Bennett David: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Bennett David: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:660;Page:9119] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 I will follow on from that speech from Maryan Street by thanking the officials for their hard work on the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill. It is a large bill and they did their work on it in a very timely manner so I thank them very much for their work. I also thank all the submitters throughout New Zealand who took an active interest in the bill. Many submitters related their personal circumstances to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee but many also represented points of view in relation to accident compensation and what they see as the fundamental concept behind the scheme. 
Following on from the previous speech in which the member talked about the Woodhouse principles I think it is important to remember that some of the changes made in this bill relate to things that have occurred subsequent to the adoption of the Woodhouse principles on which the accident compensation system was set up. It is not right for members opposite to say the bill is against the Woodhouse principles because many of the recommendations in this bill relate to things that have been done subsequent to the Woodhouse principles being invoked in the original legislation. I think that members and people out in the community who are listening to this debate need to be aware that the Woodhouse principles are firm and that the accident compensation scheme is here to stay. In this bill we are making sure that the scheme can survive and be there in the future to deliver on the Woodhouse principles and to deliver what people expect from it. That is the nature of being in Government at the moment. The Government has to deal with some issues. We have to deal with the financial circumstances that the scheme is in and provide a platform for it to go forward so that it can deliver the kind of comprehensive care that people expect in order to get back into the workforce. 
The measures contained in this legislation are not mind-boggling in the sense that they change the fundamental approach to accident compensation or worker compensation in New Zealand. In fact many of the things in the legislation relate to something that most political parties are in alignment on—that is the extension of the full funding date. Most political parties in the select committee were very supportive of doing that. Only one party the Green Party was not supportive of it. Those members see the situation in a different light from the other parties. But the Labour Party is very supportive of extending the full funding date; it is that party’s policy to extend it. Those members want to extend it as much as the National members do but they will not vote for it. It is something that they want to do but they will not vote for it. It is very disappointing to see the Labour members not voting for something that they believe in but I ask what one would expect other than that at this stage of the legislation. Those members are denying support for this legislation on the basis of what is in vogue. They are doing so because they think the appropriate way forward is to put up a fight but we actually need to look at what the best thing is for the accident compensation scheme and I say this legislation delivers the changes that are best for the scheme. 
I will now look at some of the changes that have occurred. Changes have been made with regard to casual workers part-time workers and non-earners and to do with the abatement of holiday pay. There are some changes to vocational rehabilitation. Changes have been made to the eligibility threshold for hearing loss and to the provisions to do with wilfully self-inflicted injury and suicide. There has been a strengthening of the disentitlement provisions for criminals. The bill allows some safety incentives for employers and vehicles. There are also changes to the financial reporting provisions. All those provisions deal with trying to provide a stronger accident compensation system going forward. 
When I look at some of the changes such as reversing the entitlements for wilfully self-inflicted injury or suicide or strengthening the disentitlement provisions for criminals I find it amazing that Labour members come into this Chamber and want to strengthen the entitlements for criminals. Those members want to see criminals get a better result than other New Zealanders do. They want to see criminals be supported and the accident compensation system go down the tubes which would hurt ordinary New Zealanders who do not have criminal convictions or a criminal record. When we look at the provisions on allowing safety incentives for employers and vehicles we see that they will lead to a stronger accident compensation system. We are setting up a situation where we can take into account workplace history.