Claims ACC sent sensitive files

A news report from Radio New Zealand

The Human Rights Commission has received five complaints in the past two years about Accident Compensation Corporation files sent to prospective employers.
The commission on Wednesday said in at least one case, the file included sensitive claim information such as sexual abuse.
ACC's policy of forcing clients to sign a wide-ranging privacy waiver has been found in breach of the law.
The Dunedin District Court ruled on Monday that the controversial ACC 167 form was beyond the law and the corporation had no right to decline entitlements because a client would not sign it. The corporation had cut compensation to an unknown number of claimants for refusing to sign the waiver.
Christchurch Justice of the Peace and community board member Karolin Potter said she had been approached by two people at legal forums who told her they had had sensitive claim information sent to their employer by ACC.
"In response to employer's request for their ACC information, the ACC had sent out the entire file including sensitive claim material for sexual abuse in their past."
Ms Potter told Radio New Zealand's Nine to Noon programme on Wednesday both complainants said ACC told them it had no discretion to filter the information they provided to prospective employers.
ACC has issued a statement saying it does not send information about claims older than 10 years, mental injuries, declined claims, treatment injury claims or sensitive issue claims, without the client's express permission.
The corporation said it will disclose information only if it is required to help get a client into work, which is the purpose for which it was collected.
Council of Trade Unions' president Helen Kelly says people signing employment privacy waivers are in no position to negotiate its conditions.

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

© Radio New Zealand 2014

Question to Minister

10. KEVIN HAGUE (Green) to the Minister for ACC: Have all of the recommendations of the 2012 Independent Review of ACC’s Privacy and Security of Information been implemented; if not, why not?



Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC): ACC advised that it has implemented 37 of the 44 recommendations. A number have ongoing activity associated with them. Of the remaining seven, two are under active management, which relate to information governance and the implementation of data loss protection software. The other five involve a fundamental review of ACC’s end-to-end claims process activity. Accordingly, ACC advised that it has taken a deliberate decision to complete the end-to-end process review of claims management as part of its work around improving trust and confidence. This is to ensure all processes and information technology changes required under these five recommendations comprehensively meet the intent of the report.
Kevin Hague: Is she confident that the recommendations to ensure that consent forms follow the law and are best practice have been properly implemented, given that the court has just found that the way that ACC was using its ACC167 form was actually illegal?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I do not want to argue with the member, but, strictly speaking, the form was not held to be illegal, but the way in which it was used was outside of the statutory requirements. I agree with the member that the form must be changed to comply with the latest decision. I have also been advised by ACC that this form has in the past been approved by the Privacy Commissioner, by the Human Rights Commission, and, I have been told, by six different District Court decisions. So the fact that this latest decision has said that it has been wrongly used is something that ACC is taking very seriously, as am I.
Kevin Hague: How does she reconcile ACC’s illegal use of this form with the privacy review’s findings that stakeholders’ single-biggest concern was the attitude and culture of the organisation in dealing with their personal information, and the report’s finding that a consistent theme was that information not relevant to the claim was held on file?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I also recall that the review said that the form itself was able to be used. So I think the problem is that the past decisions of the courts and of other agencies, like the Human Rights Commission, the Privacy Commissioner, and also the review, have not actually said that the form has been misused. But I believe that the member is right that the form should be changed. ACC told me on Monday this week that it was not going to appeal the decision and that it would abide by it. I think that is the right outcome.
Kevin Hague: How do revelations today that ACC has been handing people’s full ACC files—including information on sensitive claims—over to prospective employers stack up against the recommendations of the privacy review?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I am sorry, I have not heard that claim, but if the member would like to provide me with the information, I will be happy to take some action. I seek leave to assist the member with the summary—
Mr SPEAKER: You are seeking leave to table a document?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: It is a document that is the independent review recommendations and summary of actions as at 24 January this year, and I think that might help the member.
Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that summary of actions. Is there any objection to that being tabled? It can be tabled.
    Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.
Kevin Hague: How does the Minister reconcile the responsibility she took as Minister in 2012 and her comment that “I’m not going to sit back and let one of the most important Government entities we have let people down time and time again around things such as privacy. They have to act in the way that I expect them to act.” with her comments over the past several days that the implications of the court decision are an operational matter?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well, strictly speaking, forms are an operational matter, but if the member is going to come to see the progress that has been made and what actions I have taken, I think that I have been very strong on this issue relating to ACC. I can look at the proof of just how successful that has been. In August 2012 there were 80 privacy breaches from ACC. A year later, in August 2013, that was down to 28. In March 2014—the month just past—it was down to 19. There are significant improvements in the ability of ACC to protect people’s privacy, and at the same time, to comply with its obligations under its own Act.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/business/qoa/50HansQ_20140416_00000010/10-accident-compensation-corporation%E2%80%94privacy-and-security

Rejected claims miss out in u-turn

An article from the New Zealand Herald by Derek Cheng

The partial u-turn by ACC on paying for counselling for victims of sexual abuse will not help those who have had their ACC claims declined since guidelines were tightened last October.
ACC this week admitted that changes last October to rules covering "sensitive claims" had exposed gaps.
From Monday, people making new claims of sexual abuse or waiting for a decision on a claim would have automatic access to 16 one-hour sessions of ACC-funded counselling. Since the changes in October, about 2500 claims have been lodged. About 300 have been approved, 1200 declined, and the rest are still awaiting a decision.
ACC Minister Nick Smith said the changes, which restricted funding to those with a diagnosed mental injury resulting from sexual abuse, had caused an unacceptable delay in processing claims.
He said it was unsure if it had led to claims being improperly declined, but he would wait for the final report of an independent clinical panel before considering inviting those who had their claims rejected to reapply. "The difficulty has been the time it's taken to be able to get the diagnosis, and the damage that has done in the time it has taken to get to that diagnosis," Dr Smith said. "The number of sensitive claims declined by ACC is quite small. The lion's share has been where there has been no decision."
The extra counselling is an interim solution that will remain in operation at least until the panel presents its final report in mid-September. It has been applauded by victims' rights and rape prevention groups, as well as the Human Rights Commission, which said it was pleased that ACC had responded to concerns.
"The cuts to costs of treatment for sexual abuse 'sensitive claims' has put considerable pressure on victims and increased their fears and anxiety," said Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner Judy McGregor. She said it remained to be seen if the 16 hours would be enough for victims who suffered child sexual abuse or more than one sexual assault.
Dr Smith said ACC had handled the issue poorly. "There are some lessons for them to learn. I will await making a final judgment until I get the full report from the panel."
Labour's ACC spokesman David Parker said the cuts had led to a 90 per cent reduction in ACC-approved counselling for victims of sexual crime. "The minister was repeatedly and clearly warned, by clinicians and the Labour Party, that his changes were so obviously wrong. His attempt to blame this all on the ACC board should not be accepted.
"Why have a minister if he will not take responsibility in the face of prior warnings?" Parker said.

Rule change

• Since October ACC-funded counselling for "sensitive claims" (victims of sexual abuse) has been approved only if the claimant was diagnosed with a mental injury resulting from the abuse.
• This week, ACC said it would pay for 16 one-hour counselling sessions for all "sensitive claims" and existing ones awaiting a decision, regardless of entitlement.
• ACC Minister Nick Smith says the problem was the delay in making the diagnosis, not that claims were wrongly declined.

Copyright 2010, APN Holdings NZ Limited
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10665689

ACC reverses sex abuse decision

A news report from the NZPA

Victim advocates are relieved to see a reversal by ACC on its decision to cut funding for sexual abuse counselling, but the Greens say independent reviews should also follow other changes the Crown organisation has made.
Last October ACC cut counselling for victims of rape and other sexual abuse "sensitive claims", and funding was restricted to those with a diagnosed mental injury resulting from sexual abuse or assault, sparking outrage and protests from victim advocates. But it back-tracked yesterday and said from next week people with a new ACC sensitive claim, or with a new claim already in the system but awaiting a decision, would be able to access up to 16 hours with a counsellor.
ACC said the decision was made after concerns were expressed and followed advice from an independent panel appointed by ACC Minister Nick Smith to review the sensitive claims pathway in light of advice he had got from clinicians.
Dr Smith said the 16 hours was an interim provision, and a long-term plan would be made after the final report from the panel was released in mid-September. He said while he had been careful not to interfere with what was a clinical matter, he didn't think ACC had managed the issue well.
The Mental Health Foundation, Human Rights Commission and National Council of Women NZ (NCWNZ) all expressed relief over the u-turn today, although the organisations have raised questions as to whether the 16 hours will be enough for some victims.
NCWNZ national president Elizabeth Bang said the situation showed how critical it was to test new policy approaches before rolling them out. She said savings made during the nine month "experiment" would no doubt be spent on an envisaged influx of claimants. "Again, ACC will need to ensure they have sufficient staff on deck to manage the opening of the flood-gates," Ms Bang said.
Green Party ACC spokesman Kevin Hague said the u-turn "strongly suggested" that all changes ACC has made to its cover, entitlements and assessment criteria needed to be independently reviewed. "An independent review is needed to ensure ACC is doing its job and not causing re-victimisation of accident victims," Mr Hague said. He said Dr Smith had introduced other changes to ACC over the past two years which were not supported by evidence.
Labour's ACC spokesman David Parker said it was unacceptable that Dr Smith was pointing the finger at the ACC board over the sexual abuse funding issue. "The minister was repeatedly and clearly warned by clinicians and the Labour Party that his changes were so obviously wrong. Why have a minister if he will not take responsibility in the face of prior warnings?"

© 2010 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4018575/ACC-reverses-sex-abuse-decision

Commission welcomes support for sex abuse victims

A press release from the Human Rights Commission

The Human Rights Commission welcomes ACC’s decision announced today to reverse funding cuts and the provision of extra support to sexual abuse victims.
“The cuts to costs of treatment for sexual abuse ‘sensitive claims’ has put considerable pressure on victims and increased their fears and anxiety,” said Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner Dr Judy McGregor.
From Monday, 16 August, people with a new sensitive claim related to sexual abuse or sexual assault and those whose claim is awaiting a decision will be able to have up to 16 hours with a counsellor funded by the ACC.
Dr McGregor said it remained to be established whether this was sufficient for sensitive cases such as those who had suffered child sexual abuse or more than one sexual assault.
The Commission was strongly opposed to the cuts at the time they were made and said that the delays in gaining approval from ACC for assistance to partially meet the costs of treatment “had been alarmingly protracted”.
The Commission welcomed the fact that ACC has listened to the concerns expressed by several groups.
When changes were made recently to ACC legislation, the Commission expressed concern to the Select Committee about the proposed cuts to be made by regulation.
The Commission said counselling for people who had been sexually abused or assaulted should be fully funded by ACC and the cost of services should not be a barrier to access. The cuts placed considerable stress on a very vulnerable group and delayed their recovery and integration back into society and employment.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1008/S00143/commission-welcomes-support-for-sex-abuse-victims.htm