From: juscallin1 (Original Message) Sent: 5/7/2004 8:48 PM
HAVE YOU ALL NOW RECEIVED YOUR REPLY FROM ACC COMPLAINTS RE DAVID RANKIN'S COMMENTS REGARDING SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANTS??
Usual whitewash!
Complaint was valid, (hoho), but it was only said in the context of discussions about
Work prep Programmes only!!!
So he was made to apologise.
"Let me say on the outset that my comments as quoted, were not intended to CAUSE OFFENCE. They obviously have, and for that I sincerely apologise.
There is no doubt that some long term seriously injured claimants have to face issues of depression (wonder why???) and lack of motivation.Unfortunately I did not ensure that the article in the paper distinguished that my remarks were addressed at this minority of claimants.
I also appreciate the concerns raised about the use of the word "Benefits". I acknowledge that ACC payments are entitlements, and I shall be mindful of this distinction in the future".
The ACC Complaints, Peta Cherry, says she considers this apology to be sufficient remedy for my complaint.
Well, THIS COMMENT WAS MADE IN THE PUBLIC ARENA AND IT MUST BE PUBLISHED IN THE SAME ARENA.
David Rankin, your apology means nothing, you will continue with your plan to belittle claimants, minimise their serious injury and continue with your harebrained schemes of nose enemas etc.
Does anyone know the fax address of Nick Venter, Dominion Post? He was the reporter in this case. Rankin has to apologise publicly, do you agree???
Cheers from one angry Juscallin
First Previous 2-4 of 4 Next Last
Reply
Recommend Message 2 of 4 in Discussion
From: fairgo1 Sent: 5/7/2004 10:43 PM
These comments were made in the media... his apology shall also be made in
the public arena. Claimant's that were insulted and defamed by his comments
deserve no less.
Reply
Recommend Message 3 of 4 in Discussion
From: fairgo1 Sent: 5/7/2004 10:43 PM
send to Cushla Managh (DPT)
E-mail Address(es):
[email protected]
I'm sure she will be more than interested..............
Reply
Recommend Delete Message 4 of 4 in Discussion
From: crowbay1 Sent: 5/7/2004 10:59 PM
If he was the person for his position he would never have made them in the first place. His attitude is clearly of the culture that so obviously runs through ACC. No one who comes from that sort of standpoint has the integrity or character to hold the position and his resignation is what should be called for.
This is the man who controls the rehabilitation cash. Who benefits most from his position? The injured or his army of parasitical service providers? Who benefits financially from rehabilitation? The claimant having water poured down there nose or the Healthwise, ACC rehabilitation service provider holding the tea pot?
How much financial support does the CPANZ get through this mans appropriations?