WTF National privatising ACC?

[Mike748]

Deep!! Ocean!! Geddit??? Priceless.



You'll find a lot of large (multi-national) companies are like this too. Long-term employees who no-one would dare to question decide what they will and wont do. Government agencies are all about spending their budgets so they get more next time, so they are overstaffed. Senior management of these Depts are more interested in covering their arses and feathering their own nests.

I agree as I've witnessed both. It just pisses me off that there is a general perception that public assets and services can only be run efficiently by private companies.
Private companies are only successful if they employ the right people, so why can't public departments be run by more commercially minded people?

[Max Preload]

I wasn't happy last time National were in and privatised ACC - all the drama of finding another provider....and it was all on their terms,not ours.Like compulsory 3rd party it will be a feeding trough for insurance companies.

You didn't have to change from ACC when it was changed to allow you to choose your provider. You simply had the choice.

I don't understand why we must sell assets/privatise sectors etc to make them effective and efficient.
Why can't the goverment get the right people in to shake things up, that way savings or profits can benefit us and not going offshore.
A private organisation won't step in to save us money, they will generally look to increase profits by reducing costs.

Nobody is talking about selling it. Or privatising it. They're talking about opening it up to competition. I wish someone could explain to me how that is not a good thing.

[geoffm]

I agree as I've witnessed both. It just pisses me off that there is a general perception that public assets and services can only be run efficiently by private companies.
Private companies are only successful if they employ the right people, so why can't public departments be run by more commercially minded people?

Because the culture of government departments doesn't suit self motivated and driven people, and commercially minded people also hate pointless red tape and interference from political hacks that get appointed to these departments.

[trustme]

Commercial realities are not always politically acceptable, the edges get very blurred at times
Look at Air NZ & its charter flights to Iraq for the Aussie govt
Commercial decisions were overridden because of politics.

[Hitcher]

Are they nuts? Was going ta vote for them but definitely won't if they are going to do this. Didn't work last time. Cost me big time as a self-employed last time. Opens the way for the US sueing culture. Encourages discrimiation in work places based on health risks. Will cause injuried to be forced back into work earlier. Bugger that for a joke.
Who's bright idea in Nat was this?

I was self-employed during the last National administration, and have a different recollection entirely. My ACC fees almost doubled once Labour "nationalised" ACC. It didn't open the way last time for a "US sueing" culture, as the fundamental tenet of no-fault coverage was enshrined. Nobody is talking about changing that.

[Ocean1]

Jee I always wondered why the Americans where so responsible Where's that Tui

You have a problem with people paying for their own lifestyle choices?

Because the culture of government departments doesn't suit self motivated and driven people, and commercially minded people also hate pointless red tape and interference from political hacks that get appointed to these departments.

Some work well. Health professionals are generally dedicated and effective, in spite of impressions engendered by semi-regular press beat-ups. It's the bureaucratic entities who's brief amounts to a provider-generated market that inevitably spectacularly fail to supply any value.

[Motu]

So obviously different self employed people had different experiences under the last privatisasion of ACC - same will happen this time too.

[Ocean1]

the fundamental tenet of no-fault coverage was enshrined. Nobody is talking about changing that.

I am.

I was self-employed during the last National administration, and have a different recollection entirely. My ACC fees almost doubled once Labour "nationalised" ACC.

Ditto. IIRC I get to pay ACC three times in my various guises as employer, employee and business entity. Think it amounted to around $5K last year.

[RiderInBlack]

You have a problem with people paying for their own lifestyle choices?

No but do not buy into ya theory that this will some how make them more responsible for their own actions as one can see that this has not made people in America more responsible. But it has cause them to blam others more for what happens to them because sueing is big money.

[Mully]

Some work well. Health professionals are generally dedicated and effective, in spite of impressions engendered by semi-regular press beat-ups. It's the bureaucratic entities who's brief amounts to a provider-generated market that inevitably spectacularly fail to supply any value.

I concur, health professionals in NZ are almost certainly world class (We'll ignore the taping the old woman's mouth for a while) but the health departments are hugely inefficient because the management have no-one to directly answer to.

I think there is a case to investigate making the administration of health services private, funded from central government. *Note, I said the admin, not the actual medical care*

[Ocean1]

No but do not buy into ya theory that this will some how make them more responsible for their own actions as one can see that this has not made people in America more responsible. But it has cause them to blam others more for what happens to them because sueing is big money.

Indeed, identical health procedures cost more in the US than they do here in spite of a supposed free market. The fact is it's not really a free market there either. As for responsibility? If an individual is willing and able to support the cost (whatever they may be) of his choices then what business is his behaviour to anyone else?

I concur, health professionals in NZ are almost certainly world class (We'll ignore the taping the old woman's mouth for a while) but the health departments are hugely inefficient because the management have no-one to directly answer to.

I think there is a case to investigate making the administration of health services private, funded from central government. *Note, I said the admin, not the actual medical care*

If you want to make the costs of healthcare transparent then make the rules of entitlement to access simple and abundantly clear. The bullshit starts when politicians tweak the rules in response to "unfair" cases or noise from the multitude of narrow-focus lobyists in the industry.

[Usarka]

My son broke his arm snowboarding in the US and it cost $60,000 US. He was in hospital overnight.
ACC may not be the best way to go, as it is a bureaucracy and all that it entails, but the options can be extremely brutal to the average person. Dealing with an insurance company, which is PURELY PROFIT DRIVEN makes ACC look like a cakewalk, trust me...

I've had nothing but good experiences claiming on my southern cross.

Yet nothing but problems with those dickfucks at acc, at least as soon as it looks like costing more than 10 physio visits.....

hmmmm.....

[Headbanger]

I concur, health professionals in NZ are almost certainly world class

Nothing world class about PotLuck Wanganui.

[Mully]

Nothing world class about PotLuck Wanganui.

Is that the staff themselves or the constraints in which they are working (understaffed, etc)??

[MacD]

So obviously different self employed people had different experiences under the last privatisasion of ACC - same will happen this time too.

It is also worth remembering that motorcyclists' accident costs on the Motor Vehicle Account are subsidised by other road users at present. I can't see private providers being willing to continue this, and competition for the lower risk customers (car drivers) will force ACC to follow suit.

Even Price Waterhouse Coopers considers the current ACC system to be a good system overall. For example:

The ACC employer contribution rate as a proportion of wages is substantially lower (0.78% at June 2007) than in comparable Australian workers compensation schemes (NSW 1.86%, Victoria 1.38%, Australian average 2%). The overall cost of ACC is quite low even after adjustment for coverage (eg common law access) and other known differences, and is also low relative to other international systems (Canada average 2%).

ACC motor vehicle contribution levels are also significantly lower than all Australian states.

This is not the same as saying all individual's experiences with ACC are good, but there are a lot of complaints on this site about private vehicle (property) insurance. Why would private injury (personal) insurance be any different?

Like many things in life, be careful what you wish for!