Goudie Sandra: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Goudie Sandra: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20272] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I would just like to carry on the issues that have been raised previously with regard to cost. Perhaps the Minister in the chair Ruth Dyson might like to take a call to explain some of the cost implications with regard to this bill and in particular to clause 13. 
Section 32(7) inserted by clause 13 states: “If a person (person A) suffers an infection … cover for that personal injury extends to—(a) person A’s spouse … (b) person A’s child … (c) any other third party …” and any other person who might be infected. There are a whole raft of infections that that provision could relate to. I wonder how far it is meant to be extended and what the range of infections is that it is meant to cover or whether that is fairly unlimited. It brought to my mind the question of AIDS through immigration. In talking to some people in the AIDS Foundation—[ 
Interruption 
] I do not know. What does this provision mean? It refers to people who suffer an infection. If they pass that infection on all those infected persons become eligible for accident compensation. Perhaps the Minister would like to take a call to explain just how far that goes. Let us face facts. It is my understanding that the only real way to test immigrants is to do so not only when they come into the country but also after they have been in the country 3 months particularly if they have spent any time in a refugee camp. 
I note with concern that in section 33 “Treatment” inserted by clause 13 there is no definition of “prophylaxis”. Perhaps that is an oversight. I have checked the Act and the bill and I could see no definition for that word. Perhaps we need a definition in the bill. The Minister might like to take a call to explain whether she intends to make provision for that. 
Certainly there is concern about the cost of some of the implications of these changes. Although National supports the bill—there are some real concerns that are trying to be addressed through it—the costs that will arise as a result of its provisions are substantial particularly with regard to section 33(1)(d) inserted by clause 13 whereby: “a failure to provide treatment or to provide treatment in a timely manner:” means someone has the opportunity to apply for accident compensation. When 2000 people are being bumped off waiting lists does that mean that if any of those 2000 people become sicker or more debilitated as a result of waiting for treatment they are then eligible for accident compensation? There are a whole raft of considerations. Perhaps the Minister might like to take a call as the provision says: “a failure to provide treatment or to provide treatment in a timely manner:” and when people are being bumped off waiting lists or made to wait on waiting lists why would they not be eligible for accident compensation in that circumstance? Perhaps the Minister might like to take a call to give us an explanation for that and to give us some idea as to whether a definition of “prophylaxis” will be put forward seeing as there is not one in the Act or the bill. That is something that might need to be addressed. Certainly there is a concern around the suffering of individuals when they incur an infection and how far that might spread to others. 
I reiterate the concerns expressed by Business New Zealand about the omission from the bill’s explanatory note of any statement of likely cost increases both in respect of actual compliance with increased administration and levy costs and in terms of the expense of covering the liability issues with regard to people being able to claim. 
I also reiterate that section 33(1)(g) inserted by clause 13 refers to “the failure of any equipment device or tool used as part of the treatment process including the failure of any implant or prosthesis …” whether it be an implant for breasts or implants for developing masculine pecs. What is the definition of “fair wear and tear”? How many times do those things have to be handled before they start to wear out?