Sexual violence services – the real story

A blog post by Jan Logie

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

© 1996-2015 The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

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

Sexual violence counselling boost

A report from Radio New Zealand News

The Government has announced a $10 million funding boost in next month's budget for specialist sexual violence services.
Social development minister Paula Bennett says the increase will provide immediate stability for specialist services to help address current funding shortfalls. Ms Bennett says the sector requires extra resourcing, especially for making 24 hour, seven-days-a-week crisis call-out and emergency counselling services available. She says the money will be used to support frontline crisis-response and community-based treatment services, as well as male victims and those accessing medical and forensic services.
A Parliamentary inquiry is currently looking into the funding of specialist sexual violence services.
Ms Bennett says she couldn't wait for the outcome of the inquiry.
"The need is so great now, to be honest I'd done a lot of work on my cabinet and to get them to this point, there was no way I was going to delay them for another six months!
"I knew I had a shot of getting a bit of money in this year's budget so I was going to grab it with everything I had."
The Parliamentary inquiry has been told the sector is severely under-resourced and has lost about $6 million a year since changes to ACC in 2011 when it cut funding for sex abuse counselling.

Funding welcome
A rape prevention trust says the Government's funding boost will help stop the loss of trained staff from the sector.
Executive director of Rape Prevention Education, Kim McGregor says the sector has been underfunded for many decades. She says there's been a high level of burnout and it's been difficult to hold on to specialist trained staff.
Ms McGregor says the extra funding will help stabilise the sector in the short-term.

© Radio New Zealand 2014

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/242981/sexual-violence-counselling-boost

ACC boss fronts up on privacy breaches

A news report from TVNZ

The chief executive of ACC has spoken out this morning about the raft of complaints that have emerged about the organisation in recent months. It has been a year of controversies and complaints around ACC, with boss Ralph Stewart scrambling to apologise earlier this week following the latest privacy breach blunder, which ACC tried to keep private.
ONE News revealed on Wednesday that an ACC employee sent confidential account information on more than 100 clients to the wrong people. Accounts for overdue levies for 118 ACC clients were mixed up and sent to other clients by mistake last Friday. As a result, inquiries are being conducted by the Privacy Commissioner and the police.
Speaking on TV ONE's Q+A this morning, Stewart said today that he "wishes" that from tomorrow there would be no more privacy breaches but he knows it won't be. The key thing is to declare for ACC that no breaches is our objective".
On the Bronwyn Pullar case, where it was revealed in March that an ACC employee sent confidential details about 6000 clients to claimant Pullar, Stewart said the organisation is looking at the case. "We are managing her case as we can under legislation, and as carefully and sensibly as we can through ACC."
Stewart said the privacy breaches have to be put into context as the organisation handles 1.7 million claims per year. "I think a sense of context helps to understand the privacy issues... Bronwyn is one of 1.7million claims last year."
And while, he would not say what it would take for him to resign, Stewart stressed that privacy is just one of his responsibilities in a complex organisation, and remained optimistic about the public trust in the organisation.
"In terms of public trust and confidence, I believe that ACC has it."
"The buck stops with me," he said.
Stewart listed three areas that the organisation is focusing on to protect client privacy. "We've conducted a complete independent report, now half-way through. It's being conducted by KPMG as experts, and also has on the panel the ex-federal privacy commissioner out of Australia," Stewart told Q A host Paul Holmes this morning.
"It will be completed by June, it will be made public," he said.
"Secondly, in terms of privacy, I think one of the key influences of privacy is development of the digital age. As a consequence we're sending out more files electronically - i.e. attaching things to emails - so we've commissioned a second piece of work to look at the infrastructure at ACC and say 'how can we take this from where we are, in terms of client records and privacy, and take it to world's best practice."
Stewart adds that he has also commissioned "80 privacy champions out of the ACC network to constantly monitor, maintain and raise awareness for privacy in ACC."

© 2012 Television New Zealand Ltd

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/acc-boss-fronts-up-privacy-breaches-4894783

Pullar claims recording shows ACC lied

An article from the New Zealand Herald by Adam Bennett

Former National Party insider Bronwyn Pullar made a recording of her December meeting with ACC officials which she claims shows the corporation lied about her using a privacy breach as leverage for financial gain.
Police are investigating ACC's allegations that during the meeting, Ms Pullar attempted to secure a two-year benefit in exchange for the return of sensitive information about 6500 other claimants mistakenly sent to her by an ACC employee in August last year.
Ms Pullar's support person at the meeting was her friend and former National Party president Michelle Boag.
Ms Pullar, who has previously said she used stealth software to track emails she sent to ACC, yesterday revealed she made a recording of the meeting with senior ACC managers Philip Murch and Hans Verberne.
That recording showed that, "neither Michelle Boag nor I threatened to withhold details of a mass privacy breach and go to the media if I did not get a guaranteed two-year benefit payment", she said.
Ms Pullar also said the recording shows ACC's account of what was said at the meeting regarding details of the privacy breach and how it occurred was also incorrect.
However Ms Pullar refused to release the recording or a transcript, saying it contained sensitive personal health information.
In an extract of the transcript published yesterday, Ms Boag is quoted as saying: "I don't want to see headlines criticising the minister and the Government for things that have taken place ... And as I say, I mean we are all supportive of this Government. We do not want to see them embarrassed."
Yesterday, Ms Pullar said ACC had published the account of the meeting in which the extortion allegations were made without asking her and Ms Boag if there was any truth to them.
She had given ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart and others at the corporation the opportunity to listen to the recording.
"Despite ACC having heard a full recording of the meeting they have refused to correct their blatant lie, which continues to smear my reputation and Michelle Boag's."
But Labour's ACC spokesman Andrew Little said irrespective of what happened in the meeting, ACC had still asked for the information to be returned and Ms Pullar had not met that request until the story went public in March.
Mr Little said Ms Boag's subsequent email to ACC Minister Judith Collins after the story of the privacy breach broke clearly suggested some kind of deal had been discussed.
"Even if it wasn't about two years of entitlements, clearly some sort of arrangement was being talked about that was some sort of quid pro quo.
"Today's story, if it does anything, just confirms that the ACC officials may have misled the minister in their report, but it doesn't remove any of the cloud of doubt about the actual nature of the conversation that some deal was being struck to return information that she shouldn't have ever had in the first place."
Mr Little said the report highlighted the need for the various official inquiries into the matter "to hurry up and get on with the job, get some conclusions from some credible sources that we can start to see where the truth might actually lie".
However, Green Party ACC spokesman Kevin Hague said the public would have got the impression from ACC that Ms Pullar went into the December meeting demanding two years' compensation and threatening all sorts of consequences, "and very clearly that didn't occur in that meeting".
Mr Hague said the fact that ACC didn't refer the matter to the police immediately "gives rise to the suspicion that the complaint was essentially designed as a diversion from the scrutiny on its own actions".
"That suspicion is given added weight by the revelations today."
Neither Ms Collins nor ACC would comment on the report yesterday, saying it was not appropriate to do so given the matter was under investigation by various authorities.

© 2012 APN Holdings NZ Ltd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10802613

Dunedin lawyer wants ACC inquiry

An article from the Otago Daily Times by John Gibb

Dunedin lawyer Peter Sara is urging ACC to "come clean" over the details of its controversial "VIP claims" handling policy but ACC says it will not comment until the Privacy Commissioner completes an inquiry in three months. Mr Sara, who has been dealing with ACC cases for more than 30 years, says he also supports the establishment of an independent inquiry into concerns over ACC's handling of long-term claimants, and over the VIP client issue.
The Privacy Commissioner and the Auditor-general have both announced inquiries after continuing public debate over the ACC board's handling of claimant and former National Party insider Bronwyn Pullar. Ms Pullar has complained to ACC over the way her own ACC claim has been dealt with, and a major breach of privacy occurred when the corporation mistakenly sent her the details of about 67,000 other claimants last year.
An Otago Daily Times story, which appeared on Monday, raised concerns that ACC's "VIP claims" handling policy delivered better protection for the privacy of powerful decision-makers, including MPs, judges, ACC board members and their respective immediate families. The corporation's delegations manual shows that the final decision on VIP claims is made by ACC managers and not by more junior staff, and ACC has confirmed it takes extra measures to protect VIP confidentiality.
Mr Sara was "unhappy" about aspects of the VIP system and said there was also an undesirable lack of transparency about the way it was operating. An independent inquiry by a judge or QC was needed to investigate long-standing concerns over the handling of long-standing ACC claims, the ACC "exit strategy" involving long-term claimants, and over the VIP arrangements. ACC's refusal to clarify the situation until the Privacy Commissioner had reported was unsatisfactory, and what was already known about the VIP arrangements suggested potential preferential treatment, he said.
The Otago Daily Times this week has also asked ACC further questions about how the VIP arrangements operate, and has sought further comment on suggestions that this approach seemed to deliver special treatment to powerful decision-makers, in conflict with New Zealand's egalitarian ethos. An ACC spokesman said it was "unable to comment further on this matter until the independent review commissioned by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner has been completed."
The review had begun on March 28 and was expected to take three months. After the review was completed, its findings would be made public, the spokesman said.
Asked whether its VIP approach amounted to preferential treatment, an ACC spokeswoman had earlier said the practice for claims "categorised as VIP on ACC's registration and claim management systems" had followed "the standard allocation and management processes applied to all claims".
"The only difference being security rights and who can make decisions on the claim," she said.
Dunedin ACC campaigner Dr Denise Powell said a fully independent inquiry by a QC or judge was needed into concerns over the handling of long-term ACC claimants, and the VIP claims system.

© Allied Press Ltd 2012

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/204493/dunedin-lawyer-wants-acc-inquiry

Question to the Prime Minister

1. GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his answers to questions in the House this year?



Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes. The Prime Minister has answered 36 primary questions covering a large range of topics, and if the member wants specific answers, then he will have to ask a more specific primary question.
Grant Robertson: Does he still stand by his answers that Ministers involved in the ACC saga showed only a lapse of judgment and “not a terribly significant one”, given that there are now five separate inquiries under way into the ACC saga, and why does he just simply not appoint a judge or a QC to do a proper inquiry?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, of course, the member has taken the partial view of what the Prime Minister said. The quote the member used was in respect of the first letter, I think, that the Minister for ACC at the time had written. Of course, in that case further evidence came to light and the Minister decided to stand down. We also need to bear in mind that the focus of a number of those inquiries is actually the privacy processes of ACC, which, of course, are of great interest to all those who are claimants, and might be claimants in the future. We believe that those matters are being adequately inquired into.
Grant Robertson: Does he still stand by his answers around the appropriateness of chairing the committee and appointing his electorate chair, Stephen McElrea, to the board of New Zealand On Air, given Mr McElrea’s attempt to intervene in the broadcast of a programme?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: In answer to the question about appropriateness, I did chuckle when I saw Mike Williams on TV going on about getting rid of cronyism, when he was appointed by the last Prime Minister to, I think, five large public boards, in which he interfered in every decision any of those entities made.
Grant Robertson: How can he express confidence in all of his Ministers when his Ministers have stuffed up the reform of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, stuffed up the Crafar farm decision, and when his finance Minister can give only a guess as to the real value of the assets that are his only economic plan?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: All I can say is that the Prime Minister has more confidence in his Ministers than the deputy leader of the Labour Party has in his leader.
Grant Robertson: In reference to the Prime Minister’s answers in question time on 7 March on the provision of unconditional love by his pet, and in light of what his own pollster has described as a “quartus horribilis” for his Government, will he now reconsider his apparent decision to appoint his cat Moonbeam as the Government’s strategist?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. I do not believe the Prime Minister would do that. The Prime Minister has great affection for Moonbeam, and being the Government strategist is somewhat challenging, and Moonbeam might not be up to it. [Interruption] But he is available for the Labour Party.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Grant Robertson: Does he still stand by his answer that he has confidence that he has confidence in all his Ministers, given that the Hon John Banks failed to declare a $15,000 donation from Skycity in his electoral return for the Auckland mayoralty?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Prime Minister is not aware of those issues, and the inquiry should be directed to the relevant Minister. The Prime Minister would expect that all Ministers comply with the requirements of the Registrar of Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament and the Cabinet Manual.
Grant Robertson: Would he still have confidence in the Hon John Banks as a Minister if he was aware that Skycity publicly stated that it had given $15,000 to both main mayoral candidates in Auckland, and that it has a policy of asking those who get donations to declare them, and that that donation to Mr Banks does not appear in his return for the Auckland mayoralty expenses?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Prime Minister’s concern is that members comply with the Register of Pecuniary Interests of Members of Parliament and with the requirements of the Cabinet Manual, and any inquiries related to that should be directed to the relevant Minister.
Grant Robertson: Would the Prime Minister continue to have confidence in a Minister who has not declared a $15,000 donation from Skycity when running for the Auckland mayoralty, given that the penalty for failure to properly declare a donation, under the Local Electoral Act, is up to 2 years in prison—enough to force a resignation from Parliament?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: I can only repeat the answer I gave before, and in that respect the Prime Minister is more demanding than the previous Prime Minister, who tolerated a Minister who did not declare a $100,000 donation that was arranged by the Labour Party from one of the Labour Party’s principal donors.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does the Prime Minister recall the Hon Nick Smith telling this House, at the same time, that he made a declaration of his legal fund—identical to mine—to Dame Margaret Bazley, only to have her tell this House that he lied; that he made no such declaration? Does he recall that?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am not familiar with the details of that. What I am pointing out is that the Prime Minister has a standard he expects Ministers to reach, and that standard is higher than what was applied by the previous Labour Government to its Ministers.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the Prime Minister is so keen on certain standards being upheld, why is he not concerned as to what Nick Smith did when, for an egregious reason being sued for defamation, he had such a fund to his pecuniary advantage whereas the fund we had was for an electoral democratic purpose?
Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, the purpose of the significant donation to New Zealand First by Labour’s principal donor was, I think, discussed at the time. Nick Smith was involved in a defamation action. The matters around his legal fees were all canvassed, in detail, at the time.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1204/S00085.htm

ACC board endorse governance inquiry

A press release from ACC

John Judge, Chairman of the ACC board says that on behalf of the board he supports the Inquiry by the office of The Auditor General into how ACC manages risk at the board level.
"The ACC board, in conjunction with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, has already commenced a review of the recent privacy breach and a complete review of the privacy polices and procedures at ACC. The inquiry into board governance by the Auditor General adds another positive element to ensuring there is a complete review of all issues relating to privacy at ACC. The ACC board endorses and supports the Auditor General's review."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1204/S00069/acc-board-endorse-governance-inquiry.htm

ACC Minister Judith Collins lays job on the line

An article from the Dominion Post by Vernon Small and John Hartevelt

ACC Minister Judith Collins has promised to quit if she or her office is found to have leaked an email at the centre of a spat over an ACC claimant as the auditor-general launches an investigation into governance at the state insurer.
ACC hit the headlines after it was revealed that the details of more than 6000 clients were accidentally sent to claimant and former National Party activist Bronwyn Pullar.
Ms Collins became caught up in the controversy when an email sent to her and a staff member about Ms Pullar was leaked to the media. Ms Collins has insisted the leak did not come from her office and told Parliament yesterday she would resign if that was disproven.
"Of course I would, because I have integrity," Ms Collins said.
She would not say if she had filed court papers over a defamation suit against Labour MPs Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little and Radio New Zealand over remarks made about the issue. Asked if she could guarantee court action, Ms Collins said: "I'm guaranteeing that I'm taking a lot of advice on this matter and that as far as I'm aware, matters are proceeding."
The alleged defamation last week had been exacerbated by the behaviour of Mr Mallard, Mr Little and by Labour leader David Shearer, she said.
Mr Little, along with Green MP Kevin Hague, earlier asked Auditor-General Lyn Provost to look into aspects of ACC's governance that would not be examined by the investigations already under way by the privacy commissioner and being considered by the police.
Ms Provost said yesterday she would hold an inquiry examining aspects of ACC's governance.
"The inquiry will examine how ACC manages a range of risks at the board level of the organisation. It will also examine how any matters relating to ACC claimant Ms Pullar that came to the attention of the board or individual board members were dealt with," she said.
As well as this inquiry, Ms Provost intended to develop an audit proposal on ACC's general operations, with a focus on its case management.
Mr Little welcomed the inquiry, saying Labour hoped it would be widened to include the behaviour of ministers in the case.
"The inquiry by the auditor-general into how ACC manages conflicts of interest and relationships between board members, clients and staff is an opportunity to examine the real problems plaguing the agency," he said.
ACC Futures spokeswoman Hazel Armstrong said her organisation had been concerned for some time about the culture at the top of ACC. In the past four years an increasing number of claims had been rejected and there had been an increase in appeals against ACC's decisions, she said.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6696973/ACC-Minister-Judith-Collins-lays-job-on-the-line

Greens say ACC investigations suit Govt's agenda

A news report from Radio New Zealand

The Green Party says its suits the Government's purposes, politically, to have several ongoing investigations in the Accident Compensation Corporation.
The Auditor-General, the Privacy Commissioner, police and the ACC board are carrying out investigations, following the release of thousands of confidential files to Bronwyn Pullar, an Auckland claimant, and other communications.
Greens co-leader Russel Norman says the Government should hold a single inquiry into the corporation to clear the air.
Dr Norman says a single inquiry would sort out governance issues at ACC, as well as look at how it handles its case management.

© 2012 Radio New Zealand

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/102613/greens-say-acc-investigations-suit-govt%27s-agenda

Privacy Commissioner late to ACC leaks

An article from the Dominion Post by Kate Chapman

The first the Privacy Commissioner knew of an alleged privacy breach by ACC was when media contacted her.
Commissioner Marie Shroff is investigating how the personal details of thousands of claimants were accidentally sent to claimant Bronwyn Pullar. That investigation may also look at how Pullar's own personal information, in an email by former National Party president Michelle Boag, was leaked to a Sunday newspaper.
Pullar had contacted the Commissioner about a separate issue late last year, but the first they knew of the leaked spreadsheet containing information about thousands of claims, was when a journalist rang her office.
Assistant Commissioner legal and policy Katrine Evans said it would be normal practice for ACC to contact the Commissioner if they were aware of the breach.
"What I understand, when we first got the media inquiry, we had no knowledge."
The inquiry would look at what happened with ACC, when they became aware, and what they should have done once the knew of the breach, she said.
ACC became aware of the breach in December during a meeting with Pullar. The information was also sent as an attachment in one of many emails from Pullar to the State Services Commission last year but they did not realise they had the information until a review was conducted recently.
ACC Minister Judith Collins is threatening to take defamation action against Labour MPs Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little and Radio New Zealand, over suggestions she was the source of the leaked email about Pullar - something Collins vehemently denies.
Prime Minister John Key said that if and when Collins took defamation action was a matter for her.
"I support her action, she wants to clear her name, she feels very strongly that she was impugned and on that basis she's taken her own action, it's her own money, her own resources, she's free to do that."

© 2012 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6693862/Privacy-Commissioner-late-to-ACC-leaks

John Key wrong about ACC inquiry

A press release from the Green Party

The decision by the Auditor General to launch an inquiry into aspects of the Bronwyn Pullar saga that will not be examined by other investigations shows that there is more to the matter than just breaches of privacy says the Green Party.
“John Key said no further investigation was needed. The Auditor General’s decision shows he was wrong,” said Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman.
“We asked the Auditor General to investigate this matter, and we are glad that she has decided to do so.
“The Auditor General’s decision shows that there are important matters of public interest to do with the ACC saga that are not covered by the Privacy Commissioner or police inquiries.
“It was always clear that there are matters raised by this case that are outside the scope of the other inquiries, so it is sensible the Auditor General is now looking into them.
“We are pleased the inquiry will look at the actions of the ACC board and chair which on the face of it has been questionable.
“It is critical that all the issues raised are resolved so trust in ACC can be restored.”

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1204/S00064/john-key-wrong-about-acc-inquiry.htm

Labour welcomes Auditor-General’s inquiry into ACC

A press release from the Labour Party by Andrew Little

The inquiry by the Auditor-General into how ACC manages conflicts of interest and relationships between board members, clients and staff is an opportunity to examine the real problems plaguing the agency, says Labour’s ACC spokesperson Andrew Little.
“We welcome today’s announcement by Auditor-General Lyn Provost that she will carry out an inquiry that is focused on governance concerns at ACC that have been exposed during the public examination of a very difficult case.
“We note that while the terms of reference focus on the Board’s actions and their interaction with clients and staff, there is also a clause allowing the Auditor-General to look into ‘any other matters’ she considers desirable. Labour hopes that will include the behaviour of ministers who have been involved in this case.
“We must be able to have trust and confidence in ACC and be reassured that every client is treated equally. At the moment, it is easy to see how New Zealanders could have gained the impression from the Bronwyn Pullar saga that if you know someone from the National Party, you’ll be treated differently.
“This announcement by the Office of the Auditor-General brings the number of publicly-funded inquiries into the handling of Bronwyn Pullar’s case to five and we still believe a single high level inquiry by a QC or Judge would be more suitable,” said Andrew Little.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1204/S00062/labour-welcomes-auditor-generals-inquiry-into-acc.htm

Inquiry into aspects of ACC's board-level governance

A press release from the Office of the Auditor General

The Auditor-General, Lyn Provost, has decided to carry out an inquiry into how the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) manages risk at the Board level of the organisation. This document sets out the terms of reference for our inquiry.

Background
During March 2012, concerns were raised about a significant breach of privacy by ACC, and about the interaction between ACC and a particular client (Ms Pullar). We received several requests for the Auditor-General to inquire into aspects of that interaction and into ACC’s general operations.
The Privacy Commissioner and the Board of ACC have already begun to investigate the privacy breach and to assess ACC’s policies and practices for the privacy and security of information. The Police are considering a complaint about a related matter.
The Auditor-General has decided to inquire into aspects of ACC’s governance that will not be examined by the other investigations.

The inquiry
The inquiry into ACC will examine:
• the policies and practices at ACC for managing risks relating to conflicts of interest, legal compliance, and communications between Board members and clients and staff;
• the policies and practices that apply when claimants personally contact Board members;
• how any matters relating to Ms Pullar that came to the attention of the Board or individual Board members were dealt with; and
• any other matters that the Auditor-General considers it desirable to report on.

The inquiry is being carried out under section 18(1) of the Public Audit Act 2001. We will publish a report when the inquiry is completed.

Contact for queries
For media queries, please contact Tamar McKewen (Communications Advisor, Media) on (04) 917 1879.

Background information

The role of the Auditor-General
The Auditor-General is an officer of Parliament, and as such, is independent of the central and local government entities that we audit. The Auditor-General cannot be ordered to conduct an inquiry and has responsibility for determining the nature and scope of any inquiry. The Auditor-General has wide powers to request information, and decides what information to disclose or include in a report.

The stages of an inquiry
Every inquiry has four broad stages:
• Gathering information: We review relevant documentation held by the public entity and other relevant individuals and organisations, and meet with or interview people who have been involved in the issues we are looking into.
• Analysis: We analyse the information we have gathered and form our preliminary views.
• Preparing a draft report and consultation: Once we have drafted a report, we consult as necessary on its content to ensure that it is factually accurate and that the rights of any affected parties are properly protected.
• Publication: We then finalise and publish the report.

General policy on comment during inquiries
Once the Auditor-General has begun an inquiry, the Office will not normally make any public comment on the substance or progress of the inquiry until we release a report. This policy protects the rights of those involved in the inquiry and our ability to carry out the work effectively and efficiently.
It is hard to predict what might emerge or transpire as we carry out an inquiry so it is equally hard to predict when we might be ready to report our findings. In general terms, relatively contained inquiries usually take 2-3 months. Larger and more complex inquiries can take 6-12 months.

Further information
More information on the Auditor-General’s inquiry function is available at www.oag.govt.nz.

http://www.oag.govt.nz/media/2012/inquiry-acc

ACC scandal special

A press release from iPredict

Key Points:
• Collins set to survive ACC scandal but defamation actions expected to fail
• “Beehive staffer” most likely culprit for Boag email leak
• Police expected to investigate while new stock launched on probability of Prime Minister announcing an inquiry
• Nick Smith looks safe from further sanction and has 1/3 chance of being re-appointed a minister by year’s end
• National appears unaffected by scandal with new stocks on next TVNZ poll launched overnight
• Labour still favoured to win next New Zealand election

Click here to read more.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1203/S00407/ipredict-newsletter-acc-scandal-special.htm

Inquiry more necessary after Minister drops ACC chair in it

A press release from the Labour Party by Grant Robertson

ACC Minister Judith Collins has hung her own board chairman out to dry in a desperate act of self-preservation, Labour’s deputy leader Grant Robertson says.
“Ms Collins summoned ACC chair John Judge to Parliament today for a ‘please explain’ over the leaking of information about claimant Bronwyn Pullar to the media.
“During questioning in the House she refused to say who she thought was responsible for the leak, despite having said only four people had the information – herself, an office staffer, Mr Judge and ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart.
“Ms Collins was adamant the information hadn’t come from her office. She had asked Mr Judge about the privacy breach; he denied any involvement.
“She has said she is not responsible, nor was her staff member. That leaves her chairman and her chief executive under the spotlight. She has hung them out to dry.
“This has been a fiasco from the start. It smacks of cronyism and leaves the impression with many that if you know someone in the National party, then you’ll be treated differently by ACC.
“A full, independent inquiry into this whole sorry saga is not only called for but should be a priority,” Grant Robertson said.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1203/S00348/inquiry-more-necessary-after-minister-drops-acc-chair-in-it.htm

ACC chairman called to Beehive

An article from the Dominion Post by John Hartevelt

ACC board chairman John Judge has been called to the Beehive to discuss the leaking of private information about ACC client and complainant Bronwyn Pullar.
ACC Minister Judith Collins this morning appeared reluctant to express full confidence in Judge, although she stopped short of blaming him for what appears to have been a breach of Pullar's privacy.
Pullar came to the media's attention after it was revealed ACC had accidentally sent the details of 6000 claimants to a third party.
She was named as the recipient of the breach and revealed she had been supported by former National Party president Michelle Boag in a meeting with ACC over her case.
Collins this morning said that information had "certainly not" come from her office.
Asked this morning if she had confidence in Judge, Collins said: "Look, I've got a lot of confidence in the work that he's done in the board, particularly around the financial state of ACC. But look, I'm very concerned about the privacy issues and I spoke to him last night, had him in my office to talk about this issue. I'm very concerned about the privacy issue and I expect it to be dealt with."
Collins said she would not "speculate" over the source of the leak.
"People can speculate all they like but I'm also aware that it didn't come from my office and it didn't come from me - I'm 100 per cent certain."
The information had come "from the spoke" so there were "possibilities" about how it had emerged.
"If Ms Pullar thinks her privacy has been breached, then I suggest she makes a complaint to the privacy commissioner and have it investigated," Collins said.
Labour's deputy leader Grant Robertson said there were only a few ways the information could have been leaked and Collins needed to answer questions. He had no details but Labour would be asking questions in Parliament.
"We need to find out more about how information about Ms Pullar found it's way into the public arena."
There were only a few ways the information could have got out, Robertson said.
"Judith Collins needs to answer very clearly whether her or her office had any role in accessing that information or in how that information made its way into the public arena."
Told Collins had denied the leak came form her office, Robertson asked "who is it then?"
Labour wanted a full inquiry into ministerial conduct, the conduct of the ACC board and the privacy issues.
The inquiry was bigger than what the Privacy Commissioner or police could look at and the auditor-general should be involved, he said.
"The impression New Zealanders are going to get is that if you know somebody in the National Party, you get treated differently by ACC and there's a word for that, it's cronyism."
It was still cronyism, regardless of the outcome, he said.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6644194/ACC-chairman-called-to-Beehive

Reaction to Bronwyn Pullar's list

An article from NZDoctor.co.nz by Kevin Hague

Well it seems that Bronwyn Pullar's claim to have been acting in the public interest has some substance to it.
The 45-point list (published on the Dominion Post website) of breaches of law, ACC's own rules and general good process is a substantial indictment of the erosion of public service culture in ACC.
It requires serious scrutiny, and that scrutiny must be independent. Anyone of the points would be a major concern on its own, but 45!
What adds particular weight to the list is that every person around New Zealand reading the list today who has experience trying to assist claimants with their ACC claims will have felt a very strong sense of recognition. I have certainly dealt with claimants who have experienced all items on the list.
In my correspondence with the Office of the Auditor-General this week I have noted that there are two sets of issues that will not be addressed by either the Police or Privacy Commissioner investigations. For the public to have confidence in ACC they need to be confident that it is free from political interference. But they also need to be able to rely on the organisation to consistently apply the highest standards of public service. Currently they cannot, and Ms Pullar's list provides a good summary of the issues that need to be addressed.
Those of you who have been following ACC stories for a while will know I have been calling for an inquiry into ACC's processes for a couple of years. For example: blog.greens.org.nz/2010/11/08/more-reasons-emerge-for-independent-inquiry-on-acc-reforms/
In that post I link to the report from Judge Trapski in 1991, which examined systematic breaches of good process in ACC, and suggested that as some of the self same problems are repeatedly being experienced again, another inquiry like Trapski's would be timely.
A comparison of the issues uncovered in the Trapski report and Bronwyn Pullar's list shows striking similarities.
It seems likely that following the Trapski report major improvements were made to ACC processes, but that under pressure from the former ACC Minister, these same bad practices came back in to facilitate minimisation of ACC's expenditure.
An inquiry like Trapski's, from a Judge or a Commission of Inquiry, might be the best vehicle for investigating this, but as the Government (so far at least) has ruled out ordering any kind of inquiry, the only option we have for this to occur is for the Auditor-General to do it, on her own authority.
That's what I will be saying to her when we meet in the coming week.

© 2012 UBM Medica (NZ) Ltd

http://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/un-doctored/2012/march-2012/26/reaction-to-bronwyn-pullar%27s-list.aspx

ACC caught out in another privacy breach

An article from the Sunday Star Times by Kirsty Johnson

Embattled insurer ACC has been caught out scrambling to shut down yet another privacy breach in the very week it has been forced to accept an audit into its handling of client files.
The inquiry was commissioned by ACC and the Office of the Privacy Comissioner in the ongoing fallout after the Dominion Post revealed ACC sent whistleblower Bronwyn Pullar 6500 clients' private details, including the names of sexual abuse and violent crime victims. The saga also claimed the scalp of former ACC Minister Nick Smith who stood down from his cabinet portfolios after it was found he sent correspondence to ACC about Pullar - a friend of Smith and former National Party activist - without declaring a conflict of interest.
The latest breach came about when ACC claimant Garth Paul asked to see his file - he had to make repeated requests to get the file as ACC sent only some documents. In the end, ACC sent him a file belonging to a different person.
Paul advised ACC it had sent him another person's file, but did not reveal whose it was. He did however contact the man whose file was sent out.
The Sunday Star-Times has spoken to that man. We are not naming him to protect his privacy. "I was so angry when I found out. But it's typical behaviour of ACC," he said. "I said to him [Garth Paul], hang on to it [the file], use it to show what they're like."
He and Paul say ACC's systems are so bad the case managers cannot work out whose file they breached and have yet to contact the client to let him know his file was wrongly sent out and apologise.
If it were not for Paul contacting him, he would be unaware of the error. He is grateful his file went to Paul who handled the matter sensitively.
The botch-up and inability of ACC to determine whose file was sent and how backs up other claims of sloppy practices.
Dunedin ACC client Bruce Van Essen has had an ongoing battle over breaches of his privacy. He says the ACC computer storage of clients' confidential medical records is so primitive the records can be viewed by virtually every employee from a mailroom assistant up. Van Essen found his ACC files had been accessed 2800 times since 2006 - a figure he said could not be justified by everyday claims management. Pullar said her file had been accessed 2000 times over three-and-a-half years by a total of 137 people.
On Thursday ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff announced audit firm KPMG and Malcolm Crompton, a former Australian federal privacy commissioner, would probe the Pullar privacy breach.
The Sunday Star-Times found the privacy commissioner received 61 privacy complaints about ACC in the last year. Of those, 15 were found to have substance and were subsequently settled. One has been referred to the director of Human Rights Proceedings, who will decide if it will go to a tribunal hearing. The figures show ACC privacy concerns are endemic. There were 57 complaints to the commissioner in 2009/10 and 43 in 2008-09.
"I think this kind of thing happens a lot more than we know," said counsellor and ACC advocate Ian Brown, whose clients include Garth Paul.
Brown said that even as officials scrambled last week to resolve the fall-out from the Pullar breach, managers from a Christchurch ACC office were making endless calls to Paul, to try to retrieve the file sent to him in error.
Just before Paul went public with the privacy breach, ACC manager John Doidge sent him a letter on Monday, March 19, telling him to return the file within 24 hours. ACC refused to comment on the latest breach, with the board chairman and chief executive citing the pending inquiry as preventing them from discussing breaches or privacy issues.
The inquiry is expected to take three months, which means the ACC position on comment blunts discussion of privacy breaches that surface in the meantime.
ACC's initial response when Pullar's claims were made public was to issue a report to new ACC Minister Judith Collins - without speaking further to Pullar - and to allege she tried to blackmail ACC over return of the files. It then said it had referred the matter to police. Pullar denied any blackmail attempt and said ACC was trying to defame her.
Brown said receiving another person's file was not the only evidence Paul had of privacy breaches. ACC had also allegedly contacted his mother about his case without permission, which backs Pullar's claims of the treatment meted out to her.
Brown said Paul had been treated appallingly by ACC. He claimed staff weren't interested in rehabilitation, people, or their privacy. "In her criticisms of ACC, I don't think [Pullar] was being over-the-top, I think she was being gentle. As one of my clients has told me, if he was a dog, the SPCA would have been prosecuted over his care."

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/6633165/ACC-tries-to-plug-another-breach

ACC's records storage 'primitive'

An article from the Dominion Post by Phil Kitchin

ACC'S computer storage of its clients' confidential medical records is "so primitive" the records can be viewed by virtually every employee from a mailroom assistant up. The corporation relies on reminding its staff they should not look at files they are not supposed to view on its EOS claims management system as one way of protecting privacy.
The lack of restrictions to medical records on the system was criticised yesterday by Dunedin ACC client Bruce Van Essen as "out of the ark". Mr Van Essen said ACC told him his files had been accessed 2800 times since 2006, "which surely cannot be related to everyday claims management".
ACC has previously had to pay Mr Van Essen $12,000 for one breach of privacy and has admitted to several other breaches.
The corporation is under fire for sloppy privacy practices after The Dominion Post revealed last week that it sent whistleblower Bronwyn Pullar 6500 clients' private details, including the names of sexual abuse and violent crime victims. The revelation prompted an inquiry into ACC's privacy practices by the privacy commissioner and has also prompted a flood of complaints from ACC clients that their privacy had been repeatedly breached.
Ms Pullar said she had repeatedly outlined longstanding concerns to ACC about its "primitive" security for confidential medical files in EOS after learning that her file was accessed nearly 2000 times in 3 1/2 years. She was horrified that 137 ACC employees "right down to a mailroom assistant" had looked at her file. "Any one of those people could have looked at my strictly personal, private medical in-confidence health information," she told ACC.
"No-one can rock up to your GP's office and look at your medical records. Why should they be able to do this at ACC?" Ms Pullar said yesterday.
"ACC rely on the hope that ACC employees don't snoop and then they conduct annual audits once the snooping has already occurred.
"All claimants' medical records should be kept secure and only those with the appropriate authority and security clearance should be able to view them."
The confidential medical records were being regarded as general documents on the EOS system instead of being restricted, she said.
Mr Van Essen could not understand why "low level parties who have absolutely no medical qualifications have access to my sensitive and confidential medical records".
An ACC spokeswoman said ACC did regular checks to ensure "adherence to protocol" and all data on EOS was considered in confidence. Clients in the sensitive claims unit – such as victims of sexual abuse and violent crimes – had their files stored on EOS but access to those files was restricted.
Ms Pullar and Mr Van Essen said if that were the case then all ACC clients should have restrictions placed on just who could view their medical details.

Document's Explosive Allegations
The document tabled at a crucial December meeting between senior ACC managers and whistleblower Bronwyn Pullar makes explosive allegations that the corporation repeatedly broke laws. The 45-point document – posted on line at dompost.co.nz – accuses ACC of breaking a wide range of laws in its dealings with Ms Pullar since she suffered a life-changing brain injury in 2002. It alleges ACC staff made false written and oral statements to unlawfully obtain medical reports for its advantage, collected personal information without her knowledge, and made clinical decisions and assessments without medical competency or qualifications.
Ms Pullar gave the document to ACC senior managers Philip Murch and Hans Verberne at the meeting and asked that its contents be raised with chief executive Ralph Stewart and the ACC board. The document said that ACC deliberately interfered in supposedly independent medical assessments, and covertly and inappropriately communicated with assessors to bias the outcome against claimants. It said ACC exceeded its powers by investigating injuries for which no claim had been lodged.
The document said ACC had breached privacy laws, ACC's own legislation and code of conduct, medical council professional standards, the Crimes Act and the State Services code of conduct.
ACC said it could not comment on privacy issues till the completion of a Privacy Commission inquiry, announced yesterday, into the recent mass data breach and whether or not ACC had systemic privacy problems.

Click here for a full list of Ms Pullar's complaints

© Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6630091/ACCs-records-storage-primitive

Smith rode his luck and fell

An article from the Otago Daily Times by John Armstrong

The word "scandal" is too easily and too often attached to circumstances which amount to nothing of the sort.
But the Accident Compensation Corporation's blunder in releasing thousands of sensitive patient files and its wrangling with the woman who mistakenly received them, plus the ministerial intervention to help her case, have more than a whiff of the scandalous about them.
Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First have their own obvious and self-interested motives in calling for a full and independent inquiry. But their argument that public confidence in the ACC is now in serious question would seem to justify some kind of independent investigation.
With the Prime Minister point-blank refusing to countenance one - he wants to consign this corrosive episode to history as soon as possible - the opposition parties' last option (as always) has been to ask the Auditor-general to start one of her own accord.
So Lyn Provost is now considering the request and hopes to make a decision within two weeks. As Auditor-general, she certainly has the powers to mount an effective inquiry. But into what exactly?
Public confidence has been dented by the huge privacy lapse. But that is a matter for the Privacy Commissioner, not the Auditor-general.
There are several separate strands to this messy business. Nick Smith's conflict of interest in writing a reference for his friend and National Party associate Bronwyn Pullar has nothing to do with ACC's big mistake. Neither does Dr Smith's consequent departure from Cabinet fall within Ms Provost's purview.
However, Dr Smith wants an inquiry so he can prove his indiscretions were limited to some minor assistance for Ms Pullar and that everything else he did while holding the ACC portfolio was above board.
Meanwhile, Ms Pullar claims her privacy was breached when her name was leaked from within the ACC to the media. It is a very serious allegation. But it follows years of argument and complaint by Ms Pullar over the handling of her case by the ACC after she was injured in a cycle accident. Moreover, Ms Provost's powers of inquiry do not extend to assessing the rights and wrongs of an individual claimant's case against the corporation.
More preferable would have been an inquiry by a senior lawyer, such as a Queen's Counsel, who could have been given a wider brief and not been proscribed by statute as Ms Provost is.
It is still possible something extraordinary may yet emerge which forces Mr Key to U-turn on his refusal to establish such an inquiry - one which would probe far wider than the joint inquiry being conducted by the Privacy Commissioner and ACC.
What has already happened is extraordinary, so such an eventuality cannot be ruled out.
An inquiry would be lose-lose for Mr Key. If it uncovers something really dicey, that can only mean trouble for National. If an inquiry reported little or nothing was wrong it would be dismissed as a whitewash.
Dr Smith's hopes of getting an inquiry were always forlorn. His resignation on Wednesday made him party to an unspoken deal with Mr Key that he won't get one.
Dr Smith has been a long-serving and loyal servant of the National Party.Having done the right thing by resigning, he can be assured the party will now look after him. But that means no inquiry. His seat at the Cabinet table will be filled by someone else. But Dr Smith's intelligence, energy and salesmanship will not go to waste. Once the current hoo-hah dies down, it is not inconceivable that in a few months he might be offered a ministerial post outside Cabinet. He is too valuable to allow to go to seed on National's backbenches for the best part of three years.
The dignified manner of his departure has already placed him on the road to rehabilitation. That he somehow managed to hold himself together on Wednesday afternoon was something of a minor miracle. His haggard face, sagging jowls and teary eyes were the look of someone who had not slept in days. It was the look of someone who had hit rock-bottom. It was the look of someone at the end of their tether - or close to it.
It took true courage to stand up in Parliament and announce his resignation as a Cabinet minister before stepping out of the chamber to face the waiting media. Lesser politicians whose worlds had just crashed around them would have barged their way through the throng of microphones and cameras without stopping. Dr Smith - polite and professional to the end - endured the interrogation until the questions dried up and his colleagues could finally shepherd him away.
Jim Anderton liked to say that one bad day in government was better than 1000 good days in opposition. But Wednesday was an especially bad day for National. Barely four months into its new term, the governing party has lost its first minister - and a senior one to boot.
A wheel has come off the National juggernaut. It is still full speed ahead with the party's reform agenda. But National has suffered its biggest psychological hit since Mr Key became leader more than five years ago.
The sheer speed of Dr Smith's demise was a shock for the party. On Monday afternoon, as local government minister, he stood alongside Mr Key on the podium at the Prime Minister's weekly press conference to launch National's eight-point plan to curtail local body rates rises. Less than 48 hours later Dr Smith, who had also held the Environment and Climate Change Issues portfolios, was no longer minister of anything.
There was astonishment and puzzlement within National that - despite all his experience - he should have ignored strict Cabinet rules on conflicts of interest to help Ms Pullar in her fight against ACC when he was in charge of that portfolio at the time. It was not as if he was doing it for any apparent financial or personal gain.
Correspondence released this week shows Dr Smith was perfectly well aware of the conflict of interest. His mistake was to think he could minimise it to a point where people would think it was not that big a deal in the grander context of his contribution as a hard-working minister and MP.
He might get into some minor trouble over it, but it would stop Ms Pullar pestering him to intervene in her case.
Or so he seems to have thought.
Dr Smith could not have got things more wrong.
But then he has often ridden his luck in the past.
This time it ran out. Just as it seems to be running out for National generally.

© 2012 Allied Press Ltd

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/202708/comment-smith-rode-his-luck-and-fell