Tuesday, June 19, 2012
"The 1967 Royal Commission fixed that legal defect by proposing a no-fault scheme: the state should take over from insurance companies the injured person's "compensation". That proposition stunned the National government of the time and it took six years, a select committee inquiry and a change of government to be implemented.
It is admired internationally. But it is in concept an insurance scheme. And it is unfair: ACC income support for accident-generated disability is far greater than social security support for illness-generated disability."
His point is the last paragraph is a valid one. Should the two 'schemes' continue to be quarantined one from the other Where is the fairness and equity in a system which discriminates between accident and illness with the taxpayer picking up the tab in both instances. Is this a conversation that we should be having? Interested in your feedback.