The story of icare—the embattled NSW workers’ compensation scheme—is one of mismanagement, controversy, and political reckoning. At the centre of this long-running saga now stands NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey. Once the vocal critic of the scheme from the Opposition benches, Mookhey now finds himself in the unenviable position of surgeon-in-chief, charged with rescuing a system many say is beyond repair.
When revelations of underpayment, executive excesses, and systemic failures first surfaced under the former Coalition government, Mookhey emerged as a persistent and sharp critic. He held the government to account in parliamentary inquiries, called for transparency, and demanded justice for injured workers lost in bureaucracy. But now, with Labor in power, the responsibility to fix icare has landed squarely in his lap.
And the diagnosis is grim.
icare, the state-run insurance agency that manages workers' compensation in New South Wales, is facing a financial and moral crisis. The scheme has left thousands of injured workers without adequate support, while operational costs ballooned and customer service deteriorated. Years of internal mismanagement and poor oversight have corroded trust in the system. Critics argue that instead of functioning as a safety net, icare has become a source of anxiety for the very people it was designed to protect.
Mookhey’s solution? Radical reform. This month, the NSW Government unveiled a bold proposal to split icare in two—separating its workers’ compensation responsibilities from its other insurance services. The aim, according to Mookhey, is to refocus the agency on injured workers’ welfare and restore financial discipline.
"This is not a decision we take lightly,” Mookhey said at a recent press conference. “But it is necessary. We cannot continue with a system that fails injured workers and the public purse.”
Supporters of the move argue that it reflects the kind of decisive leadership the system needs—something the previous government lacked. They credit Mookhey with having the foresight to call out problems early and now the courage to carry out deep structural reform.
But critics are not convinced. Some union leaders and legal experts warn that dismantling icare could further disrupt an already fragile system. They question whether the proposed changes address the underlying cultural issues and whether the reforms will translate into real improvements for workers on the ground.
“Breaking up icare is a headline, not a solution,” said one industry insider. “We need systemic reform, not just a structural shuffle.”
Meanwhile, for the thousands of injured workers who rely on the scheme for medical treatment, wage support, and rehabilitation, the political drama means little unless it results in real, tangible change. For them, the hero-villain narrative surrounding Daniel Mookhey is irrelevant. What matters is whether the system begins to work for them again.
In the months ahead, all eyes will be on the Treasurer as he oversees what could become the most significant overhaul of workers’ compensation in a generation. Success could cement his legacy as a reformer who turned a broken system around. Failure, however, may add his name to the long list of leaders who promised to fix icare—and didn’t.
Only time will tell whether Daniel Mookhey will be remembered as the man who saved the system or simply another actor in its continuing tragedy.
