First, manufacture a crisis…

Written By: - Date published: 9:00 am, October 12th, 2009 - 43 comments
Categories: ACC, privatisation - Tags:

acc-undermine-200The first thing you need to understand is ACC is not spending more money than it is taking in through levies. It is not going bust. It is not ‘making a loss’ despite what Nick Smith writes and the media faithfully repeats, but, then, they got taken in by this same trick six months ago.

What is happening is that ACC is building up a huge amount of assets, savings. These savings are to pay for the entire future cost of claims that are being made now and that is turning out to be a more difficult process than expected. Here’s ACC’s very good explanation:

Until 1999, ACC operated under a ‘pay-as-you-go’ basis, collecting only enough levies each year to cover the cost of claims for that particular year. In 1999 the Government decided to change ACC from ‘pay-as-you-go’ to a ‘fully funded’ way of operating. That means we now collect enough money during each levy year to cover the full lifetime costs of every claim that occurs in that year.

Some people who are injured need ACC’s help for 30 years or more, so significant reserves must be built up to fund these future costs. This money is invested and earns interest that helps pay the cost of claims.

This fully funded model is fairer for levy payers. Future generations of levy payers won’t be paying for injuries that happened years before as the cost of those claims will already have been collected.

In the future, being fully-funded will mean ACC levies will be lower than they otherwise would be. For now, they are higher because as ACC is transitioning from ‘pay as you go’ to fully funded’ it needs to build up a pool of billions to cover the future costs of current claims and its assets are less at the moment, as ACC explains:

The Scheme’s claim liability (the future cost of existing claims) now stands at $23.8 billion against current net assets (the money ACC has ‘in the bank’ to cover those future costs) of $11 billion.

But that’s basically just a book-keeping/cost-spreading exercise (most of ACC’s assets are actually government bonds, so the government (Treasury) owes itself (ACC) money).

ACC isn’t losing money. Its revenues were $4.5 billion – $1.5 billion more than it spent on claims this year. $500 million of that extra is operating costs, the other $1 billion was added to ACC’s investments but changes to predictions of the future costs of current claims pushed out that target even further – by $5.7 billion. So, getting to being fully funded is $4.8 billion further away than it was before.

There’s no actual crisis. Despite Nick Smith’s hysterics over ‘increased costs’, the cost of new claims isn’t rising (steady at $1.7 billion for the last 2 years). ACC is making enough money. The ‘crisis’ is just modelling changes for a bookkeeping exercise that has no effect other than to make levies higher now so they won’t have to be as high later.

It’s not the end of the world. ACC isn’t broken.

Now, it is going to be harder to complete the move to being fully funded by 2014, which is the Government’s target, without increases to levies. Pretty simple solution to that, push back the date. Labour was going to move the date back to 2019 and the Government has just announced it will adopt that idea. Take ten years to move to fully funded rather than doing it in five. It makes no real difference except there’s no need for big levy hikes.

That hasn’t stopped all the amateur dramatics from Nick Smith. He was on RNZ this morning still confusing the issue by claiming that the rising target to being fully funded is due to entitlements. He made no attempt to explain to people that ACC is safe and functioning perfectly well, fully funded or not. But, if he did that he wouldn’t get to paint ACC as mired in crisis. And, if he couldn’t create a false air of crisis, how would he soften the public up for privatisation?

43 comments on “First, manufacture a crisis…”

  1. Why is it that left Governments are cautious, financially prudent and take a long term view and the right are reckless, short sighted and either unbelievably stupid or cynical in the extreme in the way they seek to undermine public institutions.

    Their hatred of anything collective borders on the psychopathic.

    Interesting that the Nats refused leave to David Parker to introduce Parker’s member’s bill titled Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Change of Date for Full Funding) Amendment Bill earlier in the year.

    This bill would have extended the time required for full funding of ACC liabilities to 2019, just as Smith is proposing today to do.

  2. toad 2

    micky, if they had allowed Parker’s bill to be introduced and passed, they wouldn’t have a crisis.

    I’ve never really got the bit about fully funding future entitlements on current claims anyway. What was wrong with pay-as-you-go?

    I guess full funding gives predictability over levies, but I wouldn’t have thought levies would fluctuate wildly from year to year in any case.

  3. ghostwhowalksnz 3

    Yet when Labour introduced a measure of ‘pre funding ‘ for super National called a halt to that within months of coming into office. This means that super too will face a funding ‘crisis’ . I can imagine the answer to that will be cut the entitlements as well

  4. ben 4

    Marty, precisely because you are saying there is no crisis, and because it is in your interest to do so (Labour is wearing the political cost of this fiasco) I will proceed by assuming there is a major problem. I agree the $4.8 billion is the product of accounting decisions about timing of expenses – but that doesa not mean there is no problem.

    It would be nice if you would explain what allows you to tell the difference bewteen a $4.8 billion deficit that is not a product of fundamental problems, and a $4.8 billion deficit that is. Based on the level of argument at the The Standard, I believe the main criteria for that decision would be the colour of the logo of the political party most responsible. Which, I have to say, does not give me confidence.

    ACC’s fundamentals look dodgy. Nobody disputes entitlements under ACC have increased very substantially over the last few years. Nobody disputes those entitlements have increased faster than inflation and that they have increased faster than increases in fees collected. So the question is why shouldn’t we think that $4.8 billion – rougly 3% of GDP, an enormous number for one organisation to inflict on people – isn’t something to be worried about?

    What is truly absurd about all this is that the main effect of this deficit will be to substantially increase the cost of driving a motor vehicle and to hire a worker. Which has almost nothing to do with the cause of the deficit in the first place.

    • snoozer 4.1

      Whoo, someone got up on the wrong side of bed.

      ACC is taking in more money than it is spending. It accumulated a further billion dollars of assets this past year. The only problem is that revisions to the predicted futures costs of existing claims have risen faster. So what? Just take longer to go to fully funded.

      The whole idea of going to fully funded is to spread the cost of claims fairly over generations. If in doing that we need to put an unfair amount of cost on people right now as we both fully fund and pay past costs, well that’s not fair. Let’s just take our time instead and spread the transition cost over a longer time frame.

      • ieuan 4.1.1

        snoozer, such well balanced common sense has no place in politics.

        I do think Labour probably went too far in the entitlements ACC covers and some of this could be pulled back to help reduce the cost.

        However there is too much political capital to be made here by National by scaremongering about increases in levies for them not to milk this for all it is worth. Sad really.

        • Daveo 4.1.1.1

          What makes you think Labour went ‘too far’ in entitlements? That argument is reliant on accepting Nick Smith’s figures, which we all know are based on lies.

          • ieuan 4.1.1.1.1

            Well there was the free provision of physio that resulted in an explosion of physio providers.

            ACC is a good scheme but there is a fine balance between providing free medical care for those that need it and providing free care and the system being abused.

            I think there should be no such thing as ‘free’ with even small charges to remind people that there is a cost and someone has to pay.

            • Sean 4.1.1.1.1.1

              Exactly right ieuan. Most people who read up a little on the ACC situation will know that the scheme is not insolvent, nor any other extreme claims that are being made. However, there is an unbelievable rorting of the system going on and that is because people think that using the system is free. Bring in small charges for some of the services and you might bring some balance back into the system.

            • Pascal's bookie 4.1.1.1.1.2

              So who’s rorting? Providers or consumers? I’d say the former primarily, so targetting the latter is a mugs game. Make the charge high enough to deter, and some people won’t get treated when they should.

              Why not random audits with providers caught rorting being done for fraud?

  5. tsmithfield 5

    Remember Labour promised to cut ACC levies prior to the last election.

    What was that all about?

    • snoozer 5.1

      they were going to push out the fully-funded date so, under the costings at the time, they would have been able to cut levies.

  6. Victor 6

    The problem is our inability as a country to have a reasoned conversation about these long-term issues. The hsyteria over ACC is pathetic.

    The ACC Annual Report is interesting reading. Their 17 year return is 9.97%, their NZ equity return is 12.45%. Much better than the Super Fund. There is no crisis, just provide a capital injection, which the government could do by injecting government bonds into ACC. No big deal. Their returns will cover the cost (clearly they have an impressive investment management team). And the amounts we are talking about are trivial relative to the global financial crisis, and what the UK or US governments have injected into banks and insurance companies.

    Nick Smith is hysterical about ACC. Well, what is the fully funded cost of the guarantees on the finance companies, including South Canterbury Finance? But hang on, those are the National Party’s mates aren’t they?

  7. Lew 7

    Marty, this is an excellent analysis. Thank you.

    What interests me is how ACC and the minister are trying to pass off two separate things as one: the changes to sexual abuse claim criteria and the overall restriction of entitlements. The SCU changes are framed as clinical best practice — the argument that they’re a cost-cutting measure has been strenuously denied — and yet they’re encapsulated within an overall ‘we must cut costs and this is how’ narrative by redefining ‘clinical best practice’ to a standard which just happens to substantially cut patient entitlements. Rationally, it’s a matter of figuring out which of these imperatives is the stronger: improve the standard of care and adhere to clinical best practice, or save money.

    Given that the strategy is to undermine public confidence in the ACC system to build public support for a (gradual) privatisation endgame, I don’t think it’s rocket science to figure out.

    L

    • George D 7.1

      This is beyond depressing.

      The only consolation is that National are making themselves a lot of enemies very quickly, so they might not get away with what they want.

      • Lew 7.1.1

        George,

        Well, yes and no. Depends on what you consider that they want. They want to privatise ACC in order to get it off the books and shore up the insurance industry, but I think electoral success is going to be the priority, and any programme of privatisation only get underway once a second term is in the bag, and a new and stronger mandate for change has been achieved.

        As far as I see, the prime danger for them is in moving too quickly or too soon, resulting in an abortive privatisation attempt, as last time. This is why the building of public intolerance of the ACC system is critical to the strategy. Deny enough patients cover, starve the bureaucracy to depress standards of service, and massage the books to make it look like they’re dysfunctional and insolvent as well as stingy and incompetent, get the electorate hating ACC hard enough, and they’ll beg the government to sell it to insurers for a song.

        For this to work for the government, it’s critical that the impetus for these changes comes from within the operational hierarchy of ACC, rather than the ministerial level. This puts opponents to the changes — such as the NZAP — in an invidious position of having to support ACC in the abstract, while attacking its operational decisions. ACC’s opponents need to fight the changes at the political and ministerial level, because by criticising ACC they may end up winning battles while endangering the war. Nick Smith’s ability to stand up in the house and say ‘it’s an operational matter’ is a powerful tool in turning privatisation’s opponents against their own cause. All criticism of ACC must be crystal clear: we do not oppose the system, we oppose the government who has set it up to fail.

        L

  8. Brett 8

    I will be a happy man when reintroduce competition.
    Acc levies ups my tax rate by around 10%

    • Daveo 8.1

      Brett, all the independent evidence says introducing private competitors would make accident compensation more expensive.

    • Draco T Bastard 8.2

      Right, so you think that introducing competition to replace the best and cheapest form of accident compensation in the world will make you better off?

      Just another delusional RWNJ.

      Clue: Competition is inherently more expensive.

  9. randal 9

    so its okay for geeks to do themselves in on the rugby field and have a few months off but not for the workers. also I was not impressed by red hootons support of lax safety standards in industry as a tradeoff for no tort law on rnz this morning.

  10. HitchensFan 10

    Let’s pray you don’t need accident insurance cover in your future then. Do you think private insurance companies have any incentive to pay out on your claim? Good luck in fighting them in the Courts, hope you’ve got lots of spare cash for paying your lawyer……

    • Craig Glen Eden 10.1

      Exactly HF I can tell you as a business owner there is no way I would go with the private insurer.For one when the private insurer decides that they are not going to pay out they create huge barriers which leaves the employee stranded and the employer not being able to do anything or risk a court case with the Insurer.

      While ACC is not perfect it actually works very well. If you wondered who funded Nationals campaign out side of the trucking lobby and Closed Brethern take a good look who would benefit out of this hysteria that Key and Smith are creating.

  11. Brett 11

    Daveo

    Back in 1990’s,when the introduced the option of getting private cover the cost compared to ACC was about 60% cheaper.
    I remember the Sallies begging Clarke and Cullen not to change it back to a government monopoly as they were saving so much money on their premiums.
    No offence Daveo, but I struggle to believe this independent evidence.

    • IrishBill 11.1

      And I remember BP oil pointing out during the inquiry in ’99 that nobody but the insurance companies would win unless it was changed back. I also remember HIH collapsing not long after the scheme was renationalised. Before that they had something like 40% of workplace cover in NZ. If we hadn’t changed by then that would have been a disaster for hundred if not thousands of workers and their employers.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 11.2

      They didnt have a chance to find out what their claims service would be like.
      Tell your wife you have found the cheapest home and contents around and see the reaction
      Plus that system only lasted a year so once you signed up they would hit you with big increases . Sound familiar

    • Craig Glen Eden 11.3

      So you don’t believe the independent advice but you believe Key and Smith?

      Ok Brett, good on ya mate!

    • snoozer 11.4

      Brett – ACC is 10% of your tax?

      I just did the formula, if 10% of your tax is the ACC levy (1.511 cents in the dollar) it means your income is $16K a year and you’re only paying $240 a year on your ACC, not too shabby for a no-fault insurance policy covering medical costs and income.

  12. jen 12

    Brett, not only would privatising increase the cost but there is a risk that if/when things get tough for them, such insurance companies just up and leave, go into liquidation or whatever leaving the insured person without cover. I heard of at least one instance of this relating to the National Govts previous experiment with private providers. Even if there was a remedy for this person, he certainly didn’t know what it was, had no claim against ACC for that period and was left permanently injured and without compensation.

  13. Mach1 13

    My ACC levy, Utility network construction and maintenance services $2.01.

    Now, if Brett can point me to a cheaper option I’m all ears.

  14. George D 14

    National takes money from the insurance industry, and promises them results. They’re engaged in corruption of a far worse type than Field ever was involved in.

  15. HitchensFan 15

    I went to a conference on the future of ACC earlier in the year, thinking it would be a celebration of the Woodhouse principles and a discussion of where things could be improved, without compromising the fundamental social contract underlying the scheme. I left after half a day in disgust because it was filled with representatives of the insurance industry drooling about how much money privatisation was going to make their companies. It was just downright sickening.

  16. Brett 16

    Sorry must have got that wrong.
    One year which wasn’t particularly good, I paid $2000 dollars in ACC premiums on a gross income of $20k.
    You are obviously more of a maths whiz than me, so I will let you work that one out.
    I can tell you know getting hit with that sort of premium really hurts especially when you don’t get a choice also getting threatened with debt collection if you can’t pay really sucks.

  17. Which planet are you currently residing on?

  18. Swampy 18

    You claim “the media got taken in by the same trick six months ago”. The only reference I can find dated back six months is this one:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10559739

    The facts are plain: the shortfall in the earners’ account is not some sort of creative accounting invention as you seem to imply. That shortfall actually does exist.

    • BLiP 18.1

      In that case the same applies to anyone who has a mortgage. Your logic is flawed. So is National Ltd®’s

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Government must apologise over rebuild debacle
    The Prime Minister owes the public of Otago and Southland an apology and then he must come up with an unredacted copy of the business case for the Dunedin hospital rebuild, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David Clark. "For too long the interests of ...
    1 day ago
  • Government caves to multi-national tax avoiders in the shadows
    News that the Government has secretly caved in to the demands of multi-national tax avoiders come as no surprise, but will disappoint Kiwi taxpayers, says Labour’s spokesman for Revenue Michael Wood.   “It has been revealed that a United States ...
    2 days ago
  • Cheaper to stay at The Langham than emergency housing motels
    Labour’s comprehensive plan to fix the housing crisis and ensure there’s enough state housing, means we won’t be paying through the nose for emergency accommodation like the current Government has to, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni. “National has ...
    2 days ago
  • Government must come clean on water
      News that the National Government is secretly working behind closed doors on its own water charging schemes shows their utter hypocrisy on this issue, says Labour’s water spokesperson David Parker.  “They have been carping on about Labour’s plan for ...
    2 days ago
  • Government pays twice the price for emergency housing motels – with two more on the way
    Under Labour’s plan to build at least 1000 state houses each year, New Zealand wouldn’t be paying more than double the valuations for motels to house Kiwis needing emergency housing, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni. “Under questioning today, ...
    3 days ago
  • HAM shows country needs Labour on housing
    The latest Housing Affordability Measure report shows affordability dramatically worsening for Auckland first home buyers, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    3 days ago
  • Canterbury kids get more support for mental health
    Children in Canterbury and Kaikoura will get dedicated mental health support to help them overcome the trauma of the earthquakes, says the Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern. “We’ll fund an extra eighty mental health professionals for the next three ...
    3 days ago
  • Statement on Julie Bishop’s comments
    It is highly regrettable that the Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has chosen to make false claims about the New Zealand Labour Party. I have been utterly transparent about this situation. I stand by my statements this morning that I ...
    4 days ago
  • Labour stands with Pike families
    A Labour Government will stand with the families of Pike River and reaffirm its commitment to safe workplaces by ensuring there will be a Minister responsible for Pike River, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern. “The Pike River disaster ...
    4 days ago
  • Yes to Sallies – Labour will build more state houses
    The Salvation Army’s latest report ‘Taking Stock’ shows why New Zealand needs a Labour-led Government committed to a massive house building programme, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. “When the Sallies say the country needs 2000 extra state houses a ...
    4 days ago
  • New Zealanders deserve better than scaremongering over water
    New Zealanders need to hear from National about how they will fund the clean-up of our rivers and lakes for future generations. Instead, National has broadened its scare-mongering, says Labour’s Water spokesperson David Parker. ...
    5 days ago
  • School Leavers’ Toolkit to equip young people for adult life
    Labour will give school leavers the practical skills and knowledge they need for adult life with a new School Leavers’ Toolkit, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern. “Our teachers and schools do a great job of teaching our children ...
    5 days ago
  • Pay equity to be a priority for Labour
      Labour will make sure that the country’s mental health workers are a priority when it comes to pay equity negotiations, says the Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern.  “It is very important for me to right the wrong created ...
    1 week ago
  • Labour’s positive education plan
    Today’s announcement on learning support is more tinkering and proof that only a Labour Government will deliver the resources that schools and parents are crying out for, says Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins.  “We have a positive vision for a ...
    1 week ago
  • Pike footage raises questions over government’s actions
    The Government’s seeming determination to turn a blind eye to new questions about what happened at Pike River Mine is troubling, says Labour’s West Coast-Tasman MP Damien O’Connor. ...
    1 week ago
  • Solution to rent rises lies in building houses and stopping speculators
    The spread of rental increases from the big cities to the surrounding regions shows why we need to get on top of the housing shortage build homes our families can afford, and lock out the speculators, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson ...
    1 week ago
  • Clean rivers don’t cost $18 a cabbage
    National is falling into a bad pattern of promising the world and not saying how they will fund it, says Labour’s Water spokesperson David Parker. ...
    1 week ago
  • Time for honest answer on transport funding
    National needs to explain how they will fund the $6 billion funding gap in their 10-year Auckland transport plan, says Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    1 week ago
  • Time for true numbers on overseas speculators
    It’s time for the Government to give accurate figures on the number of houses being bought by overseas speculators, says Labour’s Land Information spokesperson Raymond Huo. ...
    1 week ago
  • Fair and sustainable trade: A Green Party vision for New Zealand’s trading relationships
    Trade is a cornerstone of the New Zealand economy. It provides us with the things we want and need, and enables us to pay for those with exports that generate business opportunities and jobs. However, it should be recognised that ...
    GreensBy Barry Coates
    1 week ago
  • Clean rivers for future generations
    Labour will lead a nationwide effort to restore our rivers and lakes to a clean, swimmable state, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern. ...
    1 week ago
  • New Zealand really can do better on health
    Labour’s commitment to affordable access to high quality healthcare will provide a better service for New Zealanders than the current Health Minister, who will not apologise for statements that he made that wrongly criticised hard-working staff in the Southern DHB’s ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour’s plan the answer to motorway chaos
    Labour’s plan to build a light rail network and improve heavy rail and bus services across Auckland is the only answer to the kind of motorway congestion Aucklanders endured this morning, says Labour Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour to build rail to Auckland Airport
    A world class city needs a rail connection from the CBD to its international airport – that’s why Labour will build light rail to Auckland Airport as a priority, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern.  “Let’s get Auckland moving ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Is pay equity just too hard for this Govt?
    You are hard pressed these days to find someone that openly admits their misogyny, that men should still be paid more than women. Politicians proclaim that they want to see women paid more, but do their actions back it up? ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour’s commitment to our Rainbow nation
    The Labour Party has reaffirmed its commitment to New Zealand’s rainbow community with its 2017 Rainbow policy, featuring the goal to end HIV in New Zealand by 2025. Grant Robertson says Labour continues a long and proud tradition of advocating ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour’s vision for Auckland more than reheated roads
    Labour is more ambitious for Auckland than the reheated set of transport projects proposed by National, says Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Waiting urology patients are the tip of the iceberg
    The 10 patients waiting for urology surgery at Dunedin Hospital are just the tip of the iceberg, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David Clark.  "Hundreds of patients are waiting for follow-up appointments, but they are not deemed serious enough to be ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Maori Landowners Misled by Maori Party
    Māori landowners are being misled by Government hui being held throughout the country promoting the troubled Māori Land Service (MLS), which underpins the Crown’s unpopular Ture Whenua reforms, says Labour’s Ikaroa-Rāwhiti MP Meka Whaitiri. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government’s Johnny-come-lately approach to multinational tax won’t wash
    It’s a case of baby steps for a Government that still allows multinational companies to avoid paying their fair share of tax, says Labour’s Revenue spokesperson Michael Wood. “After nine years in government, five years after the issue of multinational ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Auckland congestion up there with the world’s worst
    Traffic congestion is costing Auckland up to $2 billion in lost productivity according to the latest report from the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research, says Labour’s Transport spokesperson Michael Wood.  “This is a disaster and underlines the need for ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Experience in Youth Parliament 2016
    Being a Member of Youth Parliament was an unexpected, but fabulous opportunity for me. It provided me a way to connect with other young people who have some things in common, and to learn what it is like to be ...
    GreensBy NZ Green Party
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour backs renters’ call for warm, healthy homes
    80 per cent of renters wish their home was warmer and drier, and that’s what Labour will deliver, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • We can – and must – do better for Kiwi jobs
    Labour has the plan to get more young New Zealanders into jobs and tackle concerns raised in the latest statistics which show an extra 3000 young Kiwis are neither earning or learning compared to the same time last year, says ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Statement from Jacinda Ardern, Leader of the New Zealand Labour Party
    I want to start by giving my thanks to Andrew. His announcement today and the situation we have found ourselves in is not what anyone expected or wanted In my time working with Andrew I know one thing to be ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Better homes for Maori under Labour
    Labour’s vision is that Māori enjoy an equal playing field and have the same home ownership opportunities as non-Māori, says Labour’s Māori Development spokesperson Kelvin Davis. “Today Labour is proud to announce a detailed Māori housing policy from South Auckland’s ...
    3 weeks ago

%d bloggers like this: