Offers for readers

The comment stream

Recent comments

Join the Interest community to be a registered commenter so you can:
- Edit your comments
- Avoid the CAPTCHA
- Vote on comments
Register Here

Already registered? log back in here ..

Forgotten your password? No problem! Click here

Finance sector jobs

Corporate Recovery Senior – Australia, Audit experience welcomed
Successful applicants will have the opportunity to work with this leading Australian Advis...more
Australia
Transaction Services Assistant Manager/ Manager – Melbourne
Think Global Recruitment is working with this exceptionally respected Australian Boutique ...more
Australia
Audit Senior - Australia
Sought after opportunity to move to one of the most beautiful westernised countries in the...more
Australia
Research & Master Trust Relationship Manager
Strategic and Senior Appointment...more
Australia
efinancialcareers.com

Reader poll

Who do you think should be appointed Reserve Bank Governor to replace Alan Bollard when he retires in September?

Choices

Nick Smith: Replacing ACC board is not a step towards privatisation

Posted in News

Hon David Parker: Does the Minister agree that replacing more than half of the ACC board, including Ross Wilson and Wayne Butson, will make it easier for the Government to reduce the scope of accident compensation cover and to privatise the earners account, which currently covers all workplace accidents?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No, it will enable us to ensure that the board members will have the top-flight governance skills that are needed to run a very large organisation and to provide New Zealanders with 24/7 care but, at the same time, ensure that the levies are affordable for ordinary New Zealanders.

Michael Woodhouse: What reports has the Minister received on briefings and timeliness of responses?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I was amused to note that the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party said there were some 600 briefings. In fact, there was one. I note that an important briefing was provided on 14 August last year, noting a requirement for $1.56 billion. The matter was not included in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update because Treasury officials said it was not being considered by Ministers. The billion-dollar question is why a problem of that size was not being considered by Ministers.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments. Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making these comments.