privatising ACC - Page 2

BloodDonor · 4th July 2008, 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz

ACC is a monopoly, they earn far greater than they pay out, hence why competition should reduce the levies paid by businesses or at the least provide lower levies to those companies with lower rates of workplace injury.
As it stands business A and B are in the same industry, business A has had no workplace injuries, business B has many, they both pay equal levies per employee performing the same function.

The benefit I can see is lower levies for those companies who maintain safe work environments, whether that is via training or other means. The less people injured the better imo, injuries cost the tax payer.

i see what youre saying, but in the states, and elsewhere, insurance companies try to weasel out of paying, thus maximising their shareholders profits

Dazza · 4th July 2008, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz

ACC is a monopoly, they earn far greater than they pay out, ........., injuries cost the tax payer.

Bzzzt, does not compute.

Another good thing about ACC is that it covers more than just workplace related injuries.

I don't trust corporations in anything where the primary goal should be the welfare of people rather than the pursuit of profits.

Draco T Bastard · 5th July 2008, 00:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodDonor

i see what youre saying, but in the states, and elsewhere, insurance companies try to weasel out of paying, thus maximising their shareholders profits

http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/natio...tionals_policy

Lawyer say that the exact same thing happened in 1999 when National last opened up ACC to competition.

r3x · 7th July 2008, 03:31

Competition is great and works pretty well in most commodities and services we buy. It theoretically should work well for ACC too, but private companies are driven by profit, not the greater social good. To keep them from taking shortcuts, you need a strong regulatory framework and a lot of oversight, then also handle any disputes. ACC has the additional problem of having a lot of lock-in with its customers. What happens to the customers of a shoddy provider, does the government still underwrite the obligations? Unfortunately, its easy to overlook this when employers are demanding lower levies, and corporate interests want a cut of the pie. Maybe private enterprise can play a useful role e.g. kiwisaver, but it needs to be in the right place without losing the existing efficiencies.

7th July 2008, 03:31	#44
r3x	Competition is great and works pretty well in most commodities and services we buy. It theoretically should work well for ACC too, but private companies are driven by profit, not the greater social good. To keep them from taking shortcuts, you need a strong regulatory framework and a lot of oversight, then also handle any disputes. ACC has the additional problem of having a lot of lock-in with its customers. What happens to the customers of a shoddy provider, does the government still underwrite the obligations? Unfortunately, its easy to overlook this when employers are demanding lower levies, and corporate interests want a cut of the pie. Maybe private enterprise can play a useful role e.g. kiwisaver, but it needs to be in the right place without losing the existing efficiencies.