Question to Minister

9. IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for ACC: Is she satisfied that just 54 percent of the public expressed trust and confidence in ACC according to the corporation’s 2014 Annual Report?



Hon Nikki Kaye (Minister for ACC): No, I believe that ACC needs to do more to rebuild trust and confidence with New Zealanders. I am confident that ACC has a significant programme of work under way to achieve this. I am also pleased that the annual report shows trust and confidence has been trending upwards for the past few years.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Did former Minister Judith Collins damage public trust and confidence in ACC when she admitted that every New Zealander is paying too much for ACC because the Government is using excessive levies to create the perception that it will achieve a fiscal surplus in the current financial year?

Hon Nikki Kaye: Well, firstly, I disagree with the statement made in that question. But what I can say in terms of levies is that under our Government we have announced $480 million in levy reductions. That is incredibly significant, and it is a bit rich to get a lecture after the previous Labour Government left us with a huge deficit in 2008-09 of $4.8 billion.

Iain Lees-Galloway: I am going to seek leave to table a media statement, but that is because the Minister refuted the premise of my question—

Mr Speaker: Order! Members need to understand that the purpose of tabling a document is not to make a political point.

Iain Lees-Galloway: The purpose is not to make a political point.

Mr Speaker: Well, I think that in the way it has been described to me, it is very much about making a political point. The reason people seek leave to table documents is that it is information that is not readily available to members, may be difficult to source for members, and may be informative to members. If it is something that has been in the media, particularly media that is freely available to members, I do not intend to start putting the leave.

Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In a ruling that you made—it was either earlier this week or last week—you referred us to a Speaker’s ruling that requires any statements made in a question to be authenticated, so if there is any factual material in a question, it needs to be authenticated. If a member is not able to table a document to authenticate that claim, what is the appropriate way for them to authenticate any claim that they might be making in a question?

Mr Speaker: The member, I think, is confused between a primary question and a supplementary question. The authentication is required for a primary question, and that is required in the process when it is lodged to the Clerk’s Office, and they will be accepted with authentication. With regard to supplementary questions, I have to judge relatively immediately whether it is a reasonable question, and I do that, but it is not as if there is an ability to then table information that substantiates the authentication of a supplementary question. So in this case, the primary question was authenticated, it was immediately answered in the very first word by the Minister, and we have now moved to a supplementary question. The way forward, as I continue to advise the House, is further incisive supplementary questions.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Does the Minister accept—

Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: World weary—he’s not happy. That’s a big sigh.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Are you all right? Does the Minister accept that over the 6 years that National has been in Government, New Zealanders have overwhelmingly come to perceive ACC as difficult to deal with, likely to breach their privacy, likely to litigate against claimants, and overcharging them for the privilege; if not, why not?

Hon Nikki Kaye: No, I do not accept all of the statements made by that member. What I can say is what I have said in answer to the primary question: there is more work to do. Obviously, by a percentage that shows 54 percent public confidence, we have to do better. Let me outline some of the progress that we have made. Firstly, you can see at an investment level that ACC is now essentially fully funded. That is an extraordinary achievement for this Government, given that we were left in a situation of a debt of $4.8 billion in terms of deficit. Secondly, at an organisational level it is very clear—and I am meeting with the board tomorrow—that it has a huge programme around both updating information and communication technology systems to ensure that we have better progress around issues like privacy but also that a huge amount is being done in terms of claims management. I am confident that ACC is on the right track.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Will this morning’s article in the New Zealand Herald damage public trust and confidence in ACC, given that it detailed an attempt to cover up information about fraudulent activity, that the cover-up itself was bungled, that when pressed about the extent of fraud, ACC could only say that the information it used was not robust, and that an accurate figure for the level of fraud has not been provided?

Hon Nikki Kaye: In terms of the article in the New Zealand Herald, I do not believe that it will actually damage public trust, because you need to understand that the data is—and I want to outline why, for a number of reasons—11-year-old data. The data was from 2,000 clients, and that is out of a total of about a billion claims. So, firstly, it was a very small sample. I also understand that the figure that was quoted of 8 percent to 10 percent was not the proportion that was fraudulent; it was the proportion that needed another look. So it is old data, it is a small sample, and it is ropey.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Given that the Minister is not satisfied with the level of public trust and confidence in ACC, does she believe that the two initiatives to address public trust and confidence listed in the service agreements between ACC and former Minister Collins, which are “refresh our communications strategy” and “social media”, will be enough to improve confidence in ACC, or does she think it might take something a little bit less superficial than that?

Hon Nikki Kaye: In terms of the corporation’s programme to improve public confidence, there is a range of initiatives. There is a range of initiatives. The member is referring to a different document. He is not referring to the annual report. If he reads the annual report, he will see that not only is there a significant investment plan in terms of dealing with the privacy issues, and not only is the ACC doing a huge amount around sensitive claims, which is very important, but, thirdly, the Government is looking at the long-term funding policy. When he drills down, when he does the work and reads the annual report, he will see that one of the areas where we do need to improve public confidence is around businesses’ interaction with the ACC. There is a huge amount to do in terms of that administration side because that is where the public confidence is partly very low.

Marama Fox:

    [Authorised te reo text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]

    [Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]

Hon Nikki Kaye: Just in terms of the translation of that question, I got only half of it, I think—

Mr Speaker: I invite Marama Fox to either repeat it in Te Reo, or, if she wants to, she can now repeat the question in English—whichever she would rather do.

Marama Fox: Perhaps I will repeat it in English. How is the Minister planning to address the projected 10 percent increase in new sensitive claims each year, and what plans does she have in place to involve whānau in the recovery process?

Hon Nikki Kaye: That is a very good question. Firstly, one area where the Government is very focused, and also the corporation is very focused, is the prevention of sexual violence. We have a strategy and an action plan around that, and they involve a number of Government agencies. The second thing I would say is I am advised that ACC is currently in the final stages of tendering for new suppliers and providers around some of those sensitive claims. That is very important so that we have more providers. Thirdly, with regard to family and whānau support, I am pleased to confirm that family and whānau of sensitive claims clients will receive support through the introduction of up to 20 hours of family and whanau support, depending on family need. I can confirm that this will be available by the end of the year.

Hon Te Ururoa Flavell: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Can I just ask the Minister with respect to the question, because I was not listening to the translation, for further information, just in case other members, Māori members, use Te Reo and we have to switch into English, which defeats the purpose. Was the issue that the Minister did not get a good translation, that the Minister did not get a translation, or that the translation was unclear—just for the purposes of—

Mr Speaker: I am sure I can answer that on behalf of the Minister. The Minister did not manage to realise it was going to be in Māori. She did not grab the headpiece in time to listen to the translation, so she picked up the latter part of the—[Interruption] I will let the Minister explain her own reasoning.

Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: No, I am going to hear from the Hon Nikki Kaye first so we will get an explanation.

Hon Nikki Kaye: I was listening, and I heard only half, I think, of what the translation was, and other members may be able to confirm that.

Chris Hipkins: I am happy to speak to this, because I also was listening to the translation, and the translation bore very little correlation to the question that was then asked in English. This is quite a serious issue for the House, because we previously had a situation where questions were asked first in Te Reo Māori and then in English, and we moved to a system where we had simultaneous translation. If that translation is not going to actually translate what is asked, then we are going to have to reassess that. I listened very carefully to the translation. I can fully understand why the Minister did not understand what the question was. I did not understand what the question was either.

Mr Speaker: Thank you. I appreciate that. When I finally got my headpiece on, again, I found much the same as the member Chris Hipkins has said. We need to now investigate whether it was an issue to do with the translation, because it is critical, if we are going to rely on the translator, that we have an accurate interpretation of the question that is asked. Otherwise, it could lead to all sorts of difficulties for a Minister. I will look into the matter.

Complaint turns up heat on Collins

An article from the Dominion Post by Phil Kitchin

An ACC whistleblower has complained to the privacy commissioner alleging Cabinet minister Judith Collins leaked confidential but false details to WhaleOil blogger Cameron Slater. Bronwyn Pullar filed her complaint after reading in Nicky Hager's Dirty Politics claims of Slater giving a friend - a former sex worker - false details about Pullar that the blogger said he got after speaking to Collins.
Privacy Commissioner John Edwards, whose office is overseen by Collins as the justice minister, said yesterday that he was assessing the complaint. The complaint heaps more pressure on the embattled Collins, who is on a "final final warning" from Prime Minister John Key after admitting she passed details about public servant Simon Pleasants to Slater, who then published material on his blog, prompting death threats against the bureaucrat.
Pullar caused severe embarrassment for Collins, who is also ACC minister, when she blew the whistle in 2012 on a massive ACC privacy breach involving her being sent confidential details on 6500 claimants, including sexual abuse victims.
Dirty Politics claims the day the story broke, Slater told the former prostitute - who was concerned her details were part of the ACC breach - that he would talk to Collins for "the real story". In two sets of messages between Slater and the ex-prostitute, Slater said he had spoken to Collins, and he provided his friend with then-unknown information about the whistleblower, the book claims.
Particularly damaging for Collins are the book's claims that Slater's statements show that he knew who Pullar was, that she had tried to extort ACC and that she was likely to be prosecuted. At the time Dirty Politics claims he was stating this to the ex-sex worker, ACC had not laid any extortion complaint to police and Pullar's request for anonymity had been respected by ACC.
If Slater's statements to the former prostitute as detailed in the book are correct, Collins could face serious trouble for leaking Pullar's name and false allegations of extortion against her before the minister had received any final written reports from her ministry.
However, Slater now insists the key details were not leaked by Collins.
Slater yesterday confirmed he spoke to Collins but said she only provided him with details about the privacy breach to allay his ex-sex worker friend's fears. He said Collins gave him no information about Pullar and allegations of extortion, and that he got that information from other sources.
Collins side-stepped questions about what she told Slater and said she was unaware of any complaint to the privacy commissioner against her by Pullar.
"If there is one, I would be unable to comment," Collins said.
"There are complaints about the Hager book and stolen emails before the police and the privacy commissioner and it would be inappropriate to comment further."
When Pullar first blew the whistle on ACC she was not identified, and the corporation was told she wished to remain anonymous so she was not deluged with calls from ACC clients asking if they were part of the privacy breach. The scandal forced ACC into making thousands of apologies and Collins faced snap debates in Parliament.
Three days after the story broke and after crisis meetings involving Collins, then chairman John Judge and then chief executive Ralph Stewart, ACC hit back at Pullar.
ACC published a report claiming Pullar tried to extort the corporation at a December 2011 meeting held between Pullar, her support person and former National Party president Michelle Boag, and two senior ACC managers. ACC did not ask Pullar for her side of the story before making the allegations public and then repeating them to police, who launched an inquiry.
Slater was then fed a memo from Boag to Collins which he gave to a Sunday newspaper reporter and Pullar's name became public knowledge. Slater went on the attack on his blog, falsely accusing Pullar and Boag of blackmail.
But ACC and Slater did not know Pullar had a tape recording of the meeting that showed the allegations were false.
Correspondence with the privacy commissioner's office obtained by The Dominion Post shows the commissioner admitting his office initially "overlooked" Pullar's complaint made on August 15.
The commissioner last week ruled out investigating a Green Party complaint that Collins leaked Pleasants' name to Slater. He said he would need a complaint from Pleasants, who has declined to lodge one.
Edwards' assistant commissioner of investigations, Mike Flahive, told Pullar on Wednesday he was "assessing" her complaint to consider what action to take.
"Your patience would be appreciated," Flahive said.

NEW COMPLAINT
The latest complaint that ACC and Justice Minister Judith Collins breached ACC whistleblower Bronwyn Pullar's privacy is different to one that dragged Collins into an earlier investigation by the privacy commissioner. That investigation was launched when a memo from former National Party president Michelle Boag to Collins clarifying Puller's reasons for blowing the whistle was leaked to a reporter. The leak led to Pullar - who has a brain injury - coming under siege from media as ACC simultaneously falsely claimed she'd tried to extort the corporation.
Investigators trawled through Collins' office and computer and questioned ACC chairman John Judge and then chief executive Ralph Stewart to try to find the source of the leak. Collins was accused of being the leaker, which she correctly denied.
The investigation failed to find the leak but informed sources have confirmed to The Dominion Post that the leak was from one senior board member to another, who gave it to a blogger, who passed it to Slater, who gave it to the reporter.

HOW IT UNFOLDED
March 13, 2012 - The Dominion Post reveals ACC breached the privacy of 6500 ACC clients, including rape victims, by sending their details to an unnamed ACC client.
March 13 - According to Dirty Politics, WhaleOil blogger Cameron Slater tells an ex-prostitute friend he would ring ACC Minister Judith Collins to "get the real story".
March 14 - Slater tells the ex-prostitute the whistleblower was a woman who tried to blackmail ACC and was likely to be prosecuted for extortion, Dirty Politics claims. That afternoon, minister Collins attends a meeting with ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart and chairman John Judge. In an affidavit later, Judge said Collins "very strongly" pushed for police to be told about threats allegedly made by Pullar at a meeting with ACC on December 2011.
March 15 - The word "blackmail" is first publicly discussed. Collins tells Radio Live she had oral reports on the December meeting but wanted written reports.
March 15 - Two ACC managers from the December meeting provide their official account, which contains no allegations of blackmail or extortion.
March 16 - A "situation report" is published on ACC's website accusing the whistleblower of extortion.
March 17 - The book claims Slater tells the ex-prostitute he knows who the whistleblower is and that she will get "rat f...ed hard."
March 18 - A Sunday newspaper names the whistleblower, Bronwyn Pullar, after Slater provides a leaked email from ACC.
March 19 - ACC makes a written complaint to police about alleged extortion.
April 30 - The Dominion Post reveals Pullar recorded the critical meeting at which ACC claimed she'd tried to extort the corporation. The recording showed ACC had made false allegations. Police swiftly shut down their investigation.

© 2014 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10440930/Complaint-turns-up-heat-on-Collins

ACC initiative targets sexual violence

An article from the Papakura Courier by Tao Lin

They are talking sex and violence at Papakura High - and how the two don't mix.
The school is the first in South Auckland to trial Mates & Dates, a new ACC initiative that aims to help prevent sex and dating violence by teaching teenagers healthy relationship skills and behaviour. It's being piloted during term three across seven classes and organisers say it's getting good results.
ACC statistics shows the 15 to 24 age group is the most at risk from violence by current and ex-partners. One in five female and one in 10 male secondary school students report unwanted sexual contact or being made to do unwanted sexual things. Around 37 per cent describe the unwanted activity as severe and 57 per cent tell no-one.
Korowai Tumanako, a Maori service designed to support those affected by sexual violence, facilitates Mates & Dates at Papakura High. Its director Russell Smith says the response from students has been great and many of those who were disengaged at first were taking notes by the second or third sessions. The programme teaches about healthy relationships, consent and how to stay safe.
"The hope is to normalise discussions," Smith says.
Fellow director Joy Te Wiata says students are encouraged to apply the lessons to all areas of their lives and recognise how to help others in danger.
"It's quite a courageous programme in that we are making discussions about sexual violence overt," she says.
"They're simple, key messages."
School guidance counsellor Avril Michaels says she's also pleased with "how positively the staff of the classes have embraced the programme".
ACC sexual violence prevention programme manager Sandra Dickson says it applies to all kinds of relationships and extends the organisation's role in helping people deal with experiences of sexual violence. It already plays a key role supporting people dealing with the effects of sexual abuse or assault, she says.
"We now want to play a greater role in helping to prevent sexual and dating violence and the harms they cause."
The programme is relevant to all students, whether they're in a relationship or not, she says.
"It covers all kinds of relationships such as friendships and those with family. The programme will help students think about relationships they already have, as well as dating in the future.
"It's a challenging time for teenagers to be growing into adulthood. We hope Mates & Dates will give them the skills and tools they need to both make that transition safely and carry with them throughout their lives."
ACC minister Judith Collins was at the school last week to catch up on the programme's progress. She describes it as "a fantastic step to prevention" and says she supports challenging current mentalities around sexual violence.
Papakura High is one of nine schools around the country trialing the new programme.
If you or someone you know needs information or help after a sexual assault or abuse, contact ACC's sensitive claims unit confidentially on 0800 735 566. See toah-nnest.org.nz for information on where to seek help if you have experienced sexual violence or become concerned about harmful sexual behaviour towards others.

© 2014 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/10399082/ACC-initiative-targets-sexual-violence

Time Key took responsibility for Collins

A press release from the New Zealand Labour Party by Grant Robertson

It is well past time for John Key to take some responsibility for the misuse of power and information by his Minister Judith Collins, and follow through on his last warning to her, Labour MP Grant Robertson says.
“The evidence released this week shows John Key’s staff and Ministers are directly involved in the kind of negative politics and smears that put ordinary New Zealanders off engaging in the political process. It is time for the Prime Minister to show some leadership and take responsibility for these actions.
“Nicky Hager’s book includes new examples of the way in which Judith Collins has misused information that she only had access to because she is a Minister. New Zealanders have a right to expect better of the Ministers who act on their behalf.
“Two examples stand out, which John Key needs to hold Judith Collins to account for. First, she was involved in a campaign to smear a staff member in the Ministerial Services team as part of a distraction from issues being raised about Bill English claiming housing allowances in 2009.
“Despite there being no evidence to suggest this staff member had done anything wrong, he was attacked in several blogs by Cameron Slater. The book released this week reveals that Judith Collins sent information about this person’s name and job to Cameron Slater as he prepared these attacks.
“This is an appalling example of a Minister misusing her power to attack an innocent public servant. By his inaction John Key is telling New Zealanders that this is acceptable behaviour.
“The book also contains emails from Cameron Slater that report conversations with Judith Collins about the unauthorised release of ACC information that went to Bronwyn Pullar. The emails record that Slater had talked to the Minister about the case and that he received information about what Bronwyn Pullar was doing that could only have come from Judith Collins.
“As Minister for ACC that would be a gross breach of the confidentiality expected when dealing with ACC. John Key needs to investigate this to show once and for all where the leak of this sensitive information came from.
“The evidence presented this week shows that Judith Collins sent many messages and emails and made many phone calls to Cameron Slater that smear and denigrate political opponents and even innocent public servants.
“That is not what New Zealanders are paying her a Ministerial salary for. John Key needs to stop being so relaxed about serious issues. He needs to take some responsibility for her actions and follow through on the many warnings he has given Judith Collins,” Grant Robertson said.

© 2014 Scoop Media

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1408/S00248/time-key-took-responsibility-for-collins.htm

ACC cover to extend to child victims of sexual grooming

A press release from the New Zealand Government

ACC Minister Judith Collins today announced an addition to the Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill that would extend ACC sensitive claims cover to children or young people who are victims of sexual grooming or indecent communications.
“There is a gap in the current ACC law that needs addressing to establish cover for victims of these types of child sexual exploitation,” Ms Collins says.
“Our Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill targets criminals who prey on children, either by feeding the supply or fuelling the demand for the insidious underground child sexual abuse market.
“This proposal will ensure ACC cover is provided for mental injury caused by the Bill’s new offence of indecent communication with a young person, as well as cover for the existing offence of sexual grooming.”
Ms Collins says the proposal supports ACC’s new strategy for action on sexual violence that focuses on prevention, first response and quality services to help victims of sexual violence.
Just recently ACC announced its Mates & Dates pilot that aims to prevent sexual and dating violence by helping young people to understand the value of healthy relationships based on respect, negotiation and consent.
A further addition to the Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill will ensure that any person convicted of indecently communicating with a young person is restricted from working in core children’s workforce roles. The Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill is currently awaiting its second reading in Parliament.

© 2014 Scoop Media

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1407/S00647/acc-cover-to-extend-to-child-victims-of-sexual-grooming.htm

Teaching teens about right sort of love

An article from the Wanganui Chronicle by Lydia Anderson

Teenagers often look for love in all the wrong places, so a programme teaching them about healthy relationships has got to be good, a Wanganui counsellor says. ACC's new pilot, Mates & Dates, will teach secondary school students healthy relationship skills, as part of a three-year programme aimed at preventing sexual and dating violence.
And the West Auckland Roastbusters scandal, which involved teenage boys boasting online about having group sex with drunk, underage girls, had an effect on the programme being formulated "at pace". Wanganui counsellor Neil Pedley said if teenagers were not getting their emotional needs met at home they often turned to drastic measures, such as having inappropriate sexual encounters.
"You wouldn't believe what's out there in the way of incidents that occur among young people, it still amazes me.
"The common factor is they're looking for love in all the wrong places."
The programme could be beneficial if it created awareness that it was OK to have needs as long as teenagers tried to meet them in a healthy way, he said.
ACC sexual violence prevention programme manager Sandra Dickson said although the Roastbusters scandal was not the reason Mates & Dates was developed, it did prompt the organisation to "move at pace" and prioritise a school-based programme.
"We were already aware of the lack of a best practice, multi-year, nationally available school-based programme to help to prevent sexual and dating violence," she said.
"Roastbusters and other recent high profile incidents reinforced the urgent need for that gap to be filled."
Students involved in the pilot programme would be taught how to have relationships based on respect, negotiation and consent. It would also help them to identify inappropriate behaviour and show them how to get help.
Secondary Principals' Association president Tom Parsons said there was no "one size fits all" programme to suit all schools. However, if the programme was shown to work it could be worth rolling out nationally with adjustments made to suit each school's unique environment.
ACC Minister Judith Collins said the Mates & Dates pilot supported the Government's efforts to drive lasting change in young people's behaviours and attitudes by focusing on prevention.
"In 2012-13, ACC funded about $44 million for sensitive claims, all of which relate to sexual violence," she said.
Mates & Dates is based on research here and overseas that shows 15- to 24-year-olds are most at risk from violence by current and ex-partners. One in five female and one in 10 male secondary school students report unwanted sexual contact and, of these, 37 per cent describe the unwanted activity as severe, and 57 per cent tell no one. The nine secondary schools involving 2000 students in the pilot study are: Dargaville High School, Kelston Girls' College, Kelston Boys' High School, Papakura High School, Makoura College, Naenae College, Nelson College, Nelson College for Girls and Otago Boys' High School.

© 2014 APN New Zealand Limited

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wanganui-chronicle/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503426&objectid=11297109

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

Bronwyn Puller: ACC abused claimants' rights with consent form

A report from 3 News by Melanie Reid for Third Degree

Bronwyn Puller blew the whistle on ACC in 2012. She was sent nearly 7000 personal files in one of New Zealand’s worst privacy breaches.
Two years later ACC has been found to be involved in another massive privacy scandal. This time it potentially affects three-quarters of a million Kiwis.
"There’s no limitation on it [ACC form 167]," says Ms Puller. "So it’s as wild as your imagination. They could go to your bank and obtain all your banking financial records. They could go to your telecommunications provider and obtain access to your emails. They could go to your gym, look at your gym attendance. They could go to your neighbours, talk to your neighbours. But it’s not just what they can collect; this actually also gives ACC unlimited powers of disclosure."
ACC was forcing clients to sign a consent form that was well beyond ACC’s legal mandate. This gave ACC powers – way beyond what they have under the legislation. This gives them the ability, and the Government, to intrude in every aspect of your life. It gives them the ability to release any information about you to any third party.
Here are just a few examples from our ACC files:

• A male freezing worker's sexual abuse history was shared with his employer.
• A claimant who had suffered mental health issues had her highly sensitive files released to her employer.
• A victim of a brutal assault also had confidential files released to his employer – files about his nightmares, medication and counselling sessions.

"This is the consequence of this form," says Ms Puller. "I don’t think anyone in their right mind would want their employer, or a potential employer, or a headhunting agency, having complete access to their medical records. They are the most highly sensitive private information."
The problem for claimants is if they didn’t sign the 167 consent form allowing ACC wide-ranging collection of their private information, they faced being cut off.
So last week a judge ruled ACC’s use of the consent form unlawful. But there are allegations that for years and years ACC has known this.
Ms Puller had raised the issue of the 167 form with the former minister, the board, the State Services Commission, the Privacy Commissioner, Department of Labour and Ombudsman.
"[Current ACC Minister] Judith Collins was given the list of 45 issues, which I took to the meeting in December, that we asked ACC to address," she says. "The ACC 167 was listed on that as one of the concerns we had about the unlawful approach to the way ACC was operating its business. That list was given to the minister on March 14, 2012.
"I know that she received my list of 45 issues. I also know that she received a copy of the independent report that was commissioned by ACC and the Privacy Commissioner, which raised concerns about ACC’s consent form, because it was the major bugbear that most claimants had with ACC."
So going by the judge's ruling, potentially there are hundreds of thousands of files sitting in an ACC database containing private information that has been obtained in an illegally manner.
"At the end of the day, ACC have created their own administrative nightmare, through the way that they’ve acted. They’ve acted unlawfully. They’ve acted irresponsibly. They’ve acted in a way that basically totally abuses the claimants' rights and the right to informed consent, and to control of their personal information. It’s that simple."
Click here to see the response from ACC.
For anyone with concerns about their claim in relation to their signing the ACC 167 consent form, please call 0800 745 254.

© 2013 MediaWorks TV

http://www.3news.co.nz/Bronwyn-Puller-ACC-abused-claimants-rights-with-consent-form/tabid/1771/articleID/341271/Default.aspx#ixzz2zkDroQnw

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

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

Respect key to tackling sexual violence early

A press release from the New Zealand Government

ACC Minister Judith Collins has today announced a new school-based pilot project funded by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) as part of its new focus on preventing sexual violence.
“Sexual violence has a significant effect on victims and families, resulting in substantial physical and mental health issues as well as social problems like poverty, addiction and suicide,” Ms Collins says.
“Encouraging a culture of respect is one of the most effective ways we can help to prevent sexual and dating violence. This pilot programme will teach young people the value of having healthy relationships based on respect, negotiation and consent.”
Recently ACC has made sexual violence prevention part of its core business focus and its first initiative in this area is a school-based pilot programme focussed on fostering healthy and respectful relationships.
In 2012/13, ACC spent $44 million on services for about 15,000 sensitive claims – the majority of which are related to sexual violence.
“There is some great work already being done by the sexual violence sector in schools but there is also recognition that we need to ensure these programmes have better national coordination, are consistent in content and ensure the best coverage possible,” Ms Collins says.
The school based programme is being developed with an Advisory Group made up of sexual violence sector representatives, interested community groups, government agencies and specialist academics, with input from students, parents and teachers. The programme will be a part of a wider programme of work led by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett.
The programme is still in its early stages of development and there will be further announcements on the specific content, providers, and schools that will be piloted in the third school term this year.

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/respect-key-tackling-sexual-violence-early

Judge criticises ACC act as unfair

An article from the Dominion Post by Shane Cowlishaw

After Coral Waitere had a new oven installed, she filled up the sink to do some dishes.
But the electrician who set up the oven had left the house unearthed, so when she turned on the tap she was blasted across the kitchen by 240 volts of electricity. The current that surged through her body blew a hole just below her lip where it exited.
Temporarily paralysed, burnt and left with brain injuries, Ms Waitere, of Alexandra, was unable to work after the 2005 accident. But because she was unemployed at the time, she was not eligible for weekly compensation from ACC. She is one of six ACC claimants, some of who were sexually abused as children, who have lost their legal battle against the corporation.
The group took their case to the High Court, but were turned down by Justice Stephen Kos, despite him noting that the outcomes under the ACC Act were "unquestionably anomalous".
Under the act, only individuals who are employed at the time of their injury are entitled to full weekly compensation. They are still eligible for treatment costs. People injured as children are eligible for a reduced weekly compensation sum based on a loss of potential earnings. Three of the four injured as children receive this compensation, but believe they should be entitled to the full amount.
The two claimants who were injured as adults receive no weekly compensation at all, including Ms Waitere, who was injured the day before she was due to start work after taking time off to raise her children. She said the High Court decision, and the others ruling against her during four years of legal action, had "made me want to cry".
Another of the claimants, who was sexually and physically abused by her ex-husband, said ACC had cut off her compensation in February. It made life extremely tough for her and her three children, who had also suffered abuse, she said.
Lawyer John Miller, who represented the group, said it was ridiculous that children who were injured while not working could be in a situation where they were denied adequate compensation for life. In essence, Justice Kos was saying the act was unfair, and that such a situation would never be allowed in the private insurance industry, he said. While preparing for the case, he looked through the transcripts of debates and select committee hearings related to drafting the act, and no discussions had taken place about the potential problems arising from this clause.
ACC Minister Judith Collins said the eligibility criteria of the act were designed to apply to a wide range of circumstances. There were special provisions to deal with unique situations when the rules were not appropriate, and the eligibility criteria would be reviewed next year.
"The eligibility criteria are challenged from time to time where applying the law may be considered unfair to claimants.
"I take issues of unfair treatment very seriously, and pay close attention to these issues when they arise."

THE SIX CLAIMANTS
HANS KOGLER - Severely injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1991, aged 16, and had his left leg amputated. He found fulltime work in 2003 but had to give it up after 10 months because of continuing problems with his injury.
RW - As a child he was sexually abused in the 1970s and 80s. He later found work but had to stop in 2007 because of issues stemming from the abuse.
RN - Suffered severe sexual abuse from the age of 12. She did not report the events at the time and first sought treatment for the consequences at the age of 28. As she was over 18 when the abuse was reported, she does not receive weekly compensation.
SA - Suffered sexual, physiological and physical abuse at the hands of her husband between 1994 and 2006. She began working in 2007 and was diagnosed with post-traumatic and major stress disorders in 2009.
CORAL WAITERE - Unemployed between 1999 and 2005, but later found employment at the Nelson Nursing Service. The day before she started work she suffered a severe electrical shock.
VALERIE MURRAY - Injured while a schoolgirl in 1976. She began working in 1979 and, more than 20 years later, had to stop as a result of the injury. Initially she was granted weekly compensation based on her income, but ACC reconsidered and reduced her compensation by $231 per week to that of a "potential earner".

© 2013 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9437185/Judge-criticises-ACC-act-as-unfair

Appalling number of sex abuse claims

An article from Stuff by Michael Fox

Justice Minister Judith Collins says about 15,000 people a year are making ACC claims as a result of sexual abuse.
Collins told TVNZ's Q and A she was appalled by the number of people seeking counselling or other assistance as a result of the assaults and elaborated on proposed changes to the way the courts deal with such victims.
"It actually shocks me, it shocks me very deeply," she said.
"People don't have to go the police for ACC to help them but I would say to people who have been victims of sexual abuse there is help for you and that there are things that can be done," she said.
The high rate of assaults showed there needed to be a culture change. While she has ruled out specialist sexual violence courts which supporters say would make it easier for victims she said victims needed to be encouraged to come forward to shed more light on the cases which might help change attitudes.
The way sexual assault victims are dealt with by police and the courts in New Zealand has been under heavy scrutiny as a result of the so-called Roast Busters sex case. Opposition parties and rape prevention groups say the system needs to be overhauled to make it easier for victims of sexual assaults to come forward.
"Of course there is always questions going to be asked about was there something that could have been done to prevent the crime, and that's the best place obviously, to prevent it, but it's also about trying to take the blame off victims and encouraging them to come forward," she said.
"I think if more victims were able to come forward and to have their stories told, and the offenders to be confronted with that, we might have fewer people who think its alright to do this sort of thing to someone else."
Collins said she was considering some changes to court processes.
"The changes about court processes, that is a draft cabinet paper with me at the moment, and that will go to Cabinet hopefully this year for the little bit of time we have got left and then it will proceed through next year," she said.
She said many were not coming forward because it was "an incredibly humiliating thing" for victims to talk about and they did not want to keep reliving it. While she did not want to lessen the criminality of the offending one of the options presented in the Cabinet paper included restorative justice as some victims were in ongoing relationships with their attackers.
"What we know is that quite a lot of those people who do complain to police as victims of sexual assault are actually assaulted by people who are close to them, either partners, former partners, friends or family members and sometimes they don't want those victims to have to go to court they also don't want to necessarily see the accused end up in jail for up to 20 years.
"What they do want is they want abuse to stop they want the offender to confess to what they've done, to acknowledge the harm that they've caused and to help give back that person's dignity."
Collins said victims would need to be questioned as those accused of assaults needed to be able to defend themselves "because it is not inconceivable that people might be convicted wrongly of rape".
Victims worried about previous sexual history come up could be warned about the questions which might come up, she said.
"And I don't want to see miscarriages on either side."
The change would take time but there was support in New Zealand for them to be made, she said.
Collins said since the 2007 Commission of Inquiry into police misconduct relating there had been "huge improvements" in the way police dealt with victims.

© Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9409869/Appalling-number-of-sex-abuse-claims

Question to Minister

Question 3: Katrina Shanks (National) to the Minister of Justice: What steps is the Government taking to support victims of sexual violence?



Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): The Government is committed to providing better support for victims of crime, including all victims of sexual violence. As a result of the Law Commission’s recent review of the Evidence Act, I will shortly be introducing proposals to improve the way some evidence is dealt with in these cases. If the defence wants to raise issues about a complainant’s previous sexual history, they will need to give notice before trial. In addition, child witnesses under the age of 18 will be able to give evidence by video recording, which can be challenged in trial. They will be able to have a support person sitting nearby when they give evidence. There is a range of support services for sexual violence victims across the Government. They include specialist victim support, no real limitation period on the making of a complaint, automatic name suppression in criminal proceedings, and the court is closed when victims give evidence. Victims can give evidence behind a screen, and they are allowed a support person with them in court while giving evidence, and there is a range of counselling and financial support through the Ministry of Justice, ACC support, or the Ministry of Social Development, including funding of agencies such as Doctors for Sexual Abuse Care, Auckland Sexual Abuse Helpline, and Wellington Rape Crisis. The Victims of Crime Reform Bill, which is awaiting its second reading, will also introduce a new victims’ code.
Katrina Shanks: What criminal processes exist to deal with sexual violence offences?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: In New Zealand we have a common law justice system based on democratic principles of fairness. Some European and former communist countries have a different system, the inquisitorial method of criminal justice, which effectively means that any accused person has to prove their innocence. Accused persons are examined directly by judges trained in the inquisitorial method of examination. There is limited ability to challenge evidence presented to the judge. In the common law method, prosecution and defence each present their evidence and arguments to the court, and have the right to challenge each other’s evidence. In 2012 the Law Commission published an issues paper and invited submissions on a range of pre-trial and trial processes, particularly to consider whether inquisitorial processes could be incorporated into our justice system for sexual offences. Some of the issues considered have been advanced, such as child protection orders, greater use of restorative justice to deal with sexual violence offences, protection for child witnesses, and requiring notice to be given if the defence intends to raise evidence of the complainant’s prior sexual history.
Katrina Shanks: What else is the Government doing to help prevent sexual violence victimisation?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Prevention is obviously the key for progress in this matter. Sexual violence is obviously abhorrent but it is also linked with alcohol and other drugs. The Government’s alcohol reform legislation comes into force on 18 December. From 18 December this year it will be an offence to supply alcohol to a minor without parental consent. In addition, the Government has passed the Psychoactive Substances Act to stop the sale of harmful party pills. The Ministry of Health funds a rape prevention programme in schools called BodySafe, which is currently run in many schools and teaches young people how to keep themselves safe from sexual violence and how to deal with a sexual attachment if it does happen. Earlier this year, Minister Bennett announced a major funding boost for victims of sexual violence through agencies such as the Auckland Sexual Abuse Help Foundation. In addition, ACC is redesigning its support, assessment, and treatment services for sensitive claims to provide more responsive services to victims of sexual violence. Sadly, many victims of sexual violence are repeat victims, and part of the approach is to help victims keep safe to prevent re-victimisation. There is a good deal currently being done to deal with sexual violence in this community, and it is a real problem that affects old and young. We need to continue to bring offenders to justice and to acknowledge that sexual violence is a crime and needs to be dealt with accordingly.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/business/qoa/50HansQ_20131112_00000003/3-crime-victims-sexual-offences%E2%80%94support

Privacy the year's big trivial story

An article from the New Zealand Herald by John Roughan

ACC data leak turned out to contain nothing personal.
Among the Christmas cards I get at work there is always one from the Privacy Commissioner, Marie Shroff. Invariably it contains a good visual gag. This year's features a Slane cartoon of a boy stuck with his head and upper body in a Dutch dyke and a passer-by explains to another, "The leak was worse than first thought".
I hope the irony was intended, because it's time to acknowledge that the biggest leak of the year, the one that the news kept calling a "massive privacy breach" which the commissioner had to investigate, turned out not to be very big at all.
It sounded serious when it was first reported that the personal details of thousands of ACC claimants had been accidentally emailed to one unnamed claimant.Among them were said to be victims of sexual offences.
Then someone on the side of ACC leaked back, naming the recipient and letting it be known she had turned up with a supporter, none other than National insider Michelle Boag, for a meeting where it was pointedly mentioned to her claim handlers that she was holding information she shouldn't have.
After that, the story took off in all directions, not all of them connected to the email accident. Nick Smith had to resign, there was palace intrigue over who leaked a memo from Boag to ACC minister, Judith Collins, who sued two MPs for suggesting it was her.
Grimly, she replaced ACC's chairman, deputy chairman, four board members and the chief executive.
Meanwhile, Labour and the Greens made a sustained attack on ACC's "culture", not just its carelessness with email but its determination to check all claims rigorously and get the injured back to work quickly. The story took on so many dimensions and ran for so long that the Privacy Commissioner's investigation of the original data leak became little more than a footnote.
But there was nothing minimal about her investigation. She appointed an independent review team of KPMG business consultants and a Melbourne company, Information Integrity Solutions Ltd, who together really went to town. From April to August they travelled the country, conducting by their own account more than 150 interviews at ACC's head office, its sensitive claims unit, six branch offices and two service centres.
They went far beyond "client facing" staff to talk to the myriad sections of the corporation that have to see claimants' confidential information: researchers, lawyers, risk assessors, injury prevention officers, assurance services, business intelligence, actuarial people, plus the complaints investigation team.
They talked to "external stakeholders": claimants, their advocates and associates, holding a workshop with some of them. They performed "walk-throughs" of the corporation's email handling habits, compared its information security practices with those of some other organisations, and much, much more.
By the time they presented the Privacy Commissioner with their report, the country was sick of the subject and hardly anybody read it.
It ran to 102 pages. You had to read to page 99 to discover exactly what sort of confidential client information had escaped.
But finally, in the fifth appendix, there it was: a sample of the fabled spreadsheet of "personal" data. It consisted of four tables listing claimants' names (removed for the report), their claim numbers, review numbers, branch, lodgement dates, issue codes, decision dates and the like.
That was it. That is all there was.
There was nothing that could be of the slightest use or interest to anyone outside ACC. No personal details alongside the names, no injury information, nothing.
That is what all the fuss had been about.
The thing that disappointed me was that so many people had known all along that the "massive privacy breach" amounted to nothing more than this. Investigative reporters, the Privacy Commissioner, her Independent Review Team, all would have discovered the contents of the spreadsheet very quickly.
None blew the whistle. No reports that I saw looked critically at the facts at the heart of a story that kept on growing and giving. The Privacy Commissioner did not say something to restore a sense of proportion. The review team, no doubt well paid, went about its investigation as though there was a serious problem.
An accident had happened. An ACC rehabilitation officer had a monthly sheet of case reviews on his screen when he decided to respond to an email. He dragged the data aside, clicked a wrong button and unwittingly attached it to the return email.
Computers are a minefield for privacy. Accidents will happen, despite all the procedures the commissioner's expert team has laid down. It happened to Social Welfare kiosks a short time later. If the data is as indecipherable as that ACC released, it won't matter in the slightest. It was the trivial story of the year.

© 2012 APN Holdings NZ Ltd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10855584

ACC's suicide snub adds to family pain

An article from the Dominion Post by Marty Sharpe

The number of families of suicide victims granted support from ACC has declined since changes to legislation in 2010.
A woman whose daughter took her own life after suffering an abusive relationship said the changes meant surviving family were not considered victims.
The woman said her 21-year-old daughter took her life in Christchurch in November 2010. She left behind a young son.
The woman, now a sickness beneficiary and living in Wellington, had been struggling to pay the $7000 for her daughter's funeral.
She sought help from ACC but was told the corporation no longer provided cover for families of suicide victims, unless the suicide was due to a mental injury caused by physical injury, sexual abuse or a work-related mental injury.
"I've got it [the funeral bill] down to about $4500 . . . It's just been devastating. It really has. I don't think people know what it's like. Anyone in that situation needs all the help they can get," the woman said.
Figures provided by ACC under the Official Information Act show the number of suicide claims accepted by the corporation dropped from 347 in the 2009-10 year to 127 in 2010-11 and just 51 in the 2011-12 year. The average number of suicides over the past five years was 543.
Between July 2008 and July 2012 the corporation paid $19.8 million to families of suicide victims. This was paid in weekly compensation, childcare, survivor grants and funeral grants.
Labour changed the law in 2008 to class all suicides as accidents.
When former ACC minister Nick Smith changed the law two years ago, he said suicide was not an accident and should be considered a health issue similar to heart disease or cancer. The original act in 1972 excluded suicide, he said.
One of the country's top lawyers specialising in ACC legislation, John Miller, was not surprised at the drop of claims.
"ACC will just knock them back and people will be in such a state they won't often fight it.
"The problem is these people leave dependants. Just because a husband or partner can't cope with bankruptcy or something like that, is it right that they leave the family bereft of income?"
Labour ACC spokesman Andrew Little said anyone who took their life had clearly lost perspective and was incapable of understanding the consequences of their action.
"No family asks for a family member to commit suicide and it can leave them in a very difficult situation. At a time when ACC has made a surplus of over $3 billion, it's not as if this is an area they cannot afford to cover.
"We will review this when back in office," he said.
ACC Minister Judith Collins said the objective of Mr Smith's reform was "to ensure ACC is affordable, sustainable and fair for claimants and levy payers".
"My priorities for ACC are to ensure entitlements are delivered transparently and fairly to those who need them," she said.

HOW NICK SMITH CHANGED THE RULES
In 2001 the Labour government introduced changes to the Accident Compensation Corporation Act that meant entitlements were paid to families of victims whose suicide was the result of mental illness (ie not necessarily a mental injury). In 2008 this was extended to cover all suicides.
This meant families of suicide victims could receive a funeral grant, a survivor's grant of around $5000, funding for counselling and a share of income-related compensation for dependants.
Two years later National's ACC Minister Nick Smith changed the law, so families of suicide victims only received entitlements if ACC established the person who committed suicide was not able to appreciate the consequences of their action, or that a previously covered mental injury caused, or contributed to, the suicide.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/7692747/ACCs-suicide-snub-adds-to-family-pain

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

ACC pays millions to send its 'hatchets'

An article from the Dominion Post by Phil Kitchin

ACC is spending millions of dollars flying doctors around New Zealand to assess long-term clients who have already been assessed by other doctors.
The policy has been slammed by John Miller - one of the country's top lawyers specialising in ACC legislation - who said the so-called “independence” of some assessors was a sham.
ACC lawyers, advocates and claimant groups know those doctors as “hatchet men and women”, Mr Miller said.
“They are not independent, as a substantial part of their income comes from ACC,” he said.
ACC figures reveal the corporation pays millions of dollars a year to a group of “independent assessors”, often flying them to towns or cities where other doctors with suitable qualifications already practise. In some cases the ACC assessors are flown from the South Island to North Island cities.
At least $3 million was spent last year on airfares and assessment fees for a group of less than 12 doctors.
Mr Miller said medical professionals had expressed serious concerns to him about the issue. Because some assessors earned virtually all their income from ACC it was “inevitable” they would tend to “provide reports ACC wants".
“The old saying of ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune' definitely applies with ACC assessors. The use of such assessors actually damages and diminishes ACC's reputation,” Mr Miller said. “ACC knows the assessors who have particular fixed medical views, for example on degeneration . . . and they keep sending injured claimants to be assessed by those assessors as they know they will receive reports they want.”
Mr Miller said ACC advocates know when clients are sent for assessments by “the same usual suspects ... there will be an adverse outcome for the injured claimant”.
ACC has seen a drop in the number of cases it is winning as claimants fight assessments. The corporation won 77 per cent of cases challenged by clients in 2009 but in the year to date that figure has dropped to 56 per cent.
Mr Miller said his firm had experienced cases where independent assessors such as occupational therapists for seriously injured clients refused to provide reports “for us in ACC disputes".
“They fear that it will affect their livelihood from ACC contracts,” he said.
“It confirms in people's minds it is an organisation more concerned with removing claimants from ACC assistance this way rather than being concerned with properly rehabilitating injured claimants off the scheme.”
Mr Miller said the solution would be for ACC to start using a group of trusted assessors who could “be used by both sides."
ACC's claims management acting general manager Phil Riley said ACC chose appropriate providers, but if clients did not want to see them because of genuine concerns, a choice of two alternative providers was offered. If clients chose not to see a local assessor, ACC could arrange for a specialist from another area to travel to their location.
"For practicality purposes, we try to send specialists to other areas when there are a number of clients to see in that area. This is why ACC flies specialist medical professionals to other regions, to hold ‘day clinics' for ACC clients."
ACC paid specialists at market rates, Mr Riley said.
ACC Minister Judith Collins said changes she made to ACC's board include new priorities for the corporation to ensure entitlements were delivered transparently. She said ACC must follow a fair process for assessments and provide best practice and lawful services to preserve public trust.
However ACC would not be a soft touch for people trying to take advantage of it, Ms Collins said.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7637014/ACC-pays-millions-to-send-its-hatchets