Foss Craig: Urgent Debates — Accident Compensation Corporation—Release of Personal Information 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Foss Craig: Urgent Debates — Accident Compensation Corporation—Release of Personal Information 
[Sitting date: 20 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1086. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CRAIG FOSS (Associate Minister for ACC) 
: 
 Firstly let me acknowledge the original incident as it has unravelled in this Chamber and across the media over recent days and reiterate what Minister Collins said. I think as do most members that the release accidental or otherwise of the information was unacceptable unsatisfactory and simply not good enough. Quite simply— 
Andrew Little 
: Well we’ve got that. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon CRAIG FOSS 
: Yes members but let us just acknowledge that because there is some politicisation happening here which is starting to go away from the core issue. 
Andrew Little 
: It started with the National Party. 
Hon CRAIG FOSS 
: The previous speaker made his points and I will start to make mine. But I reiterate that it is simply not good enough. 
I will come to a point about what has happened since these revelations came to the attention of the Minister in charge and how that has been reacted to—managed. That is not to say that other issues may not have arisen as some members have been speaking of about what else has been going on. But I do note and I am very cautious and I do urge other members to note that there is one investigation or possibly two investigations going on here about different parts of this scenario if you want. As to the paper that was released on Friday the Minister announced the papers and ACC is cooperating fully with the Privacy Commissioner to discover to learn to share to find out how it happened and maybe why it happened. The terms of reference are still being worked on I understand. The reaction to what was an unacceptable event—I would like to think an accidental unacceptable event—with consequences that we are discussing now has been addressed. I think we really do need to separate those issues because the police are possibly also investigating some of the other issues in this space which the other member was talking about. 
That is fine but let us just kind of reiterate if you want what is going on. The key issues in events like this are to understand and acknowledge what has happened and try to learn how it happened—intentional or otherwise—and about problems or gaps in a system. They may have been there for many years. We just do not know actually; we are yet to find out. And then there are some of the other issues that are clouding this space right at this moment. I have been as surprised as other members about some of the events that seem to have been portrayed out there. 
But I will agree with the previous speaker about much of what he says. It is about trust. That is quite right. So to hold regain earn that trust is what Minister Collins and ACC with the Privacy Commissioner and the inquiry into how this has happened are about. It is all about holding trust. The member is right: New Zealanders do and do need to—and by and large I think they do—have a large amount of trust in not only the ability of ACC to manage an accident whatever that may be and the issues in and around that but also the ability of ACC to fulfil its obligations under its Act over a lifetime. It can be 20 or 25 years. The member did note the need and I just urge members—they can speak quite laterally I know—to exercise caution about standing on a ladder of righteousness or something around sensitive claims. They are exactly that; they are very very sensitive. I appreciate that members of Parliament have many issues come across their desks but let us make sure we treat everything with respect and dignity regardless of what may or may not have happened to that particular individual and the circumstances whatever they are that have put them into a place where their name their review lodgment date their client name their file reference number or their branch identification category and perhaps a review outcome has been sent—inadvertently let us just assume for the moment; I am quite sure that is the case and I certainly hope so—to some other party and then there is a bit of activity after that as far as ACC is concerned. 
I just want to go back to what has happened subsequent to this. Yes here we are having this urgent debate in the House and members have raised their points. To be fair there is a general theme of surprise at this event—this is the ACC’s inadvertent release of information—the need for there to be trust and then there has been some politics sure at the margin and some other events have come through. I have here some statistics of what ACC has done since. As at last Thursday when around that time the Minister and everyone became aware of this issue ACC acknowledged that it needed to contact 6752 clients whose earlier details may have been sent in one way shape or form to the recipient. Let us just leave it there for the moment. ACC has tried as at last Thursday at 10 o’clock in the morning to contact 4457 of them. It has successfully spoken to 2611 of them and was unable to communicate with 1846. That was last Thursday. That is not to dilute in any way shape or form what has happened. My point is about the trust that New Zealanders and I think most of the House maintain in ACC from the reaction to what has happened here and what system solutions are being put in play to fix it to remedy it. I acknowledge Minister Collins’ leadership here in putting in place the machinery if you want for this to be addressed. 
I think we have to be so careful about theories about what might have gone on and the next layer of what may have gone on and some connections and some influence. Yes some members are able to allege those if they want but I trust ACC to do the job it is charged to do. On the whole it does a fantastic job. This is certainly a bump in the road which I do not think the ACC needed or required. New Zealand did not need nor require it not because of political reasons but simply to maintain trust in such a great and solid entity which is now in a very strong financial position. 
Finally just pursuant to the rebuilding of trust or the need for people to help engage—and I know that other members have pointed a few things out—I do endorse that any person who believes that their details basic though they might have been have been shared inadvertently or their privacy breached via ACC in the particular item we are talking about does call the 0800 number to engage with and discuss it with ACC. I acknowledge as that previous member said that different messages were being sent out. We need to look at that and I would be interested to hear a bit more about that if in fact that is what is happening from ACC’s point of view. So if anyone is aware of anyone or thinks they may just share the 0800 number with them let us make sure that members are not breaching the trust and the privacy of those people particularly the sensitive claims part of this—inadvertently I am sure—as the politics of this thing play out in this House. Thank you.