Let me fix that response for you:
In regards to your question below about the rule change currently open for voting.
Rule 6c proposed changes are intended by the Trustee to be a clarification of the existing rule only, which the Trustee believes currently allows the Trustee not to make payments to members if their Class 1 has been suspended temporarily, or cancelled permanently where members are receiving payments, or could be entitled to receive any payments, for any disability recognised by any repatriation or statutory authority. WorkCover currently falls into this category. Hence the proposed rule change is intended by the Trustee to be solely a clarification of the existing rule to make it clearer to members how the Trustee interprets the rule. The treatment of WorkCover benefits is no different in the new or old Rules. The Trustee does not believe that the phrase “any periodical or other payments (including, but not limited to workers’ compensation) under state or federal legislation” results in a broader exclusion than the phrase “any disability recognised by any repatriation or statutory authority”.
This does not mean that you are ineligible to claim your benefits, you could receive 12 months from WorkCover and there would be nothing preventing you from receiving your MBF benefits for the FULL two years afterward. However, if you choose not to pursue a WorkCover claim and the Trustee considers that you would entitled to WorkCover if you did, the Trustee can choose to give you nothing during the period the Trustee considers WorkCover would have been payable to you. If the condition were to be permanent, after the waiting period, you could make a claim for your Capital lump sum payment (which has been preserved by taking WorkCover payments). Your Capital payment is then free of tax. But of course, as with both versions of the rule, making a claim is not the same as the Trustee accepting the claim.
I trust this clears up the “changes” to the rule.