NZ has many Dioxin hotspots and the medical fraternity
chooses to act dumb on the health effects and sing the government department of
health song which they got from IOM and American institute whose scope was
written to minimize liability due to Agent Orange.
The NZ Government are out of sync with the real experts in
this field "By Choice" its cost effective to hide behind the shield
of the IOM list of Health effects. go to this page and/or watch the video of an expert
who really does know what Dioxin does and isn't scared to say so
Dr. Linda Birnbaum, (EPA Toxicology Division Director) 2004; In 2010 she is director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Dr. Linda Birnbaum, (EPA Toxicology Division Director) 2004; In 2010 she is director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} is hell bent on not knowing any
other tune either as its chooses to hide behind fn01 the IOM and will go to all
sorts of tactics to ensure they accept no liability for work related injury due
to dioxin exposure in or around someone’s working environment.
The writer only knows 1st hand the depth and lengths the will plunge
too. Even the courts choice to not activate provisions to ensure evidence
present by individuals is disregarded and by default defer to the ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} Toxicology Panel.
ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} has a war chest of $$$ which knows no end and they
exploit this to the fullest, only a handful of NZ citizens have fiscal
resources to campaign against ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} with Lawyers and expert witness
evidence.
Having your own medical reports and specialist reports mean
absolutely not one thing when dealing with ACC and the appeal process of review
and district courts, as the system weights the ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} Toxicology panel heavier
than anything you could possibly afford.
Lawyers don't work for the insides of a donut; Lawyers generally want the donut and the bit from the inside just to look at your case ie. $600-$700 for an opinion.
See below the clause: available in the ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} act yet the Judge will
not activate it unless pressed to by appellant
Guess what us lay people don't know that. We naively believe a fairytale & assume -
That the Courts/Judges above all else seeks the "TRUTH" and is totally committed to "JUSTICE" and "FAIR RULINGS"
"FATAL ERROR FOLKS"
{THE CLAUSE}
Accident
Compensation Act 1982 181
Commenced: 1 Apr 1983
IX: Appeals
Appeals to Appeal Authority
106 Assessors
106. Assessors---(1) If the Authority is of the opinion that any
appeal involves consideration of matters of a professional, technical,
or specialised nature, and that it would be desirable to appoint a
person with expert knowledge of those matters to be an assessor, the
Authority shall consult the parties, and if the Authority and the
parties agree on a suitable person to be so appointed the Authority
shall appoint that person to be an assessor for the purposes of the
appeal. If the Authority and the parties are unable to agree on a
suitable person to be so appointed the Authority may appoint such
suitable person as it thinks fit to be such an assessor. Any assessor
appointed under this section shall sit with the Authority and in all
respects act as an extra member thereof for the hearing and
determination of the appeal, except that the assessor shall have no vote
in the determination of the appeal.
(2) No appointment of an assessor under this section shall, in any
proceedings, be called in question on the grounds that the occasion for
the appointment had not arisen or had cease d.
Cf. 1972, No. 43, s. 160
The writer feels the formation of the ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} is the simple case of:
"putting the fox in charge of looking after the hens in the chook house"
fn01 "the fox" From Wikipedia
Commenced: 1 Apr 1983
IX: Appeals
Appeals to Appeal Authority
106 Assessors
106. Assessors---(1) If the Authority is of the opinion that any
appeal involves consideration of matters of a professional, technical,
or specialised nature, and that it would be desirable to appoint a
person with expert knowledge of those matters to be an assessor, the
Authority shall consult the parties, and if the Authority and the
parties agree on a suitable person to be so appointed the Authority
shall appoint that person to be an assessor for the purposes of the
appeal. If the Authority and the parties are unable to agree on a
suitable person to be so appointed the Authority may appoint such
suitable person as it thinks fit to be such an assessor. Any assessor
appointed under this section shall sit with the Authority and in all
respects act as an extra member thereof for the hearing and
determination of the appeal, except that the assessor shall have no vote
in the determination of the appeal.
(2) No appointment of an assessor under this section shall, in any
proceedings, be called in question on the grounds that the occasion for
the appointment had not arisen or had cease d.
Cf. 1972, No. 43, s. 160
The writer feels the formation of the ACC {Accident Compensation Corporation} is the simple case of:
"putting the fox in charge of looking after the hens in the chook house"
fn01 "the fox" From Wikipedia
The corporation was founded as the Accident Compensation Commission on 1 April 1974 as a result of the Accident Compensation Act 1972. Its principal governing act today is the Accident Compensation Act 2001.
As a Crown entity, ACC is responsible to a Cabinet Minister via its Board of Directors.
Unlike most other Crown entities, it has its own dedicated ministerial portfolio, which as of September 2014 is currently held by Craig Foss in an acting role, following the resignation of Judith Collins.
No comments:
Post a Comment