Dame Paula Rebstock has learnt to ignore the criticism that comes with the job

An article from Stuff by Jo Moir

Public servant Paula Rebstock has been recognised for her services to the state by being made a Dame Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit. Jo Moir spoke to her about her most challenging roles, the sacrifices and how she deals with, often negative, public scrutiny. Money-hungry, a patchy performer, unqualified for your job: for most people, having those insults hurled your way would make 2015 an annus horribilis.
For Paula Rebstock, however, the barbs were nothing compared to some of the darkest days in her career.
When a lone gunman walked into a Work and Income office in Ashburton in September 2014, killing two staff and leaving a third seriously injured, Rebstock - chairwoman of the Work and Income board - stood alongside workers and the community as they struggled to make sense of the tragedy.
"The senseless loss of life of staff, those things are the things that are truly hard to deal with, and those things put life in perspective."
Now, her appointment as a Dame Companion of the NZ Order of Merit has provided a new perspective on her years of work. On New Year's Eve, Rebstock, her husband and two daughters will take up glasses of bubbles from their holiday home in the Bay of Islands, toasting a successful year rounded off with a "surprising" honour that brought her to tears.
Standing in the kitchen with her husband while opening the mail, Rebstock thought nothing of a letter from Government House, assuming it was her annual invite to Waitangi Day commemorations.
"I opened it and was really quite taken back. My husband said to me, 'What is wrong with you?' and I handed him the letter with tears running down my face. He looked at me and said, 'Oh God'."
Rebstock's two daughters, aged 20 and 24, have made "a lot of allowances for the certain work schedule their mother keeps" so she was straight on the phone to tell them the news.
"It was a special family moment, no question."
This isn't Rebstock's first award: after completely revamping the Commerce Commission, she was made a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit in 2009.
Rebstock, originally from Montana in the United States, moved to New Zealand in 1987 and says the honour helped her to feel at home.
"For me it was something about being accepted in this country and really being a New Zealander like everyone else."
First employed by Treasury as an economist, she then served in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet before moving to the Commerce Commission, where she became chair in 2003.
"When I left the Commerce Commission I always thought that would be the thing in my career I'd most feel proud of because we really did shift the work of the Commerce Commission to be far more productive."
On leaving the Commission in 2009, Rebstock was asked to lead an expert panel on probation services, which at the time was "really in a state of crisis".
"They were an agency under siege."
After cleaning up that mess, Rebstock moved onto ACC where her first experience on the board was a "terrible privacy breach". Details of thousands of ACC clients, some who fell under sensitive claims, were accidentally sent to ACC claimant Bronwyn Pullar.
"It really rocked the organisation...it involved a fairly large transformation in order to earn back the trust and confidence of our customers."
Most recently, Rebstock has been chairing a review of Child Youth and Family - a government department that has endured years of overhauls but no real change.
"If I'm honest I don't think I realised how big a challenge it was going to be...we've not done well by children who come into the care of the state."
Labour leader Andrew Little was scathing about her $2000-a-day salary for the review, saying she was "in it for herself" in what he described as a "pretty patchy career".
Rebstock is not new to criticism of her work, singling out "relentless" scrutiny while at the Commerce Commission, but says she does not let the political jibes get the best of her.
"These things are political processes and it's part of the game...it would be crazy if I allowed myself to get caught up in that - that's not to say at the time I didn't think, 'Gosh, why am I doing this again?'."
For now, it's Christmas at home, then a month at the beach and much excitement at the news her elderly parents and sister plan to travel to New Zealand in the New Year to celebrate her honour.
"People have to make a lot of allowances for you in their life when you get involved in a lot of these things and my family have always done that."

© 2016 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/75403036/Dame-Paula-Rebstock-has-learnt-to-ignore-the-criticism-that-comes-with-the-job

Health insurer, physio group among suppliers of ACC sexual abuse counselling

An article from the New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse

Australian health insurer Medibank, Active Physiotherapy (now called Active+) and Auckland doctors' network Procare are among 173 successful applicants to become "suppliers" of ACC-funded sexual abuse counselling.
"Suppliers" are a new management layer created as part of ACC's sensitive claims system redesign. "Suppliers" will contract with counsellors and psychologists who will remain the service "providers."
Counsellor and co-chair of TOAH-NNEST Tania Blomfield expressed concern about whether non-specialist suppliers would understand privacy issues and other sensitivities associated with sexual abuse, and whether they were seeing sexual abuse counselling as a "potential money-spinner."
As part of the system redesign, ACC will raise the level of funding it provides from the current $83 per hour to new rates dependent on the qualifications of the counselling provider. Providers will no longer be able to charge clients a "top-up" fee. This is intended to reduce the barriers to victim/survivors to access counselling. However, Ms Blomfield expressed concern that some providers could end up worse off if the suppliers charged large administration fees.
ACC recently announced that under the redesign, it would:

• Fund access to 48 therapy sessions over 12 months
• Provide the full cost of counselling sessions
• Allow claimants to 'shop around' for a therapist of their choice
• Provide therapists with travel funding to allow them to travel to people in isolated regions
• Support the inclusion of family members and support people during the recovery process where appropriate.

© 2014 New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse

https://nzfvc.org.nz/?q=node/1888

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

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

National must stop meddling with ACC before the election

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

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

© 2014 Scoop Media

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

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

ACC privacy ruling welcomed for sensitive claimants

A press release from the New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists

Yesterday’s District Court ruling, that the standard ACC release of information form the “ACC 167” is illegal, has been welcomed by psychotherapists and clinicians working with sexual abuse survivors.
“The Disley Independent Clincial review of the ACC’s treatment of sensitive claimants, undertaken in 2010, outlined serious concerns about this form and the ACC’s approach to the gathering of health information. This decision is welcomed, but long overdue” says Kyle MacDonald, New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists Public Issues spokesperson.
The Disley review included a legal opinion, which noted concerns about the ACC 167, and explained the limitations that apply to the collection of health information. Those working with all ACC claimants, and specifically in the sexual violence sector, have long expressed these concerns.
“We’ve known for a long time that this form, and its implementation, has caused specific problems for sensitive claimants” says Kyle MacDonald, “it has been common practice for the ACC to request ALL of a claimants GP or Mental health notes, and not accept a health professional acting in accordance with the Privacy act by providing only those parts of the record relevant to the claim. Furthermore the ACC have quite explicitly declined to advance a claim if individuals refuse to sign the waiver due to quite legitimate privacy concerns.”
This has set up a perception that ACC have gone on “fishing expeditions” for reasons to decline claims, rather than sticking to the limits of the Privacy Act, like all other health professionals are required to do.
“Hopefully this decision allows people who have had their claim declined due
to the illegal acquisition of health information to have their claim revisited. It should also allow those who have had their claim declined due to their refusal to sign this form to also re-apply for cover and treatment.”

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1404/S00230/acc-privacy-ruling-welcomed-for-sensitive-claimants.htm

ACC compo policy 'wrong in law'

An article from the New Zealand Herald by Martin Johnston

Form requesting signature to consent to information with threat of compensation cut is deemed unlawful.
A judge has overturned ACC's policy of cutting off accident claimants' compensation if they refuse to approve widespread gathering of information about themselves. The Accident Compensation Corporation's actions were "without basis and wrong in law", District Court Judge Grant Powell says in two just-released verdicts. The decisions come 2 years after ACC's mass privacy breach.
ACC, asked yesterday if it was following the judge's advice to rewrite the ACC167 form, said the form was "not illegal". ACC was "amending the relevant processes to address the matters raised by the court". ACC argued before the court cases that the blanket consent form provided "administrative efficiency".
Claimants Denise Powell, a part-time university lecturer who had a back injury, and "K", a sexual abuse victim and brain injury claimant, appealed against ACC cutting off their entitlements after they repeatedly refused to sign the ACC167 form. Their entitlements were reinstated after they eventually signed but they said they only signed because they were put under duress. Both claimants previously had arrangements with ACC to give it consent to obtain specific information relating to their claims case-by-case. This system ran for several years until 2009 and 2010 when case managers indicated the corporation could no longer accept those arrangements and they would have to sign the form or lose their entitlements.
But Judge Powell said the ACC167 form was much broader in its consent to gather information than the requirement in the Accident Compensation Act that claimants approve the release of "medical and other records that may be relevant to the claim". ACC was justified to seek a wide range of information and could request consent for this from claimants. But it could use section 117/3 of the act to cut off entitlements for refusing consent only for the "medical and other records" specified in the act, and not for the wider information search that ACC167 enabled.
The judge cites, as an example of the kind of wider information sought, Dr Powell's ACC case manager asking her GP if the medical certificates he wrote accurately reflected the amount of work she was capable of doing. "It would appear," the case manager wrote, "that the hours both paid and unpaid combined could almost exceed a full week's work. If you do not agree will you please provide your reasons."
Dr Powell, an ACC claimants' support group spokeswoman, said the case manager's letter was inappropriate and after a complaint she was assigned to a different case manager. "K" told the corporation he was concerned about its use or possible misuse of private information including details about his sensitive claim with ACC.
Warren Forster, the advocate for both claimants, said there had been a long line of failed appeals against having ACC payments stopped because of refusing to sign the ACC167 form, but there had not been full legal argument on the issue before the K and Powell cases. ACC is setting up a dedicated phone line for clients with historical consent concerns.

• ACC consent concern line 0800 745 254.

Form filling
• ACC167 form asked claimants to sign: "I give my consent for information about me to be collected, used and disclosed..."
• The Accident Compensation Act says: "A claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do so by the corporation...authorise the corporation to obtain medical and other records that may be relevant to the claim."
• What the judge said: "In my view, even a casual glance at the ACC167 form...shows that the authorisation is considerably more extensive than provided by section 72, 1, c [of the act]."

© 2014 APN New Zealand Ltd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11238207

ACC staffer faces inquiry after clients' records stolen

An article from the Press by Anna Turner

The personal details of dozens of Christchurch ACC claimants have been leaked after a staff member's home was burgled.
ACC confirmed yesterday that the home of a Christchurch ACC case manager was broken into on Saturday, August 3 and among the things taken was a notebook containing the details of 35 ACC clients. ACC general manager of claim management Sid Miller told The Press the case manager had kept a handwritten notebook of client details as an "aide-memoire" to help her while she was working out of Christchurch.
"She returned to Christchurch over the weekend and brought the notebook with her at her house," he said.
"Unfortunately, during that time her house was broken into and the notebook was taken. It is an unfortunate situation for a number of our clients."
The notebook contained details of the 35 people's claim numbers, details of their accidents, as well as more personal details such as dates of birth and bank account numbers.
ACC contacted every client that the case manager had dealt with this year, Miller said.
"There were 35 people we believe were in the book but we contacted all her clients [124] as a precaution in case any other details were in there."
Of the 124, ACC have spoken to 83.
Miller said a staff member keeping a notebook of details was not "at all in line with our policy and procedures". The case manager was not at work due to family circumstances, but when she returned would face a "full HR investigation".
One of the ACC clients, who did not want to be named, told The Press he was "horrified" his details had been leaked.
"It's got all of my information in there. My date of birth, my bank account number. Now, who knows who has it. This is a serious breach of privacy."
He did not understand why the case manager had the information at her home.
"It's a pretty major error."
The client said he was considering what legal action he could take.
Miller said ACC was "very apologetic" for the breach.
It is the latest in a long line of privacy breaches from ACC nationwide. Last year, the corporation accidentally sent out the details of at least 9000 claimants in what has been described as one of the worst breaches in New Zealand history. The details included personal information on nearly 250 clients from ACC's most secure unit - the sensitive claims unit. Full names, the nature of each claim and dispute, and individual claim numbers were among the information revealed. In 2010, ACC apologised after it admitted sending up to 2000 companies private information about workers' accidents that should have gone to other employers. The information included names, descriptions of accidents, injuries, treatment and ACC payments.

© 2013 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/9037801/ACC-staffer-faces-inquiry-after-clients-records-stolen

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 reined in over waiver

An article from Stuff

The Privacy Commissioner's office has again reined in ACC after it asked clients to sign a form accepting their personal files may be lost, then claimed such a form gave it indemnity.
The waiver forms were introduced after a series of client privacy breaches, including emailing of the personal details of more than 6700 clients to claimant Bronwyn Pullar.
ACC used to send sensitive files to claimants' houses via courier. It has now asked clients to sign a contract accepting the files may not reach their destination. The form states the client accepts risks, including "non-delivery, delivery to an unauthorised person, or interception by an unauthorised person".
Outgoing ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart told TVNZ: "They need to indemnify us, just in case it does go to the wrong place and they haven't used the options we've offered them."
But the Privacy Commissioner's office contacted ACC to put him right after TVNZ approached it about the comments. Mr Stewart later said the corporation would take responsibility for its mistakes.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7772012/ACC-reined-in-over-waiver

ACC to consider individual privacy complaints

A news report from Radio New Zealand

The head of the Accident Compensation Corporation says it will consider each case of sensitive claimants whose private details were released to see whether further compensation is required.
The corporation offered in June to pay $250 to each of 200 claimants in compensation for mistakenly emailing their information to another claimant, Bronwyn Pullar.
A lawyer specialising in ACC matters, John Miller, says the offer is insulting and he intends to take action on behalf of about 100 of the claimants.
Another lawyer, Hazel Armstrong, has warned that those who seek greater damages may face a costly battle.
Ms Armstrong says they will have to prove they've suffered emotional harm because of the privacy breach.
"Possibly depending on how far ACC pushes it, they might have to show a level of significance that would have to be measured by a psychiatrist, and a psychiatrist's report can cost anything between $2000 and $7000."
ACC chief executive Ralph Stewart told Radio New Zealand's Morning Report programme the $250 offered is to recognise that the corporation had made a mistake.
"If the individual concerned is not happy we want to talk to them here about that and consider their own individual position."
Claimants not satisfied with this process have the option of going to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner or the Human Rights Tribunal.
Mr Miller is confident the case is strong and says his firm will take action on a pro bono basis.
He says he will go to the Human Rights Tribunal only if negotiations with ACC and the Privacy Commissioner fail.

© 2012 Radio New Zealand

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/117041/acc-to-consider-individual-privacy-complaints

ACC's compensation a 'slap in the face'

A report from Newstalk ZB by Kaye Albyt

A woman who's suing ACC on behalf of her daughter who was sexually abused, says the offer of compensation is a slap in the face.
Around 100 people whose sensitive claims were mistakenly released to National Party insider Bronwyn Pullar, are suing the accident insurer. They've been offered $250 and an apology - but a woman who doesn't want to reveal her identity, says it's an insult.
She says it was hard to tell her daughter what had happened:
"I thought about it very, very carefully and was just very upfront with her and she was upset, worried about who knew what, because describing abuse is a very hard thing for anybody - especially a child I think."
The woman says ACC has to take more care in the way it deals with its clients.
"What I really want is for ACC to get their act together, tidy up the procedures and how they deal with their clients. I want them to show my daughter that they are very sorry and this is important and she does matter and remunerate her appropriately."
She says she has no confidence that things have improved at ACC.

© 2012 The Radio Network

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/1855189499-acc-s-compensation-a--slap-in-the-face-

Privacy breach victims to sue ACC

An article from the Sunday Star Times by David Gadd and Marika Hill

Sex abuse survivors are planning to sue ACC to force a significantly boosted payout for breaching their privacy in the ongoing Bronwyn Pullar whistleblower saga.
ACC sent apology letters in June to sensitive-claims clients and offered to pay them $250 if they agreed to stay silent, after one of New Zealand's biggest privacy breaches in August last year. The "insulting" offer came after ACC mistakenly released the names and details of 6500 claimants, including 250 sensitive-claims clients who are victims of sexual abuse and violent crimes, to claimant Pullar.
Wellington lawyer John Miller, a specialist in taking on ACC, said more than 100 claimants affected by the massive Pullar breach had approached him to take the case. He said those wanting to pursue ACC were sensitive claimants who generally had long simmering feelings of being poorly treated by the ACC system. Although a claimant with a normal injury could shrug off the privacy breach, for sensitive claimants "this is the last straw".
"It's a corrosive environment they are in with ACC, frankly. The people I have spoken to, they are insulted by $250, it is a derisory amount for the torment they have gone through."
Worse was ACC's requirement that claimants sign a confidentially agreement if they took the payment. "They feel they are being told ‘now go away and shut up and sign a document to say you are going to shut up forever more'."
He said that although technically class action claims were not possible in New Zealand, the process worked with one claim taken and if it won it set a precedent. ACC would be asked to settle with everyone, or face losing case after case with legal costs compounding the settlement payouts. He said the process had worked before and usually ACC saw sense.
Miller would not be drawn on what level of compensation would satisfy claimants, but said past privacy breaches had won payouts of anything from $2000 to $40,000. It depended on the severity of the consequences. In 2003 he said ACC paid $8000 for sending a man's earnings details to his wife, resulting in divorce because he had kept his income secret from her.
The Dominion Post revealed in July that ACC paid out almost $50,000 for eight privacy breaches in the past three years.
However, the government agency refused to divulge the amount of each payment.
Following an investigation in the Pullar blunder, the privacy commissioner found that systemic weaknesses at ACC and an "almost cavalier" attitude towards claimants' information led to the breach. The privacy breach led to ACC introducing strict privacy policies and saw an exodus of top staff.
ACC chairman John Judge, chief executive Ralph Stewart and board members John McCliskie, Rob Campbell and Murray Hilder all departed from the agency.
ACC has so far refused to comment publicly on the financial settlement payments.

© 2012 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/7748139/Privacy-breach-victims-to-sue-ACC

ACC claimants plan legal bid for more compensation

A news report from One News

ACC claimants who have had their private details exposed in a major privacy breach are launching legal action to claim more compensation.
Nearly 7000 clients have been offered less than a few hundred dollars in compensation after their personal details were accidentally emailed to former National Party figure Bronwyn Pullar.
However, the mother of a 12-year-old client involved in the privacy leak claims that figure is not enough.
The mother, whose identity cannot be revealed because her daughter is a sexual abuse victim, claims ACC's $250 compensation offer is insulting.
"I want her to see that those that have done wrong are going to front up and treat it with the appropriate, the appropriate response and not just be fobbed off with a bit of pocket money."
Her daughter is one of 200 sensitive claimants offered $250. Two months since the offer was made, only 84 have claimed the money.
She, along with other ACC claimants, is planning to pursue ACC for a payment worth thousands of dollars
"If you're just one person then $250 is a lot of effort to go to the Privacy Commissioner and the Human Rights Tribunal, but if there's a group then you know it makes more sense to go and we'll probably take some group action," said lawyer John Miller.
So far ACC have paid out $21,000 in compensation to privacy leak victims in exchange for their silence.
"There may be people in ACC right now who're saying 'well most people haven't taken up this offer, that's a bit of a win for us' - well actually hold the phone," Green Party ACC spokesperson Kevin Hague.
ACC refused requests for an interview, saying they are bound by a confidentiality clause in the compensation agreement.

© 2012 Television New Zealand Ltd

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/acc-claimants-plan-legal-bid-more-compensation-5108082

ACC backs down on privacy initiative

An article from the New Zealand Herald by Adam Bennett

The ACC has partially backed down on a new privacy initiative adopted in the wake of the Bronwyn Pullar affair but which was criticised as costly and inconvenient for clients.
However the corporation has only relaxed the new rules intended to protect privacy for sensitive claimants - those who have suffered rape or sexual abuse, whose privacy is supposed to be a priority for the corporation.
The recent review of ACC's privacy practices was launched following the Bronwyn Pullar privacy breach and prompted a new policy where claimants were required to collect sensitive documents from ACC offices rather than having them couriered to them.
But claimants such as Napier woman Jacqui Scott said the new policy meant it was now costly to access information held by ACC about her.
"For me, I'm disabled, and live in Napier. It means I have to pay for a taxi over to the Hastings office every time I request documents and need to collect them" she told Hawkes Bay Today recently.
"I'm looking at about $40 to $50 each way, and it could end up costing me about $100 every time."
Clients can choose to receive the information in the form of an encrypted CD couriered to them but that has also been criticised as expensive for those who want hard copies or impractical for those lacking computer skills.
ACC told Hawkes Bay Today the policy was "not a cost-cutting exercise, but a proactive step we've taken to improve the security and protection of client information".
"These changes have been introduced with our clients' best interests in mind, because they reduce the risk of a client's hard copy file ending up in the wrong hands."
But just a few weeks after the new policy was introduced, the Herald this week obtained a recent letter from an ACC manager to a sensitive claimant in which the manager says corporation's Sensitive Claims Unit had sought "further advice from senior management".
"It has been confirmed that ACC are now able to send copy files for sensitive claim clients only, directly to their home address."
A sensitive ACC claimant who did not wish to be named said the new privacy policy and partial back down was "another example of ACC being consistently inconsistent".
"They are making kneejerk reactions without even considering one iota of what claimants require or request or need."
The claimant said the policy requiring claimants collect documents didn't take into account the needs of clients.
"For myself it's a 180km round trip."
The claimant said ACC "should be asking each client which is their preferred method of delivery, simple end of story".
A spokeswoman for ACC said the corporation had opted to continue couriering files to sensitive claims clients, "with special measures taken in the couriering".
That included a stringent "track and trace" process and courier follow up.
ACC would also only courier to a verified client's home address, she said.

© Copyright 2012, APN Holdings NZ Limited

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10835140