Cosgrove Clayton: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Cosgrove Clayton: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:16950] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 I rise to take a short call on Part 2 having entered the Chamber after being elsewhere. I listened to Dr Hutchison’s comments and also to those of Pansy Wong. I will address Part 2 especially in terms of the commencement date—of course those people do not want it to commence on 1 July or 1 August 2008. 
I listened to the bleatings of Dr Hutchison and Pansy Wong who were standing up for people on accident compensation and lamenting the old system. I ask those members whether it was their party when it was in Government that effectively flogged off the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) privatised it and did away with it. I ask those members whether they will make a commitment: I challenge Dr Hutchison Mr Power Pansy Wong and old “cue ball” over there—I cannot remember his name—to announce a policy tonight to make a commitment that National will not do what it did pre-1999 which was to privatise the ACC and flog it off. Do we have a commitment? Do we have half a commitment? Do we have a quarter of a commitment? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No not a word. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Not a word. 
I will address Part 2 especially in terms of the commencement date that National members do not want. I say to those members that in 1999 when I became a member of Parliament Labour members would have spent at least 12 months possibly 2 years as Government members of Parliament—as would those Opposition members who actually saw a constituent occasionally—dealing with the carnage that was visited upon people who were forced out into the private sector solution that National proposed. Those people were forced out of a no-fault system and they still dealt with it. People were pressured by the private sector providers and we know that National did a deal with the Insurance Council to push that one through before the election. 
As we look at Part 2 we know that that deal must be live today because having asked National members whether they would do it again—and I ask them again whether they would revisit their policy—there is no answer no commitment. They would do it again. I can recall constituents in my electorate office in Kaiapoi in tears because of the treatment that they had received at the hands of some of those private providers who in using a pure market model had done everything they could to dispatch people out of their care as soon as they possibly could. Members should ask physiotherapists and others in my area what they think of National’s accident compensation proposal then and now. 
That member over there who gave a particularly sour speech rabbited on about legal issues and about people suing each other. Well I say to her that we have a world-class accident compensation system. A world-class accident compensation system means that if one has an accident one is looked after. From time to time some may pull the wool over the system. I have people coming to me and saying that the ACC is at them because it wants to help them rehabilitate them and get them back to work. One or two pull the wool and one or two actually complain because the ACC keeps ringing them up giving them options giving them retraining and getting them medical attention. Even if people have a substantial injury those people who really want to get back to work will pursue those options. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The previous Chairperson made it very clear that it was most important that members from both sides of the Chamber stuck to Part 2 and the schedules. Unfortunately I have not heard anything relating to Part 2 or the schedules from the present speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The member was on a point of order Mr Cosgrove. The member speaking has been doing a fair bit of rebuttal but debate on the schedule makes the debate a lot wider than just a glance at Part 2 would suggest. But I ask the member to have regard to Part 2. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am grateful Mr Chairperson for your learned and precise rulings. [ 
Interruption 
] He is learned. That genius over there might want to clean his lugs out—maybe he needs some accident compensation help with that—and listen to what is said. I am entitled to rebut the piffle from that member and also the piffle from “cue ball” over there. I have referred many times to a number of commencement dates the first being in Part 2—1 July and 1 August—which National members do not want.