Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lightspeed
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Do you know what policy it was National was basing their decision to ignore expert advice when they screwed around with ACC's sensitive claims service?
|
I see what you mean – when the Govt. makes changes that weren’t specific policy that they campaigned on during the election.
My understanding of how these sensitive claim changes came about is that the Govt. required ACC’s policies on administrating claims to cost less. So this was all about political ideology and as a direct result of these ideological changes was a low number of successful claims.
Maybe it’s too idealistic but it would be helpful if voters understood party’s ideological foundation (civics education?). When you know that National generally believes in less state intervention then when they cut services and under-fund health and education and sell it as necessary belt tightening then you can call bs and see it’s actually just them following the ideology and values they believe in.
Sadly these sensitive claim problems were identified two elections ago and too many people fell for the bs and brushed it aside as some unfortunate unavoidable consequence of scarcity.