Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 17 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:7684. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4.  
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for ACC 
: Does he stand by his statement: “this Government is committed to the core concept of ACC being a 24/7 no-fault insurer for New Zealanders at work at play and on the road.”? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 Despite the fact that this Government inherited the accident compensation scheme in a financial mess yes. The annual accounts signed by Maryan Street— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the Minister to resume his seat. If the member looks at the question he has just been asked he will see it was very simple. It did not ask why he stood by his statement; it just asked: “Does he stand by his statement …”. I do not think the House needs all that. Could the Minister answer the question. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The fact is yes but it is also true that the previous Government left this Government— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question did not ask why. If the member had wanted an explanation he could have asked why in his question. It is a question on notice. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: So we have to— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am on my feet. The question on notice simply asks the Minister: “Does he stand by his statement …”. I think the Minister has answered “Yes”. 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Minister now agree that proposed increases in motorcycle levies are unfair and undermine the no-fault principle behind the accident compensation scheme? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Accident compensation has long been established on different risk ratings for different groups. For instance in the work account there are over 400 distinct classifications. All employers do not pay the same but rather pay a different risk rating. In respect of the motor vehicle account it has long been the practice that there are different levies based on the different risk rating of different vehicles. The fact is that there has been a substantial increase in the number of motorcycle accidents and the pity is that for the 9 years of the last Labour Government the number of motorcycle accidents increased every year and Labour did nothing. 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Minister regret exaggerating the accident compensation scheme’s woes and does he expect gratitude from motorcyclists when he puts up their levies by a lesser amount? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There has been no need to exaggerate the woes of the scheme because the numbers speak for themselves: a $2.4 billion loss in the annual report signed by Maryan Street and a $4.8 billion loss audited by the Auditor-General for the last year. I think— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Nobody believes that! 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Mr Goff says he does not believe it. I ask the member why Maryan Street signed the annual audited accounts saying the scheme lost $2.4 billion. 
Hon David Parker 
: Which other group will the Minister’s Government target next? For example has he dropped his plan to charge drivers of older cars higher levies than drivers of newer cars? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: This Government has a very sensible plan to get the accident compensation scheme back to financial sustainability. That will have to involve some levy increases. It will also involve pulling back on some of the entitlements that the previous Government provided. I am confident with the changes this Government is advancing to the accident compensation scheme that we can make some savings and that the scale of the increases proposed by the Accident Compensation Corporation board will not need to be advanced.