ACC, sickness benefits, why not even add the unemployment benefit !you may as well say that they are all abused and do not actually get applied as was originally intended. In respect to ACC, NZ'ers gave up the right to sue with the ACC act implemented, perhaps if mello #1 wants the system to run as "intended", give others (hurt, harmed & think RSA Killings) the capability and ability to take those responsible or their estates or their employers to task financially. Yes ACC covers more than it probably should, but you cannot reduce accepted coverage without instituting a workable alternative for those any reduction affects. Should sexual abuse be covered by ACC, maybe not, BUT there should be financial assistance available to the victim and to the victims of violent crime etc so that they can be helped towards recovery.

I appreciate there is sensitivity needed for people who have been victims of sexual abuse. However, it is not an accident. It is not the victims' fault, but it is a premediated act directed by one person on another. Premediatation does not equate to an accidental action or effect.

ACC stands for Accident Compensation Corporation. The defintion of what constitutes an accident was never intended (when ACC was originally established back in the early 70s) to cover issues such as suicide and sexual abuse.

Suicide is also not an accident. It is a terrible event for a family to have to endure (my family has had to - twice) but paying compensation to the family for funeral expenses and mental injury counselling for years after the fact is not acceptable. Suicide is not an accident and if my family member had died through natural causes such as a heart attack I would not be receiving ACC compensation to help with funeral expenses. A heart attack is not an accident either.

It is time ACC stopped touting for business by putting full page ads in the paper asking for people to come forward (who have been mentally and physically abused) and started dealing with actual and real accident cases. There are far too many New Zealanders who have had real accidents resulting in real injury that found it nearly impossible to have their claims assessed positively by ACC and this is the actual crime of ACC - they have been inculcated by left wing social engineering ideology that purports to incude a multitude of activities and people who do not fit the true defintion and do not pay into the fund.

Including overseas holiday makers who are somehow 'entitled' to access the non-earners account that you the tax payer has to cover. Since they already have travel insurance to cover injury and accident why are we having to pay for such people twice over?

ACC front up and tell us what your mandate is.