The National Injury Insurance Scheme

The National Injury Insurance Scheme (NIIS) is proposed as a no-fault scheme to operate nationwide. Initially proposed to cover four categories of accidents (motor accidents, workplace accidents, medical accidents and general accidents), each jurisdiction is now operating a complying scheme in relation to motor accidents and workplace accidents. The ALA believes that the rollout of the NIIS should stop there.

While no-fault might sound good, the reality is that no-fault schemes can rob injured people of the compensation that they need and deserve. No-fault schemes shift the cost of the injury from the responsible party to the taxpayer. The injured person is left vulnerable to the whims of government policy. The person that caused the injury is not held liable and has no incentive to act more responsibly in the future.

These injuries can have life-changing consequences, including the need to take extended periods of time off work, undergo intensive rehabilitation, and modify living spaces for new accessibility needs. Some people can never work again, their injuries are that bad. Anyone in such a situation deserves the autonomy to make decisions that are right for him or her, which is only possible with compensation, not with no-fault schemes.

In New Zealand, the no-fault compensation scheme, the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has been operational since 1974. It has often been financially unstable, and in 2008, had unfunded liabilities equivalent to $24 billion (source: Gallagher Basset). To get the scheme out of the red, thousands of claimants had their support slashed. In 2013, the scheme was in such disarray that consideration was had to privatisation.

The ALA has worked with all states and territories to advocate for fair NIIS complying schemes for motor and workplace accidents. We have been successful in ensuring that access to compensation is retained for those who need it most.

Medical and general accidents are so complex that we believe that no-fault schemes are unable to deliver fair outcomes in these areas, so we have advocated for restricting the NIIS rollout to motor and workplace accidents. Extending the NIIS to medical and general accidents, or further expanding no-fault in motor and workplace accidents, could curtail individuals’ rights to seek appropriate compensation in the same way that the ACC has in New Zealand. Where compensation is not available, we believe that these people would be better served and assisted by the NDIS.

To read more about the importance of common law over administrative no-fault schemes, you can find the ALA’s position here.