parties to see if there is a better way [of doing things]."
Kaye said a "mental injury diagnosis" could be provided by any ACC registered and appropriately qualified assessor, which in many cases is the client's counsellor.
"If the assessor is someone different, the client's counsellor can be with them throughout the process, including during the assessment to ensure they feel safe and supported, and can provide background information to the assessor beforehand if the client doesn't wish to speak about some things again."
Changes were made in 2009 to the way support was accessed through ACC by sexual violence survivors, bringing in the requirement for a mental injury diagnosis in order to access help. After a 2010 review of the scheme and consultation with those working in the sector, further changes were made so survivors could have immediate access to support.
Since the review, ACC has been working with providers to improve the care of sexual assault survivors, something Kaye said had been hugely successful.
"We've come a long way [since 2009]," she said. "ACC has given me feedback that a lot of providers have been quite positive about the new service. But that doesn't mean that we can't do better."

© 2016 NZME Publishing Limited

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11646773

Sexual violence services – the real story

A blog post by Jan Logie

What has really led to the Government’s changing stance on funding for sexual violence services?
People have been congratulating me on this news yesterday and I have to admit working with the sector through this process has given meaning to my time in Parliament and I am proud of the work we have done on this.  I am a bit embarrassed by the congratulations in the context of the thousands of submissions and years and years of work by incredible advocates which really got the result.
While I’ll need to see the dollars in the budget, and hear that the Government is working closely with the specialist providers, especially Nga Kaitiaki Mauri, to design the new model before I relax, I do want to reflect on the journey to this point.
The 70s and 80s saw women coming together to voluntarily support women who had experienced sexual violence. The Government provided some funding from the mid 80s. There was a period of new general services, the Pacific Island Women’s Project, and kaupapa Maori services being set up to respond to the growing need. These groups were advocating for the prevention of sexual violence – law reform and social change as well as supporting victim/survivors. It wasn’t until the mid 90s that we had the first ethnic women’s organisation, Shakti and in the late 90s the Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse Trust set up. There are still obvious gaps.
ACC alongside MSD were the major funders for sexual violence support services. The services were always under-valued and certainly not recognised for the amazing life-saving and at times world leading responses to sexual violence that they were and are. Sexual violence has been one of those very difficult topics to talk about in any context so that always made the services a bit of an easy target for funding cuts.
Despite Maori women being more likely to experience sexual violence in New Zealand and kaupapa Maori approaches being far more successful we have lost almost all of our specialist kaupapa Maori sexual violence services. There was a time when there were over twenty services but now there are fewer than five.
The Taskforce for Action was initiated by Labour in the wake of public horror about Louise Nicholas’s experiences. Louise did not have access to the right help, from our justice system or social services, when she needed it and that is one of the reasons she has been so actively advocating for increased funding for years.
The Taskforce for Action came out in 2009 calling for a national prevention plan and proper resourcing of the sexual violence sectors, basically all the same things that the select committee has recommended again 6 years later.
Maori and non-Maori specialists gave hundreds of hours of their time, voluntarily, in the Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence. They spent hours and hours strategizing and organising and lobbying to try and ensure that victim/survivors had access to the services they needed. If this had been implemented there would have been no need for the select committee inquiry.
But even while the National party Minister for Justice called the Taskforce for Action the best road map the country had ever had for addressing sexual violence, the Government was in the process of gutting ACC support for victim/survivors. The Government told ACC that they had to make savings. In 2009 they saved $3.2billion dollars by going after, amongst other things, the “low hanging fruit” of sensitive claims. These changes resulted in a 36% decline the number of claims being lodged and even more shockingly the number of accepted claims going from 60% to 3.6% in just two years. Specialist agencies stopped using ACC because they thought it was unsafe for survivors and the number of ACC counsellors halved. During the inquiry into sexual violence funding we heard from a man whose partner had killed herself because she couldn’t get the support she needed over this time.
Many therapists and counsellors and volunteers just kept going, under increasing strain themselves, because they knew that people were depending on them. This was a truly awful time in New Zealand’s history.
Public concern over these changes forced Minister Nick Smith to initiate a review in 2010.The Disley report in 2010 made fourteen recommendations to fix the mess. Considerable effort has been made since then by ACC, the community and others to try and restore ACC. In the select committee report much has been made of the improvements to ACC. A new model is in place and it is much better but we are still not there yet.
Ahead of the budget and future work, I just want to celebrate the bloody minded tenacity of survivors and advocates who have kept going through this very dismal time. I genuinely and wholeheartedly hope the Government doesn’t let us all down again.

© 1996-2015 The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

https://blog.greens.org.nz/2016/04/01/sexual-violence-services-the-real-story/

National must stop meddling with ACC before the election

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

The redesign currently occurring at the Accident Claims Corporation (ACC) for sensitive claims needs to be put on hold immediately, said the Green Party today.
The Green Party is concerned about work currently underway at ACC involving the sensitive claims service that could impact on the availability of clinical psychology treatment for victims of rape and sexual abuse as well as their privacy. The Green Party believes that ACC is instituting a new level of bureaucracy in order to farm out sensitive claims to private providers.
“Instituting major structural change into the way ACC delivers services to New Zealanders a few weeks out from a general election is unacceptable,” Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague said today.
“The new corporate insurance model that ACC is moving towards creates a new layer of bureaucracy that may enable companies to set up and profit from procuring the services of specialised psychologists.
“Private companies should not be able to turn a profit from the money intended to support the victims of sexual violence and abuse.
“ACC’s new model involves the creation of new, non-specialist ‘supplier’ entities who will tender for the provision of services with pre-existing treatment providers.
“Moving towards this model could result in non-specialised third parties handling extremely confidential information which is currently only held by the Sensitive Claims unit and select providers,” Mr Hague said.
“The supplier organisations do not need to be specialists in sexual violence services, but are entirely new organisations set up for nationwide competitive tendering. It is not clear that in the event of a breach of privacy or process who would be held to account.
“The sensitive claims redesign could result in a decline in the specialist workforce and undermine the provision of wrap around services.
“Any psychologists not signed up with a supplier or themselves becoming a supplier will be unable to provide ACC funded specialist claims services.
“The Government has missed the opportunity to redesign the sensitive claims pathway and fully implement the Disley report recommendations.”
The Disley report, released in 2012, suggested a wide range recommendations including improving communications with clients, refining ACC’s systems and processes, ensuring treatment and assessment is carried out by a well-qualified, fit-for-purpose workforce.
“National is choosing to push through major changes without properly consulting clients, advocates, psychologists or the public,” Mr Hague said.
“The new direction National is taking ACC lacks proper checks and balances.
“The Green Party will stop this attempt at privatisation of ACC by stealth.
"The Green Party has previously laid out a ten point plan for rehabilitating ACC and bring it back to the core principles it was founded on.”
Link to Green Party ACC plan: https://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/acc-rehabilitation-plan-announced

© 2014 Scoop Media

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1408/S00211/national-must-stop-meddling-with-acc-before-the-election.htm

Question to Minister

7. JAN LOGIE (Green) to the Minister of Justice: Does she stand by her statement “we need to encourage these women and children to be comfortable coming forward to report domestic and sexual violence”; if so, what has she done to encourage women to report domestic violence?



Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) :Yes; the Government has already achieved significant progress with improving the support for victims of domestic and sexual violence. As a result of the $50 offender levy, $12.6 million has been collected since July 2010. There are 15 new grants and services available to victims, including discretionary grants to support victims of sexual violence and funding for the national Sexual Violence Survivor Advocate, as well as specialist victim advisers to provide assistance for parents or caregivers who attend court to support child witnesses. As Minister of Justice I have initiated a major work stream, which is nearing completion and which will include a range of further initiatives to provide better support and access to justice for victims of domestic and sexual violence.
Jan Logie: Will women feel encouraged to report domestic violence when they see her, the Minister of Justice, defending Maurice Williamson’s interference—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! That question now has no connection with the primary question. I invite the member—I do not want to take supplementary questions away from her. I invite her to ask a question that is in relation to the primary question.
Hon Members: Point of order.
Mr SPEAKER: Well, I cannot take three at once. I will not take any; they have all sat down.
Jan Logie: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My initial question was relating to encouraging women to report. My second question was whether women will feel encouraged to report, based on the leadership provided by that Minister. It was directly relevant.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member simply asks that question, it will be in order, but when it is a reference to a resignation that has occurred, etc., that is not in order. So if the member wants to stand and ask the question that she has just raised in the point of order, it may well be acceptable.
Jan Logie: Will women feel encouraged to report domestic violence when they see her, the Minister of Justice, providing leadership in domestic violence, supporting a Minister’s interference in a police case?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I gave the member one more chance. She was on the right track until the last part. I will give her only one—[Interruption] Order! I will give her one more opportunity. Otherwise, we will move to the next question.
Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would ask you to reflect on that ruling you have just made. The question from Jan Logie was a broad statement around domestic and sexual violence. She has asked a question of the Minister. I cannot understand why her referencing a matter that is in the public arena rules the question out of order.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Well, the member might not understand it, but I invite the member to look very carefully at the Standing Orders—
Grant Robertson: Which one?
Mr SPEAKER: Well, 384, if the member needs it, and I invite him to read it if he wants to. Supplementary questions are at the discretion of the Speaker. I have been very patient with the member. I will give the member her last opportunity. Otherwise, we are moving to the next question.
Jan Logie: Will women feel encouraged to report domestic violence when they see her, the Minister of Justice, providing public defence in relation to a high-profile case of domestic violence?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Of course I have not done that. What I have done is to say that the Prime Minister was quite right to receive the resignation of my colleague Mr Williamson in the circumstances. I have also, at the same time—
Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I apologise to the Minister.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: On three occasions you found that the original question was erroneous or outside of the Standing Orders because of a reference to a certain case. Now you find that the Minister of Justice is quite within the borders of the Standing Orders, having referred to the case that you ruled out from being referred to in the first place. Can we have some consistency here, please.
Mr SPEAKER: I would have thought the Minister’s answer was helpful to the House, but if the member is objecting to the answer, then I will curtail the answer and we will move on. Are there further supplementary questions?
Jan Logie: If tackling domestic violence is a priority, why has the Ministry of Justice funding for family and domestic violence services dropped under her Government from $8.7 million in 2010 to $7.3 million in 2013, despite an increase in family violence arrests last year?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: These days we take much more of a cross-Government approach to the funding of domestic violence and sexual violence. In fact, I can tell the member that the Ministry of Social Development is also contributing to the funding. Also, in addition to that, another portfolio, accident compensation, has spent—I think it is, from memory—around $40 million a year on sensitive claims resulting from sexual violence.
Jan Logie: I seek leave to table a report compiled by the library showing a decrease in funding from the Government, from the Ministry of Social Development, as well as the Ministry of Justice, as well as the It’s Not OK campaign—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! It has been well described. On the basis that it is not freely available to members, I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table this library report on a funding trend. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is none. It can be tabled.

    Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Jan Logie: How can women feel comfortable reporting domestic violence when Ministers have slashed funding for family violence and used their power to help a man charged with abuse simply—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again, we are right back in the same position we were earlier. I will invite the member—[Interruption] Order! I will invite the member to re-ask her question. I suggest that if she just keeps it to the first part, it will be in order.
Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister of Justice herself introduced the Mr Williamson case. That is what the Minister did. It is now on the record. We now have a right to respond—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! A member sitting not too far from the member took objection to the Minister raising that. On that basis, I curtailed the answer. [Interruption] Order! We can move on very quickly. I have been exceedingly patient with the member. I will ask her, if she wants to ask further supplementary questions, that she does it according to the Standing Orders.
Jan Logie: How can women feel comfortable reporting domestic violence when Ministers have slashed funding for support, prevention, and treatment services, and lost their way in terms of providing political leadership on the importance of a consistent response to domestic violence?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I reject the allegation in the second part of that member’s question. I can say to that member that this Government is deeply committed to bringing an end to domestic and sexual violence. In fact, that member well knows and many people in this House will well know that there are people in this House whose close family members have been killed as a result of domestic violence.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/business/qoa/50HansQ_20140506_00000007/7-domestic-violence%E2%80%94support-for-victims

Changes to ACC funding for sensitive claims

A post from FrogBlog by Jan Logie

Isaac Davidson from the Herald ran another great story today on the support services for victims of sexual abuse and ACC plans to improve coverage.
The new model will be “an expanded, more flexible service which took into account the sensitivity, length of time and cost of treating rape-related trauma based on the 2010 review recommendations.” It will cover full cost of the sessions and will allow people to shop around for a therapist who they feel comfortable with and therapists, psychologist and psychotherapists would be given travel funding to allow them to reach people in isolated regions. ACC is also planning to increasingly include family members or support people through the recovery process. There is an expectation that with increased reporting and more funding ACC were expecting the cost of sensitive claims to double from $45million per year.
Of course this is all good news but there are a few points in here that we need to watch carefully if we are to ensure that everyone gets the right help...

Read the rest of this post here: http://blog.greens.org.nz/?p=30254

© 2014 The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

Govt questioned over ACC policy

A news report from Radio New Zealand News

Opposition parties are questioning how long the ACC Minister has known about a privacy waiver used by the corporation that has now been ruled by a court as too broad.
ACC Minister Judith Collins, questioned in Parliament, said she was told about the court decision on Friday and was not aware of the significance of the issue.
But Labour and the Greens say Ms Collins has known about the issue for years, as it was raised in a report about a privacy breach 18 months ago.
Green MP Kevin Hague said after serious privacy breaches by ACC in the past, Ms Collins made public confidence in the corporation a ministerial concern.
Labour's ACC spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway said it was implausible Ms Collins heard of the issue only last week.
"It was in the review of the Bronwyn Pullar case that issues with this form were first identified. In fact, there were media articles about this late last year as well. It's implausible the minister only heard of this issue last week."
In August 2011, details of more than 6000 ACC clients were mistakenly sent to Auckland claimant Bronwyn Pullar, resulting in the resignations of ACC minister Nick Smith, ACC chair John Judge, two directors and chief executive Ralph Stewart.
Outside the House on Wednesday, Judith Collins said ACC should not be handing over people's sensitive claim information to prospective employers and she hadn't heard about the sensitive claims complaint until Wednesday.
"I am actually very concerned about that and I want to find out what are the facts behind it. Is this correct? I understand that there has been some complaints filed with the Human Rights Commission. If that is true, I look forward to seeing what has occurred and when it has occurred."
Ms Collins says she wants to make sure that people's privacy is protected.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/241780/claims-acc-sent-sensitive-files

© Radio New Zealand 2014

Help for rape victims under threat

An article from Stuff by Kirsty Johnston

Rape and sexual assault victims in Auckland may lose access to the city's only 24-hour helpline due to a funding shortfall.
The HELP Foundation will be forced to lay off specialist staff and cut services after the Government refused it $200,000 to keep the line going, spokeswoman Aimee Stockenstroom said. News of the shortfall came despite a commitment from the Government to work closely with HELP to establish a sustainable telephone service for the future in December 2011.
"For victims of sexual assault and rape, the potential to suffer devastating mental health consequences is high and early intervention must be seen as a survivor's right," Stockenstroom said.
HELP takes about 12,000 calls a year from victims of sexual assault and rape, or around 250 calls a week. Stockenstroom said one in five women were sexually assaulted or raped in their lifetime.
"It is not ethical, and shocking for us to think in the middle of the night when the terror can be the most overwhelming, there will no longer be someone there at the end of the phone."
Green MP Jan Logie said it was appalling it had only taken the Government a year to renege on its commitment to the helpline. Logie said while sexual violence reporting rates were increasing, the Government was not reflecting that in its funding, despite widespread acknowledgement that the services were vital.
"In 2009, the Taskforce for Action for Sexual Abuse identified the urgent need to increase funding to support services," she said.
"This has not happened and now even the current meagre resources are being reduced."
Previously, the help line was funded by ACC, however that was axed in May 2009. Interim funding was provided until last year, when a cross-agency group comprising the Ministries of Justice, Social Development, Health and ACC was set up to discuss a long-term solution.
Stockenstroom said HELP wanted to continue to work with the Government but simply could not continue without enough money.
More information can be found on www.helpauckland.org.nz.
The foundation is also taking donations at any branch of ASB bank. A donations account will run from 12 October 2012 through to 26 October 2012. The account number is ASB: 12 3205 0175 043 00.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7819530/Help-for-rape-victims-under-threat

ACC specialists fees reveal huge doubts about independence

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

Evidence that ACC is paying some medical specialists up to half a million dollars a year, an average of up to $1666 each client, reveals huge doubts about the independence of some of the corporation’s favourite doctors, the Green Party said today.
“I have documents showing ACC paid some of its top specialists up to $500,000 a year for between 300 and 500 clients,” Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague said.
“The enormous volume of work and the huge fees paid to these specialists suggest they have been well and truly wrapped up in ACC’s processes for delivering its goal to ‘target the low hanging fruit’ – the people with long term injuries.
“It would be totally unacceptable if the corporation was using doctors it can rely on to deliver assessments that meet that target.
“ACC has a well-established and clear goal of exiting people from the scheme and it is crucial that medical assessments are seen to be truly independent.
“It seems little has changed since Judge Trapski’s damning 1994 report that found, in the case of one favoured ACC specialist, that he’d been used over the years as ACC’s “hit man.”
“Trapski warned then that ACC’s medical assessors need to not only function as independent specialists but must be seen to be independent.
“Favouring a select group of specialists whose medical opinions appear to favour ACC’s agenda is not being seen to be independent.
“The huge fees paid to these assessors, combined with the extremely high rate that ACC’s decisions on long term claimants are overturned at review, reveals real concerns about the fairness of their decisions.
“The ACC Minister must urgently enquire into the appointment of these specialists, and instruct her new board to devise a way to appoint truly independent assessors.
“In answer to my questions in the House today the Minister seems to share our concerns and be determined to actually achieve independent assessments.
“An option would be to bulk fund DHBs to provide a rolling roster of specialists to provide ACC assessments in their region, or contract with professional colleges to ensure the assessments are independent,” Mr Hague said.
Data received through OIA on the payments made and workloads of ACC assessors: http://www.greens.org.nz/misc-documents/data-received-through-oia-payments-made-and-workloads-acc-assessors

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1209/S00211/acc-specialists-fees-reveal-huge-doubts-about-independence.htm

Question to Minister

Question 4: Kevin Hague to the Minister for ACC: Does she agree with Peter Trapski's recommendation in his 1994 Report of that "the Corporation must ensure that the opinions it obtains from medical practitioners are independent, not only of the claimant, but also of the Corporation, and that they are seen to be so"?



Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC): Yes.
Kevin Hague: Is she concerned that just four of ACC’s favourite specialist medical advisers— Dr Martin C Robb, Dr Vic du Plessis, Dr Bill Turner, and Dr David Beaumont—are collectively paid up to $2 million a year from ACC for services rendered?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I believe that the member is referring to a TV3 report on Sunday evening—oh, no, he is not. When it comes to saying that people are paid up to an amount, it is not particularly helpful, because it is anything under that amount. But I have been advised by ACC that for medical case reviews, it has 338 doctors who can carry out those assessments, for initial medical assessments the number is 97, for vocational initial medical assessments it is 62, and for impairment assessments it has got 59, and that, on average, the four particular doctors who were discussed on the 60 Minutes programme, whom I thought he was referring to, actually conduct between 8.7 and 4.7 percent of those particular reviews. So I hope that is helpful to the member.
Kevin Hague: Does she believe that an ordinary person would consider it possible that medical advisers like Dr du Plessis, Dr Turner, Dr Beaumont, and Dr Robb could remain independent of ACC, when it pays them between $300,000 and $500,000 each per year?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think that that is an issue that needs to be considered, and I have spoken to ACC about it. The member will be aware that there is a new board now put in place. I will be meeting with the board and discussing—obviously not the individual cases or the matters— how we can end up with a system that, obviously, achieves good, robust, and independent medical reports and assessments, and that can be seen as independent by both the claimants or clients of ACC and ACC. I also note that even back in the year 2000—12 years ago—the same lawyers for ACC clients were claiming exactly the same issues around what they said were non-independent medical assessments. So I do not think much has changed, but I am happy to work with the member to try to get things to change.
Kevin Hague: Does she agree that an ordinary person would find it unbelievable that ACC would continue to fly these doctors around the country and pay them an average of almost $1,700 for each client they see if they were not acting as “hit men”, to use the phrase that Laurie Gluckman was described as according to Judge Trapski, in targeting the exit of long-term claimants, which ACC has referred to as low-hanging fruit?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think it is absolutely right that people who are not highly trained skilled medical professionals, just like people who are not highly trained, very skilled legal professionals, find the fees that are charged outrageous, but that is actually something that I think most people in New Zealand would say around this area. I do not know for certain and I cannot tell the House that the medical professionals he is referring to are paid any differently from any other medical professionals—
Hon Ruth Dyson: So that makes it all right.
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: —with that degree of expertise, and I am surprised that the former Minister for ACC, who left the job so abruptly, should want to call out about this issue.
Kevin Hague: Does she accept that there is a risk that the assessments performed by a doctor who earns up to half a million dollars a year working part-time for ACC could be affected by that doctor’s desire to continue receiving such lucrative contracts from the corporation?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well, I think that there is always that perception. Whether the perception is reality is a different matter, because as I understand it, these very highly trained, experienced medical professionals are in great demand all over the world. What we do know is that in a country the size of New Zealand, which, of course, has a fabulous health system, thanks in good part to this Government, it is thanks also to the level of qualifications and experience and the work attitude of many of the medical professionals he is referring to.
Kevin Hague: Does she agree that contracting for specialist medical assessments with district health boards or professional colleges would help ensure that they are independent and are seen to be so, as Judge Trapski says they must be?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think the member has raised a very good point, and he has privately raised that matter with me. It is certainly one that I have raised with ACC, and now that the new board is in place I wish to take that matter further and see whether or not that is a realistic situation that we should consider.
Kevin Hague: What are the instructions she has given the reconstituted ACC board about specialist medical assessments?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I have not yet met with the board. It has only been in place a few days, but I will be attending the first board meeting to discuss some of these issues with the board members and ask them whether they can start considering these matters. I have, however, met with the chief executive, raised those issues, and asked for some suggestions. I think it is a very important issue that the member has raised.
Barbara Stewart: Will ACC cap the annual amount it spends on any individual medical assessor to avoid the risk of incentivising advisers to provide reports that ACC wants rather than independent advice?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I am not sure that that would be a good idea, particularly if, for instance, there may be only two or three specialists with the level of expertise in the country. So I think that might be a bit of a blunt instrument, but I can undertake to look at all those considerations.

http://inthehouse.co.nz/node/15035

Independent medical assessments must be a top priority

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

The newly constituted ACC Board needs to demonstrate its commitment to culture change in the organisation by immediately changing the way it commissions the services of specialist medical assessors, Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague said today.
Melanie Read's 60 Minutes story, which screened earlier this evening, has revealed to the public what ACC advocates, long term claimants, and the Green Party have known for some time: that ACC is selectively contracting favoured medical assessors who deliver the assessments that ACC needs to end the entitlements of long-term claimants.
"There is no doubt that ACC has a standard practice of using specialist medical assessors who are likely to make an assessment favourable to ACC,” said Mr Hague.
“The many claimants' stories I have on file show, in particular, it is common for ACC medical assessors to have views which are unusual in their specialty, and who are willing to offer opinions outside of their recognized scope of practice.
“Dr Du Plessis, who was interviewed in Melanie Reid's story is far from unique.
“This is not a new problem. The review of ACC claims management undertaken by Judge Trapski in the wake of the scandal in which Dr. Laurie Gluckman was used by ACC to give opinions in ACC's favour, recommended in 1994 that specialist medical assessments should be genuinely independent of both the claimants and ACC itself.
"It is scandalous that ACC is still engaging in these unethical practices. It is yet another illustration of the sick culture of disentitlement that has taken hold of the organisation,” said Mr Hague.
“It will be an important test of the Minister and the new Board whether urgent action is now taken to introduce truly independent assessments.
"The Green Party has suggested several ways of doing this to the Minister. One is to engage with the specialists' professional colleges to have them appoint medical assessors. Another is simply to extend the contracts ACC already has with District Health Boards so that DHB specialists make the assessments,” said Mr Hague.
Mr Hague has also raised with the Minister ACC's intention to now exercise greater control of the clinical "gateway" into the scheme.
"ACC is now extending the methods they have used to 'exit' long term claimants to the processes by which accident victims are referred into the scheme by general practitioners. The Minister has indicated that our grave concern about these practices will be considered by the new Board. This can't come soon enough,” said Mr Hague.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1209/S00112/independent-medical-assessments-must-be-a-top-priority.htm

Rebstock’s appointment highlights opportunity for ACC

A press release from the Green Party

The appointment of Paula Rebstock as permanent chair of ACC is an opportunity to steer the corporation back towards the role and principles it was founded on, the Green party said today.
Ms Rebstock has been interim chair of ACC since John Judge stood down and today was appointed chairperson.
“Ms Rebstock has a huge responsibility to turn the ACC ship around,” Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague said today.
“Recent reports into ACC by the Auditor General and the Privacy Commissioner have called for major top-level change at the corporation.
“New Zealanders will expect a very different performance and attitude from ACC than they saw when Ms Rebstock was a board member under John Judge and the previous ACC minister Nick Smith.
“Her dual roles in both ACC and Work and Income will require her to be particularly conscious that it is not acceptable to exit people from ACC only to have them end up on WINZ benefits.
“Ordinary New Zealanders don’t like the profit-driven, privacy-abandoning organisation that ACC has become and want it to return to the principals it was founded on.
“It’s pretty basic really. Kiwis gave up the right to sue for a no-fault system that guaranteed them proper compensation and rehabilitation when they were hurt and injured. Its about giving injured New Zealanders the chance of a good life and a fair future.
“Ms Rebstock has a huge job to lead the top-level change that’s needed to make that happen,” Mr Hague said.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1209/S00033/rebstocks-appointment-highlights-opportunity-for-acc.htm

Damning reports show Government’s role in ACC dysfunction

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

Reports into ACC provide the most compelling evidence yet that the Government’s focus on saving a buck has caused ACC to lose sight of its role in helping injured and vulnerable New Zealanders, the Green Party said today.
Following requests from the Green Party, reviews into the Bronwyn Pullar Privacy breach and ACC board governance were conducted by the Privacy Commissioner and the Auditor General. Reports on both were released today.
“They reveal a corporation in desperate need of a culture change which the Privacy Commissioner stated must ‘start at the very top’,” Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague said.
“The reports cite the previous ACC minister’s focus on denying claimants every dollar he could as driving the culture at the corporation.
“And they show that ACC was prepared to sustain human casualties in its drive to achieve the Government’s goal.
“The current minister must now lead the top level change that’s been called for.
“The reports reveal a corporation bumbling along with archaic ideas about communication and responsibility which meant it failed both to treat claimants with decency, and to recognise enormous risks to the organisation even when they hit it in the face,” Mr Hague said.
The Auditor General expresses concern that serous ‘accusations of systemic illegality and fraud were not taken seriously by the corporation’.
And the Privacy Commissioner highlighted ‘an almost cavalier attitude towards its clients and to the protection of their private information’.
“These are two of the most damning reports on a Government entity I’ve ever read.
“It is clear that if board chairman John Judge had not already resigned, he would have been sacked today,” Mr Hague said.
The reports highlight three key issues:

1. As a result of Nick Smith's direction to prioritise ACC's bottom line, the organisation had inadequate focus on the needs of its clients;
2. The culture policies and systems of the organisation are a chaotic shambles that are not fit for purpose;
3. Restoring public trust and confidence is an essential goal and will require very major change starting from the top.

“Given the seriousness of the findings, the Minster must now request that the Auditor General bring forward her review into claims management at ACC. Most of the serious claims Ms Pullar made appear not to have been considered by the board.
“What’s now needed is for visionary leadership to turn this organisation around and focus on the original principals on which it was founded.
“The Minister must ensure that future appointments to the board are up to this task,” Mr Hague said.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1208/S00337/damning-reports-show-governments-role-in-acc-dysfunction.htm

Question to the Prime Minister

5. Dr Russel Norman (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he agree with the statement made by the Hon Bill English, in relation to the release of Natasha Fuller’s private details by his Social Development Minister, that, “People who enter into public debate are welcome to do so … and should provide their full information to the public”?



Hon Gerry Brownlee (Leader of the House) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes.
Dr Russel Norman: Does the Prime Minister agree with the director of the Office of Human Rights Proceedings that Paula Bennett breached the Privacy Act when she released Natasha Fuller’s private details without her permission?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: In fact, there has not been a finding that the Minister Paula Bennett breached the complainant’s privacy.
Dr Russel Norman: Does that mean that he supports Paula Bennett’s decision to reserve the right to release other people’s private details without their consent in the future “depending on the circumstances”, and is this now Government policy?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: No.
Dr Russel Norman: Will the Prime Minister direct other Ministers to follow the Privacy Act and not release private information without the consent of the people concerned?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Ministers do, every day, follow the provisions of the Privacy Act and many others as well.
Dr Russel Norman: When Taleni Lafo entered the public debate about the state of Housing New Zealand Corporation homes, claiming hers was making her children sick, under what circumstances would he consider it appropriate for Ministers responsible for the Inland Revenue Department, social development, or housing to access her personal details about herself and her family and make them public?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: The first expectation would be that the Minister investigated the circumstances and remedied the problem.
Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked about the circumstances under which it would be appropriate to release the information. The Minister talked about what they should do in the first instance. He did not address the question at all.
Mr Speaker: I think the member has got a reasonable point there. I invite him to repeat his question.
Dr Russel Norman: Thank you, Mr Speaker. When Taleni Lafo entered the public debate about the state of Housing New Zealand Corporation homes, under what circumstances would the Prime Minister consider it appropriate for Ministers to access her personal details and those of her family, and make these details public?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: That is a hypothetical question, and I am not answering a hypothetical question.
Dr Russel Norman: When sexual abuse survivors criticise Government plans to cut back ACC for sensitive claims, under what circumstances would the Prime Minister support the Minister for ACC accessing the survivors’ personal files, and releasing their private, personal details to the media?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: This is once again a highly hypothetical question. The member can go on all afternoon trying to put forward these alarming situations in a hypothetical sense. They cannot and will not be answered.
Dr Russel Norman: Are there any circumstances in which it is acceptable for a Minister of the Crown to go to the Government files and access the personal, private details of a member of the public, and release those details without consent in order to make political gain?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: I have to say, once again, he is asking for the answer to a question that poses hypothetical situations. What I can say is that when it comes to people like Stewart Murray Wilson, the public expect those details to be in the domain. Therefore, it is a very difficult question to answer specifically.
Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked for, basically, a policy guideline. What is the Prime Minister’s policy for guiding Ministers on releasing this information?
Mr Speaker: The member actually asked, if I recollect correctly, whether there are any circumstances under which such information might be accessed and released. In answering it, it appeared the Minister indicated that perhaps there might be some, depending on the circumstances. That seemed to be the answer the Minister gave, because he seemed to cite a situation where that might be a desirable thing to do. It is totally the Minister’s right to answer how he sees fit, but it was certainly an answer. He indicated that there may be some circumstances.
Dr Russel Norman: Does the Prime Minister accept that having a Government that releases the private information of people who oppose Government policy—information that is available only to the State—is an approach that silences dissent, chills dissent in a democratic society, and is not acceptable in a democratic and free country?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, quite clearly by the long list of examples the member has given this afternoon, that is not the case.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1208/S00247/questions-and-answers-august-16.htm

Wellington Rape Crisis forced to cut services

A press release from the Green Party

Government must step in to protect Wellington Rape Crisis as it is forced to cut services to four days a week, the Green Party said today.
"Despite its client contacts doubling in the last year, Wellington Rape Crisis today announced they will be closing their doors one day a week,” said Green Party women's affairs spokesperson Jan Logie.
“Sexual abuse support and counselling are essential services because sexual violence is such a big problem in New Zealand. Counselling and support services are vital to healing and recovery from sexual abuse,” said Ms Logie.
Services that support survivors from disclosure to recovery reduce mental health impacts, improve well-being and assist people to reclaim their roles in their families and communities.
“The 2009 Taskforce for Action Report on Sexual Violence recommended immediate funding increases for services such as Wellington Rape Crisis. The funding increases never happened and we are now seeing agencies having to close their doors.
"The National Government’s ACC ‘funding crisis’ means that money spent on delivering counselling treatment to those who need it the most has halved and currently 80 percent of sensitive claims are on hold.
“And on top of that, funding from the Ministry of Social Development is being ‘prioritised’ to exclude adult survivors despite this being the largest group seeking support.
“Sexual abuse services are not just needed in good economic times. This Government seems to think they’re optional, maybe because the stigma means a mass protest is unlikely,” Ms Logie said.
Individuals and organisations can find out more about supporting Wellington Rape Crisis at www.wellingtonrapecrisis.org.nz.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1208/S00176/wellington-rape-crisis-forced-to-cut-services.htm

Green MP says report reveals ACC anti-claimant culture

A report from Radio New Zealand

The Green MP, Kevin Hague, says a new report on the Accident Compensation Corporation is more proof the corporation's been more focussed on getting claimants off its books than on providing help.

Copyright 2012 Radio New Zealand

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2525394/green-mp-says-report-reveals-acc-anti-claimant-culture

ACC’s compo deal should come with no strings attached

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

ACC should remove the obligation on victims of its privacy breach to sign away their right to talk about its compensation offer or take any legal action in the future, the Green Party said today.
As part of its $250 payment to victims of its mass leak of sensitive claimants’ details, ACC is asking them to accept it is a “full and final” settlement and to stay quiet about it forever.
“It’s neither fair nor reasonable for ACC to demand the claimants give up their right to sue in future over the breach or to complain about their treatment by the corporation,” Green Party ACC spokesman Kevin Hague said,
“The small sum of $250 should be seen as a nominal acknowledgement of harm by ACC and be given with no strings attached.
“It should not be seen as a fair settlement between two parties. There has been no negotiation, or any sort of process where the claimants have been able to have their individual situation heard and acknowledged, and which has led to a settlement.
“The insulting offer of $250 to everyone, regardless of their circumstances, on ACC’s terms alone, is symptomatic of the arrogance which got the corporation into this trouble in the first place.
“New Zealanders gave away their right to sue over injury when they agreed to the formation of no-fault ACC scheme in the early 1970s.
“These people should not feel compelled to give away their right to a full negotiation or compensation just because it’s convenient for ACC,” Mr Hague said.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1206/S00407/accs-compo-deal-should-come-with-no-strings-attached.htm