Territory Stories

Debates Day 2 - Wednesday 23 November 1994



Debates Day 2 - Wednesday 23 November 1994

Other title

Parliamentary Record 6


Debates for 7th Assembly 1994 - 1997; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 7th Assembly 1994 - 1997




Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory





Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication


File type



Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

DEBATES - Wednesday 23 November 1994 M r BAILEY: I put it to you that it would appear that, if that person broke his or her arm at home ... M r Hatton: How else do they pay the medical bills? M r BA ILEY : They sign for the treatment at the end. Unless the system has changed in recent years, it is my understanding that that is the procedure. An example might be where an accident occurs on a community. A vehicle rolls over, someones arm is broken and they attend the local community health care centre where they are supposedly fixed up. Once again, it is unlikely that they will be given a bill for the treatment. I am not referring to the situation where they are medically evacuated. However, it is not uncommon that, at some time in the future, there will be complications that are related clearly to a specific accident. M r Hatton interjecting. M r BA ILEY : The member for Nightcliff says that they must. If they must, there is no need whatsoever for this amendment because, if they must and they have, there will almost never be a situation where, in 3 years time, they have not made a claim. What I am saying is that there are cases where people have accidents, receive treatment o f some kind, or possibly even receive no treatment at the time, and who, at a later date ... M r Hatton: When they risk their back and 3 years later it has gone Mediterranean on them. M r BA ILEY : The Minister for Aboriginal Development is again is using one o f those racist slurs - it has gone Mediterranean on them. M r Hatton: Give us a break! M r BA ILEY : He is implying that, all o f a sudden, they contract an ailment that does not exist. Any member who knows the procedures that people have to go through to have claims supported will be aware that, currently, the procedures are weighted against the claimant. A claimant under MACA has to prove, firstly, that they have a condition, whether it is a broken arm, a bad back or whatever, and, secondly, that that condition was caused either directly, or at least partially, by a motor vehicle accident. The member for Nightcliff is implying that people will be able to create a series o f non-existent conditions and then make a claim under MACA. Such a claim would be rejected anyway unless they are able to prove the causal relationship. Claims for compensation are not accepted simply because someone fills out a form and states that, 10 years ago, they had an accident and now they have a limp. They must be able to prove that causal relationship. At the moment, the minister is saying that the government wants to remove this because it is very hard to prove that there is a real case because medical records and witnesses are no longer available. In fact, that is the very reason why such a claim would be thrown out and the person would not receive compensation because they could not 1838