Source: Radio New Zealand
Minister for Social Development Louise Upston. RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Lawyers and health professionals are urging the government to slow down a law change, making it legal to claw back welfare supports once someone has been backpaid for an ACC claim.
The coalition, with Labour’s support, is moving to quickly pass amendment legislation to align the law with long-standing policy at the Ministry of Social Development (MSD).
It comes after a significant High Court ruling made it clear MSD was breaking the law in clawing back payments for supplementary supports like the winter energy payment once someone had received ACC backpay.
The legislation is being considered by MPs for just one week before returning to the House to be read a second time.
Interested groups made verbal submissions to MPs during the Select Committee this morning.
‘Unfair and unjust’ – lawyers
Community Law Centres Aotearoa (CLMA) acted as an intervener in the High Court case against MSD and today argued the bill was “unfair and unjust” and should be “rejected in its entirety”.
“It’s really important to challenge any perception that this bill is about preventing double-dipping or treating beneficiaries in different categories fairly, because a person who’s fought for years to get their ACC and requires assistance in the meantime is not in the same position as somebody who received ACC when they were entitled to it.
“So, in our submission, the bill is not about ensuring fairness, it actually perpetuates unfairness,” barrister Jack Wass said.
CLMA’s law reform coordinator Rupert O’Brien said the organisation took particular issue with the retrospective nature of the law change.
“This bill really does present a genuine threat to the rule of law. It overhauls the High Court’s legislative interpreting role and we don’t think that going back in time in this retrospective way is appropriate in the circumstances.
“We recommend that if the bill is to pass, that the retrospective nature of it is removed. If it is going to be retrospective in some nature, we recommend that the Parliament consider the importance of the savings clause… that prevents this bill from affecting active litigants in the appeals authority and the high court.”
O’Brien also highlighted the law change would unfairly impact those who had applied for a sensitive claim as a result of suffering state abuse as children.
He suggested there be a carve-out to accommodate them.
“We recommend that the select committee and Parliament consider excusing those people from having to repay these debts. It’s double punishment for those people.”
The New Zealand Law Society’s Gareth Richards submitted any retrospective law change that had carried detrimental impacts, in this case putting people into debt, was uncommon and required a proper inquiry.
Law change will affect new mothers with birth injuries – health professional
Pelvic health specialist Dr Melissa Davidson told MPs the urgent speed at which the bill was progressing didn’t leave enough time to consider its full impact, particularly on women with maternal birth injuries.
“When the legislation moves faster than understanding the harm does not fall equally, it falls on those least able to absorb it, Dr Davidson said.
“In the maternal birth injury space, there are systematic failures occurring daily. ACC claims have been declined or taken many months to be accepted through no fault of the woman themselves and the delays are often caused by ACC processes and health system failures, not by missing eligibility.”
Dr Davidson said new, injured mothers would not seek the help they needed if they had to pay it back.
“In New Zealand, women put their families first and themselves last. When supplementary assistance is provided, it’s meant to cover essential costs, but the reality of living with a birth injury includes far more than just water rates, power, food.
“It also includes treatment co-payments for the injury to get treatment for recovery, transport to and from appointments, childcare to attend those appointments if they can’t bring the baby and basic medical resources such as continence, products and pads, scar management, supplies and equipment.
“They face higher living costs while living on reduced incomes. We’re then asking them to repay costs that they reasonably believe are covered and it places them under additional psychological, physiological, physiology, physical and financial stress, again, through no fault of their own.”
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
