Severin ToniTONI SEVERIN (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on the third reading of the Accident Compensation (Access Reporting and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. As stated by our peers this bill will amend the Accident Compensation Act 2001. The bill requires the Accident Compensation Corporation to report annually on the level of access Māori and other population groups have to the accident compensation system. This change is intended to increase transparency including by identifying any disparities in this access.ACT has a problem when you are identifying one group over other groups as obviously there are other groups that are struggling with not making claims with ACC. As we were told in select committee and by many who had come to submit they felt that we should actually list who ACC have most likely already identified because why should we put one group over the top of the other?Now I'm a little bit disappointed because I actually end up in these other identified groups because—Simon O'Connor: Other populations. TONI SEVERIN: —populations—I am a woman. Therefore that means that women Pasifika other ethnics refugees asylum seekers people who identify as LGBTQIA+ people with disabilities young and old—these are the groups that ACC have probably indicated that they need more information on on why we don't claim as much. Because again I am a woman and I've been identified as a disparity that most likely is not claiming ACC as much.Yes I commend the Labour Party for the maternal injuries bill. It was much overdue because we know that this Act was set over 50 years ago and it was done when mostly males were working in the workforce. And I do know that there's other work going on but I'm just disappointed that we have to as I said identify one over the top of all these other groups because I feel that we are a multi-ethnic society and we should all be treated as equals and not one group named over the other.We don't have a problem with the bill where it's been added what they call the other matters" which is hidden in this bill which is to bring the eligibility for the minimum full-time rate of weekly compensation from the sixth week of incapability to the second week. We agree with this because we do know that a lot of people are struggling and especially after you have an injury and have to get treatment and rehabilitation. This is what this is all about. There must be data already that we should have as to why people aren't getting treatment or what sort of treatment and if it is working what rehabilitation. Do we make claims and then not follow through on our rehabilitation programmes? So then pretty soon there'll probably be data around how much people are actually claiming.Now we know that data is very good in order to be able to supply good services but then I start to wonder if why people aren't claiming is because they don't feel that ACC is offering good services for them once they have had an accident or how much people have to fight to be able to get their claims heard. There could be many reasons why we have these disparities. And yes we should have that data and I'm assuming that we do but it's just how we get our hands on it.The other thing is that when groups come to us—was it 15 interested and nine submitters?—they state that they mostly want things to be spelt out. And I'm thinking well if these groups really say that these things should be spelt out in black and white—the likes of what groups we have identified. And I'm pretty certain that covers most of what New Zealand represents today. And the other thing is we are doing claims these days online. It's obviously why we have these disparities and why you think that we need this bill. It's about how much of it has gone online and the cost for people to do things because most people don't necessarily have access to computers in their homes or have access to somewhere close by to go in and make these claims. Or the fact is that we've got busy lives—"Oh I've sprained my ankle. Oh I don't think I need to claim. It's just a sprained ankle." This is the sort of thing that most people do. The majority of the people that I know that go and do lots of claims are usually people that are sports-orientated and they need to because again with their sports they want to make sure they're right. But the everyday mum who sprains her ankle has got two kids that they have to get off to school they will just wrap their ankle and carry on. I think that's a big thing that goes on in today's life—that people when they perceive it as something very minor do not claim and that's what this will show probably. And like it's just a huge thing. When I look at this and see that Pasifika is also a group that's identified why then if you know that this is a group that's not claiming can't we at least name them like the other groups? And also why again—there must be data because I'm pretty certain that would show who is claiming who is not claiming what sorts of accidents and in what industries are they occurring. It would be a good indication because as Michael Woodhouse said especially within the construction industry and forestry we know who are in those. Most of the time when you have to fill in a form you have to put down your sex your age and your ethnicity so I'm pretty certain we should have a lot of that data floating around.But again I think this is another bill that is again just taking up time—another feel-good factor and also a way to include a little bit of our diversity and ethnicity without naming all of New Zealand but just Māori. I'm very upset that I couldn't even get a mention of disparity as a woman in this bill. So ACT cannot support the bill in the way it is formed. We think again it's a well-meaning bill but when you put one group of people over the top of another I think it is totally unfair. Thank you Mr Speaker."