|
The Daily News
January 14, 2002
New ACC legislation getting more than accidental going over
Editorial
The accident Compensation Commission was set up to care for accident victims
and prevent New Zealand going down the same expensive path as the United
States.
There, thousands of civil court cases create a fortune for lawyers as
citizens sue each other for negligence causing injury. Like all such schemes,
New Zealand's
has had its flaws and is certainly far from just, but in general it has met
its major aims.
This is despite constant tinkering by a succession
of governments trying to keep the lid on spending. From April 1 the latest of
these will re-introduce lump sum payments and make some other changes that
have observers worried.
For the first time in 10 years, under the Injury Prevention and
Rehabilitation Act, victims of sexual abuse will be able to claim lump sum
compensation for the trauma they have suffered.
Critics say this will start a run on ACC funds that it is unlikely to be able
to afford. The change is considered doubly flawed because the checks on the
abuse claims will be limited.
Claimants will have to go to a recognised councillor, but do not need to
report the crime to police and no prosecution needs to be successfully
brought against the abuser.
While such abuse is a traumatic and life-altering experience and its victims
deserve community sympathy, it is a little difficult to understand why the
Government considers such people are likely to be any more honest or in need
than those injured by accidents, or even those who, because by an accident of
birth, are genetically disposed to a range of illnesses and disabilities.
Whatever the State attitude, it has had an abrupt reminder of the potential
for the act to be used in ways it has obviously never considered.
A Christchurch law firm has created a furore
by touting for business with offers of legal assistance to the sexually
abused.
The move is not illegal but, for some it smacks of the worst of
American-style touting.
The debate it has initiated is also likely to obscure some of the other more
worthwhile aspect of the new act, including its heavier emphasis on accident
prevention and its desire to be fairer to those with major disabilities.
It is a little difficult to understand why, if prevention is so important,
more is not being done to encourage sexual abuse victims to report their
claims to the police. Surely offenders should be helping to pay compensation,
and if they are left unchecked, is this not going to encourage further
offending on other victims?
Perhaps all this has been considered and there are logical answers. If there
are they are certainly not getting through to the public who need and deserve
to be told.
It seems one of the ACC's more important tasks between now and April 1 will
be clearing up some of these issues.
|
