Volcano victims’ dignity betrayed as NZ’s no-fault system lets tour operators off the hook

While such schemes patently fail the fairness test, they also fail the economics test. No-fault schemes typically become financially unsustainable. The ACC has moved from one financial crisis to the next over the course of its nearly five decades of life. And when there is a financial crisis, it is survivors of accidents who get less.

But worst of all these schemes fail the safety test. No-fault schemes such as the ACC foster a lax safety culture. There is little accountability when preventable accidents occur. Compared with Australia, the ACC has fewer incentives or serious consequences for companies to ensure safety is prioritised. In the knowledge they cannot be sued for negligent conduct, many businesses adopt a cavalier safety approach. That approach in New Zealand has been highlighted many times during the life of the ACC.

Australia has many safety-nets of coverage for people injured who cannot pursue legal action. But taking away the right to sue for negligent conduct ignores basic psychology, and ignores compelling evidence here and in countries such as Canada and Britain. The right to bring claims for negligence creates powerful incentives for safer behaviour. Whether it’s aircraft, hospital or car safety, workplace injuries and death, or efforts to reduce asbestos and silica exposure and smoking, the exercise of common law rights in holding negligent parties to account and forcing improved standards has long been to the benefit of the wider community.