Wong Pansy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Wong Pansy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:12439] 
12.  
PANSY WONG (National) 
 to the  
Minister for ACC 
: Does she stand by her statement made during debate on the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill: “Business people—whatever their company structure—like to have some certainty. …if we have no smoothing policy at all then we will get back to the good old bad days when people had no idea from one year to another what their levy was likely to be. That is a totally unsatisfactory situation.”; if not why not? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 Yes. The smoothing policy of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) gives some certainty to employers while also ensuring adequate funding to pay for the treatment and rehabilitation costs of injured workers. 
Pansy Wong 
: What does the Minister have to say to Mr Douglas Bull who is self-employed and facing a 34 percent increase in his ACC levy for 2008 and who was told that it was because of the merging of the self-employed work account and the employer account? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: If the increase was in the levy then that is quite different from an increase in the rate. Obviously an increase in the levy could also be contributed to by a considerable increase in income. That would be logical because it is rated against income. The way the self-employed work account is now worked out—the way the rate is determined—has separated the income and non-income parts of the account which is fair given that we are now moving them to be on the same basis as employers. 
Pansy Wong 
: What does the Minister have to say to Mr Gray who is self-employed and has had increases in his ACC levy of at least 10 percent a year since 2003 and who is now facing a 35 percent increase in the levy for 2008 for similar cover? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: It would depend on the question I was asked to address as to what I would say to him. If I was asked whether a privatised competitive scheme under National would make it better then the answer would be no. As has been shown in a country as close as Australia when insurance companies undercut their prices they loss-lead so that they give lower bills. They end up going bankrupt. That is what happened to the National Party’s ACC privatisation adviser HIH which left the taxpayers of Australia with millions and millions of dollars for them to fund. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Can the Minister tell the House by how much the work account is currently overfunded and what ACC will to do to rectify that? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The ACC work account has substantial reserves which have arisen from strong investment from ACC strong economic conditions particularly high employment and lower than forecasted injury rates. As noted in the levy consultation papers that are currently out for discussion it is proposed that ACC returns $250 million to employers in the 2008-09 year. 
Pansy Wong 
: What does the Minister have to say to Mr Armstrong a truck owner and driver who is facing an increase of 47.5 percent in his ACC levy for 2008 and who has been told by ACC that this increase is only the beginning in the phasing in of the new work account which covers both the self-employed and employers? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I can tell Mr Armstrong—as I would say to any employer and employee—that under this Government the cost of his injury treatment and rehabilitation will be met by income gained from the scheme. Under that member’s proposals of a “pay as you go” privatised scheme that would not be the case. People’s cost of injury would not have the funds collected so who would pay it?