Did you know that in the 2008 period ACC collected $437 million for the motor vehicle account, and paid out $341 million? Yet ACC only put forward the question for consultation of how much everyone’s levies should be increased by. ACC had already decided on the conclusion, and the submission process was structured in such a way that supportive submissions were sought. To be honest, even if there had been no submission process the outcome is likely to have been unchanged. It was really just a formality.
http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/stati...ount/IS0800143
Considering ACC had around a $96 million surplus in the motor vehicle account, I ask you, would a reasonable motorist support increasing the levies for all motor vehicle account users? Does an increase in levies, for an account that has an operating surplus, really in the interest of AA members?
Note that $341 million is the sum of all claims *involving* motor vehicles, even if a motor vehicle was not at fault. Obviously because ACC is a no-fault system. As a result, you’ll see non-motorists included in those figures. For example, cyclists made up around $12.5 million. So if a cyclist hit a stationary car, injury the driver, then that gets included. That’s why it is important to remember when looking at figures from ACC to bear in mind they have been collected from the context of compensation, and not that of insurance (where you have to take the view of one party being at fault).
I would not concur that both major parties are in favour of full funding, especially Labour at this point in time. Let me direct your attention to the parliamentary Hansards:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/De...-Ministers.htm
Hon David Cunliffe made these comments to Hon Bill English:
“Can he confirm that in the last year the accident compensation scheme made a cash surplus of around $2 billion, and that the only reason he is able to make the trumped-up claim of a crisis is, firstly, because the new chairman has marching orders to read every number according to the most conservative assumptions, and, secondly, because it is an ideological agenda of this Government to create a crisis in order to prepare the Accident Compensation Corporation for sale?”
David Cunliffe goes on to ask if the Government supports pre-funding superannuation. Should you need to pay for your retirement in the year of your birth?
We don’t pre-fund roading, or any other system within Government. Why should ACC be a special case?
The famous PWC report also came to the conclusion the ACC was not in “trouble”. It did note that forward liability under the “current accounting” principles. The issue is strictly a paper affair.
You mention the special case of inter-generational equity; in the long term (approximately one generation), the ongoing cost of ACC will be the same with or without pre-funding. As I said, we don’t pre-fund any other area of Government spending. If you were to adopt the view of inter-generational equity, then you would need to change the entire basis of Government revenue collection. There is no reason for ACC to be a special case.
When Woodhouse originally wrote his report he did an excellent job. But one area he did not provide sufficient information on was how large the reserve fund should be. This resulted in the events in the mid-80’s and mid-90’s that you have noted, where the reserve was allowed to run down. The size of the reserve needs to be large enough to survive a disaster or a generational recession. Different Governments had different views on the size of the reserve, which resulted in the roller coaster. It was by no means an indication that the system was broken. I have not researched this area personally, but I would think a reserve of around 24 months should be enough to cover most major disasters, and significant recessions.
And thank you, I would like to take up the opportunity to meet with Mike Noon after his return from his holidays during one of his visits to Auckland.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by yachtie10
fuck you! Automobile advocates only when It doesnt clash with your own agendas.
Bookmarks