Bennett David: Accident Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Bennett David: Accident Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:9285] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will not take long on the Accident Compensation Amendment Bill. I think we have canvassed a lot of the issues already during the last day or so. I thank members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee who worked very well to get this legislation through the committee in a timely fashion. I also thank all those who have taken an active role and interest in seeing the New Zealand accident compensation system become the best system it can be and one that will survive into the future. When we look at it we see that is at the heart of what the Government is doing here. We want to see the scheme survive and we want to see it be there for people. We want to maintain a system that gives New Zealanders the comfort that they expect and have seen in their accident compensation system for generations now. By doing what we are today we are allowing New Zealanders to have the security of knowing that accident compensation will be there for them in the future. I think the key thing that people in this House need to understand is that this bill is about saving the scheme. It is about making it sustainable over the long term. It has nothing to do with what the Labour Opposition members have been saying over the last day or so. 
I will go through two things but first of all I say there has been an abuse of process in this House today. The constant amendments that were put up when there was a particular issue there that is in the best interests of New Zealand are a tactic that Labour Party members need to reflect upon. The public out there will not want to see this House waste its time and resources when we are trying to do something good for the New Zealand people. Putting up frivolous amendments all day does not really endear the Labour members to the New Zealand public. That is something the Labour Party might want to take on board for future circumstances. 
Two very important things came out of today. The first one is that we heard a constant barrage from the Opposition members about the Woodhouse principles. They say the bill is contrary to the principles that were first adopted in accident compensation and that it takes away the principles that were there. I say we should look at that in a historical context: we had the Woodhouse report the accident compensation system and in the last term of the previous Labour Government the changes to the system. Those changes were not based on the Woodhouse principles but on the political whim of that Government. We are not reversing the Woodhouse principles. The Woodhouse principles set up the accident compensation system. What we are looking at are some of the changes that were made in recent years to the system and the legislation does not affect the Woodhouse principles. I think the public out there needs to be very much aware that the Woodhouse principles are intact that the accident compensation system is intact and that the National Government has made sure that is the case. We have not dealt with the Woodhouse principles in the way that the Labour Party has contended over the last day or so. 
The second very important thing that came out of the last day or so is the idea of full funding. The National Party is committed to that. We have extended the time frame in order to enable that to happen. The Labour Party started this debate not knowing where it stood on that. We looked at Maryan Street’s face during the debate. When she was asked whether she supported full funding she was deliberately quiet. She did not want to commit herself to supporting full funding. But what happened today? David Parker sat down beside her today and in response to a speech during the Committee stage he said the Labour Party was committed to full funding. That is what the Labour Party policy is and Labour members were backing this legislation but they could not vote for it. Labour backed this legislation but would not vote for something that was in the best interests of what New Zealanders wanted. That shows the state that the Labour Party is in at the moment. The Labour members do not know what they stand for and when they do know what they stand for they are not willing to stand up for it. That is the problem with the Labour Party. That is why it is polling so badly and why the public will see great credit in what National has done to retain the accident compensation system and will not be listening to the arguments that have been put up against this legislation today. 
I commend this bill to the House and I look forward to it being enacted tonight. I thank all those involved in the process especially members of the select committee and the officials involved. Thank you.