IMPORTANT - Submission To The Government

[TOTO]

Here is an E-mail I received from Auckland Motorcycle Club. Please read it carefully.

I have attached the Word file with the ready submission to this post. You just need to print it off and send it. No stamp required.


Hey folks, this could cost us all.



The government is looking at trying to make our roads safer and currently have a discussion paper called 'Safer Journeys' on their website. In it there is a section on motorcycles and the proposal by ACC to further tax large displacement motorcycles.



Submissions close on October 2nd.



Go here; http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Pages/default.aspx



I'll be compiling a submission asap, I suggest you do the same.



If you can't be arsed let me know and I'll forward you a copy of mine, which you can re-jig with your own details and fire it off.



If you do nothing it will undoubtedly bite you on the bum; specifically, in the wallet.



Forward this email to anyone you know with a bike worth talking about. If they don't have email then ring them, tell them in the pub or go round and see them. Don't do nothing.








Here you go.

If you agree with the content of this submission, just print it up, print your name and address at the top and sign it at the bottom.



Send it to;

The Transport Minister

Parliament Buildings

Wellington



No stamp required.

[Genestho]

Can I just butt in and say that you can fill it in online also, what doesn't concern you - don't fillin, but in the Motorcycling section, you could copy and paste from this word.doc and add any more ideas, there have been some great stuff talked about on here!

http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Pages/default.aspx

Thanks for spreading the awareness Toto! (And Auckland Motorcycle Club)

[SixPackBack]

Here is an E-mail I received from Auckland Motorcycle Club. Please read it carefully.

I have attached the Word file with the ready submission to this post. You just need to print it off and send it. No stamp required.

I would interpret the letter as being supportive of cruisers and not sports bikes!

[short-circuit]

I would interpret the letter as being supportive of cruisers and not sports bikes!

That's exactly how I read it too

[Pixie]

I would interpret the letter as being supportive of cruisers and not sports bikes!

And the implication that old, mid-life-crisis types don't have a lot of problems of their own staying on the road

[short-circuit]

In it's current form, you can stick it up your arse

[Genestho]

so edit it?:confused: Or don't use it I guess? Online there are particular questions...do you support this, do you support that...(not exact wording but...)what would you do to encourage safer motorcycling?

There is room to say yes or no, expand, then idea. Also the forum at the link provided has some good discussions on this topic.

I copied all the questions into word, so I can then copy and paste the answers back into the online version.
After starting work in the online version and my pc restarted doh! Mondays jobbie...

[James Deuce]

I'm not understanding this one bit.

We're reaping what we sowed and you guys want to argue that we don't deserve it?

That ice is so thin, it's transparent.

[short-circuit]

I'm not understanding this one bit.

We're reaping what we sowed and you guys want to argue that we don't deserve it?

That ice is so thin, it's transparent.

Hey! Careful with the inclusive language there sex partner

[Nasty]

Pages 28-30 seems to focus on motorcycles ... its a good place to read in the link that is in the first post.

[Maki]

ACC levies should be a levy for riders, not bikes. It should not matter how many bikes you own, you should only pay one levy. You can not ride more than one bike at a time. Safe experienced riders who have ridden for years without mishap should be rewarded with lower levies. High risk riders should be penalized. Fair is fair. Why should people who use their bike a primary mode of transport be penalized for the antics of weekend warriors?

[The Pastor]

ACC levies should be a levy for riders, not bikes. It should not matter how many bikes you own, you should only pay one levy. You can not ride more than one bike at a time. Safe experienced riders who have ridden for years without mishap should be rewarded with lower levies. High risk riders should be penalized. Fair is fair. Why should people who use their bike a primary mode of transport be penalized for the antics of weekend warriors?
stuff that

[The Pastor]

say no to the over 600cc levey increase >_<

[short-circuit]

say no to the over 600cc levey increase >_<

.........

No

[James Deuce]

ACC levies should be a levy for riders, not bikes. It should not matter how many bikes you own, you should only pay one levy. You can not ride more than one bike at a time. Safe experienced riders who have ridden for years without mishap should be rewarded with lower levies. High risk riders should be penalized. Fair is fair. Why should people who use their bike a primary mode of transport be penalized for the antics of weekend warriors?
It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.

[short-circuit]

It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.

The cynic speaks the truth

[Katman]

High risk riders should be penalized.

The fact that I ride an 1100cc sports bike (albeit, a dinosaur) would quite possibly place me in their 'high risk' category - even though I haven't claimed anything from ACC in the last 20 years.

Perhaps we should be looking instead towards a 'user pays' system.

[Maki]

The fact that I ride an 1100cc sports bike (albeit, a dinosaur) would quite possibly place me in their 'high risk' category - even though I haven't claimed anything from ACC in the last 20 years.

Perhaps we should be looking instead towards a 'user pays' system.

You are obviously a low risk rider and the system should recognize that. I am sure stats would prove it.

What I find most unfair about the current system is that owners of more than one bike have to pay multiple ACC levies.

I sometimes wonder if ACC levies should be dropped and registration should be free. The costs would be recovered by taxing fuel at a higher rate. That way you pay more the more you ride (expose yourself to risk) and the more you pollute. Heavy inefficient vehichles that chew up our roads would pay more than light efficient ones.

[Katman]

You are obviously a low risk rider and the system should recognize that.

Quite right - they should.

But currently they don't.

[Squiggles]

I sometimes wonder if ACC levies should be dropped and registration should be free. The costs would be recovered by taxing fuel at a higher rate. That way you pay more the more you ride (expose yourself to risk) and the more you pollute. Heavy inefficient vehichles that chew up our roads would pay more than light efficient ones.

Given the lengths of ya posts i sure hope you've made a submission :msn-wink:

[Jantar]

I would also urge everyone to make a submission. BUT please do not copy a standard submission, either adapt it in your own words or make your own origional submission. When a lot of submissions come in all saying exactly the same thing they are lumped together as a single submission from a group.

[cowpatz]

This should open up a can of worms. Should but wont.
If the methodology is applied to other road users does that mean that cars over a certain cc or horsepower rating get taxed higher? Maybe turbo vehicles or boy racer specific types? After all how much power is required to do 100 kmh? Why pick on bikes? If I only do 5000 km a year then why should I pay the same as someone doing 20000 km a year with a significantly higher risk factor?
Should sports players have to pay extra levies? After all physio is one of the biggest on going costs in the ACC system.

We are being targeted because we are easy pickings, don't have good public appeal or support and we will offer little resistance.

What is missed on the bureaucrats is that in the main larger cc bikes are more stable and handle better. They handle the crap NZ roads much better.
It is a shame they have to adopt the "beat em with a stick approach" instead of one of education and training. Driver/rider training is non-existant and this is where the best gains could be made. Roading planners, engineers and construction crews need to be retrained...in the main what is produced is crap. How many roads have you seen where the seal (cheap chip seal) breaks
down and leaves pot holes within weeks of being laid? Reverse camber corners. Liberal application of slippery road marking paint, raised and slippery manhole covers. Loose chip left on road surfaces. Impossibly short merging lanes and some of the most piss poor road signage you will find anywhere. Passing lanes that finish abruptly at a blind corner.

Katman user pays in a country this small is a joke and will not work. What we have ended up with is targeted user pays and that is wrong....If we went true user pays then most farmers or rural towns would have no roading, power or phone. Costs in a country this small need to be spread across the population or minority and special interest groups would wither and die or become elitist....and you can lump biking in there.

Statistics can be manipulated to support practically any argument and this is what is being done here.

I had hope things would improve when Aunty Helen left but it would appear that Steven Joyce has stepped in to pick up the nanny state mantle.

[Genestho]

This should open up a can of worms. Should but wont.
If the methodology is applied to other road users does that mean that cars over a certain cc or horsepower rating get taxed higher? Maybe turbo vehicles or boy racer specific types? After all how much power is required to do 100 kmh? Why pick on bikes? If I only do 5000 km a year then why should I pay the same as someone doing 20000 km a year with a significantly higher risk factor?
Should sports players have to pay extra levies? After all physio is one of the biggest on going costs in the ACC system.

We are being targeted because we are easy pickings, don't have good public appeal or support and we will offer little resistance.

What is missed on the bureaucrats is that in the main larger cc bikes are more stable and handle better. They handle the crap NZ roads much better.
It is a shame they have to adopt the "beat em with a stick approach" instead of one of education and training. Driver/rider training is non-existant and this is where the best gains could be made. Roading planners, engineers and construction crews need to be retrained...in the main what is produced is crap. How many roads have you seen where the seal (cheap chip seal) breaks
down and leaves pot holes within weeks of being laid? Reverse camber corners. Liberal application of slippery road marking paint, raised and slippery manhole covers. Loose chip left on road surfaces. Impossibly short merging lanes and some of the most piss poor road signage you will find anywhere. Passing lanes that finish abruptly at a blind corner.

Katman user pays in a country this small is a joke and will not work. What we have ended up with is targeted user pays and that is wrong....If we went true user pays then most farmers or rural towns would have no roading, power or phone. Costs in a country this small need to be spread across the population or minority and special interest groups would wither and die or become elitist....and you can lump biking in there.

Statistics can be manipulated to support practically any argument and this is what is being done here.

I had hope things would improve when Aunty Helen left but it would appear that Steven Joyce has stepped in to pick up the nanny state mantle.
2 things.

1.You are not the only group targeted.
2. How would it appear that Steven Joyce has done any such thing.

The consultation document is an old Labour led intiative.
Safery Journeys consultation document is open to submission - a PUBLIC document designed for you to HAVE YOUR SAY!

And Jantar is correct, best if everyone uses their own words as individuals.

[Reckless]

I'm starting to wonder if its worth our time to bother putting our personal view across anywhere these days??
We got the anti smacking law no one wanted and just read recently that 80% of the people in Wanganui Didn't want the H and they still got it.
This is still a Democracy isn't it?? LOL!!

[p.dath]

...I copied all the questions into word, so I can then copy and paste the answers back into the online version.
After starting work in the online version and my pc restarted doh! Mondays jobbie...

You know you can also email in your submission?

Keep it in word if it is easier for you, and just email in the whole thing.

[James Deuce]

This is still a Democracy isn't it??
Democracy is being given opportunity to vote for Local and National Government representatives.

What they do once they represent you has nothing to do with Democracy until you;re two weeks out from an election.

[Genestho]

Haven't followed the H bomb. But IMO the wording on the Referendum was never going to do anything anyway.

[Genestho]

You know you can also email in your submission?

Keep it in word if it is easier for you, and just email in the whole thing.

Doh, just understand what you meant, yea I may email it depending on what's added - I may only need to copy paste, because I have research and links to add, it's easier for me to address the topics, keep the document open and going and save it as I go. Sit back and review before I send. Thanks :)

[p.dath]

This should open up a can of worms. Should but wont.
If the methodology is applied to other road users does that mean that cars over a certain cc or horsepower rating get taxed higher? Maybe turbo vehicles or boy racer specific types? After all how much power is required to
...


That's what public submissions are for cowpatz. If you don't agree or think it can be done better - then tell the Government.

You might think doing a submission will have no effect. But I can assure you doing no submission will definitely have no effect. If you think your view is different from the Governments then it is even more important you put that view forward.

So why not put aside a couple of hours, read the discussion document, and put forward what you think would be best. :)

No use doing nothing, and then start complaining in 2 years when it starts kicking in.

[Reckless]

Democracy is being given opportunity to vote for Local and National Government representatives.

What they do once they represent you has nothing to do with Democracy until you;re two weeks out from an election.

So true! LOL!!!

[cowpatz]

2 things.

2. How would it appear that Steven Joyce has done any such thing.



His comments on the blood alcohol limit and driving age for starters.
Whatever happened to individual responsibility and effective enforcement?

[What?]

What I find most unfair about the current system is that owners of more than one bike have to pay multiple ACC levies.

I sometimes wonder if ACC levies should be dropped ... The costs would be recovered by taxing fuel at a higher rate.

My thinking exactly. Plus that those riding/driving unregistered vehicles are still elligible for ACC support when it all goes wrong for them
My submission is in - all five pages of it.

[Genestho]

His comments on the blood alcohol limit and driving age for starters.
Whatever happened to individual responsibility and effective enforcement?
Hah! Good answer! Bit of media hype there though - I don't watch the news, and any articles I want to read or watch I find on the net.

In that case his one comment regarding BAC limits - appears to have been recycled over and over

I ask the same question! And a couple more!

The thing is the 61 intiatives have been offered to public on a plate, to comment on, submit on.
Whether or not public say makes a difference in this case - I'm not sure.

But you can't say you didn't know about it, and didn't have the chance to have your say when or if policies and /or legislation changes come up.

[Squiggles]

But you can't say you didn't know about it, and didn't have the chance to have your say when or if policies and /or legislation changes come up.

Exactly! </10chars>

[PrincessBandit]

Unfortunately they will never be able to legislate against brain dead road users. I think a lot of our problems are exacerbated by our atrocious attitude of "me me me" on the road. How many times do we witness the "I'm not going to let you overtake me" attitude; how many times the "I'm not going to wait for another light cycle at these lights - my time is far too important to have to wait - I'm going to 'sneak' through on the very end of that orange"; how many times "I'm going to speed up so you can't merge into the space in front of me" on motorway onramps and lanes etc.

As a motoring nation we need to rethink our attitude to road usage. Heaven forbid that we should get like the States where you face a potential law suit at every turn, but hey we sure could learn a thing or two from them regarding letting people into spaces for lane changing for a start!

[cowpatz]

Heaven forbid that we should get like the States where you face a potential law suit at every turn, but hey we sure could learn a thing or two from them regarding letting people into spaces for lane changing for a start!

Well having driven a fair bit in the States and seen how they behave perhaps this is just what we need. As a pedestrian stepping off the sidewalk the approaching cars stop miles away from you...it is almost embarrassing. Here they speed up or see just how close it is possible to get without contact and then give the bird to boot.
The other excellent idea they have that our numb nuts politicians cant seem to get a handle on is compulsory third party insurance and in their case it is with the registration.
If you are pulled over the first things asked for are rego and licence.
Ironically here as the speed limits lower and more traffic lights are installed the frustration increases along with infringements.

[dpex]

It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.

Here speaks the voice of a type I encountered with another well known KBer, today.

'What's the the point in submitting ideas?' said he and his wife. Remember, 80% of the population voted against the anti-smacking Bill, and what did that get?

And so, his and her ideology is the same as the above. Do nothing because we can't change anything anyway.

But if you read through the discussion document you will see there are glimmers of a genuine desire on the part of the officials to actually understand the issues and find ways of addressing them.

Sure, they're still focused on greater penalties, but I trust one of my submissions, which goes on a bit, may cause them to hesitate and rethink thir strategy.

But unless you, each biker, puts in your two bits, those at the top, who don't ride motorcycles are left making decisions based upon info they get from biased parties...ergo, the cops.

You may have read one of Scumdog's recent posts where he refuted my assertions that most drivers seem to navigate the highways in a reasonable manner. He came back with 'his' experiences of daily attending crashes.

But that's scumdog's job. Of course he will attend a far higher level of crashes than we ordinary folk ever see. So he becomes biased, like all cops. Daily they deal with the scum of the earth. Is it little wonder they presume that all but themselves are scum?

But it is these quite reasonably biased 'experts' who will shift thinking toward greater penalties and controls.

Unles you, you bikers, submit reasoned arguments to the contrary, then only the voices of the naturally biased will be heard.

[Genestho]

Brilliant Dpex, I'm inclined to agree having had a good read through it a while back, and read up on things!!
And there's consensus amongst quite a few people that the document seems well intended. Human nature shows you can't please all people all the time.

I think we are offered a diverse range of options across a range of topics, including education, training..

Cowpatz - compulsary third party has been offered as a youth iniative, ask for it to be extended...where you see fit, because - why?

You know, as I see it - you're given options, then at each topic...asked how can you improve that topic.

If you you think you can improve that topic, why not say it? if you have evidence - back it up..

What you fullas don't realise is that there are big blocks of certain groups that have vested interest, which is why things change not always in the interest of the individual.

Things come up for submission all the time, and again you'll find massive aligned groups with vested interest.

It's a difficult wall to push unless the people on the ground, and lots of them, take the opportunity to have their say, no point whinging after the fact.

[James Deuce]

Public submissions aren't a new thing.

All legislation, all potential changes to the way we live are supposed to be moderated by "Public Submissions".

I didn't say do nothing.

I said start a credible Political Movement that will have the clout to be listened to.

Public Submissions from individuals are a waste of time. Public Submissions from organisations with a clear objective, a cooperative attitude, and an understanding of give and take, coupled with the voter base and economic power will be listened to.

Too many bikers think they can go and shout at politicians or write one letter and have their point of view engaged. You have to take Jos' approach. Polite, pleasantly couched arguments based in reason and the desire to engage with officials about the plans they already have, delivered with thoughtfulness and the ability to judge when to push and when to sit down and be quiet.

Being told you're wrong all the time doesn't leave you open to taking on board ideas from a threatening party.

Most of all you need to work with your resources.

[James Deuce]

Brilliant Dpex, I'm inclined to agree having had a good read through it a while back, and read up on things!!

I think we are offered a diverse range of options across a range of topics, including education, training..

Cowpatz - compulsary third party has been offered as a youth iniative, ask for it to be extended...where you see fit, because - why?

You know, as I see it - you're given options, then at each topic...asked how can you improve that topic.

If you you think you can improve that topic, why not say it? if you have evidence - back it up..

What you fullas don't realise is that there are big blocks of certain groups that have vested interest, which is why things change not always in the interest of the individual.

Things come up for submission all the time, and again you'll find massive aligned groups with vested interest.

It's a difficult wall to push unless the people on the ground, and lots of them, take the opportunity to have their say, no point whinging after the fact.

Disconnected individuals with no common purpose are viewed as an opportunity to divide and conquer. There's never any effort by people like dpex to consider the people they ridicule as a necessary resource in an organised response to a potential threat.

Want me on side? At least stop treating me like an enemy or an idiot.

Do you guys want an organised response that looks like it may have implications for a Government come election time, or do you just want to keep chipping away at big problesm by yourself?

dpex's incorrect asessment of my post and blind acceptance of his analysis is the kind of thing that keeps me off side with any "protest" movement regarding the "fate" of motorcycling.

[MadDuck]

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.


Cynic :laugh: I know I wont get crap on KB for the brand of motorcyle I ride - truely.

Damn we couldnt get them to remove the cheescutters as a collective group.

[James Deuce]

Damn we couldnt get them to remove the cheescutters as a collective group.

We never, IMO, presented anything other than a loosely arranged group of people with a common disinterest.

[Katman]

Damn we couldnt get them to remove the cheescutters as a collective group.

Motorcyclists have never (yet) been a collective group.

[MadDuck]

Motorcyclists have never (yet) been a collective group.

Oh really?

We damn well could be!

[p.dath]

...
I sometimes wonder if ACC levies should be dropped and registration should be free. The costs would be recovered by taxing fuel at a higher rate. That way you pay more the more you ride (expose yourself to risk) and the more you pollute. Heavy inefficient vehichles that chew up our roads would pay more than light efficient ones.

Playing devils advocate, that means 1100cc riders would be subsidising 50cc scooter riders, since they use so much less fuel.

[Genestho]

Disconnected individuals with no common purpose are viewed as an opportunity to divide and conquer. There's never any effort by people like dpex to consider the people they ridicule as a necessary resource in an organised response to a potential threat.

Want me on side? At least stop treating me like an enemy or an idiot.

Do you guys want an organised response that looks like it may have implications for a Government come election time, or do you just want to keep chipping away at big problesm by yourself?

dpex's incorrect asessment of my post and blind acceptance of his analysis is the kind of thing that keeps me off side with any "protest" movement regarding the "fate" of motorcycling.

No I was about to agree with the post above this. (lol a few back now) but your one regarding how you go about things, that's how it works - I agree with you, you got it

[p.dath]

Unfortunately they will never be able to legislate against brain dead road users....

Shhh. Someone will here you and make some legislation.

Having a drivers licence in NZ is not a right. There is no act of parliament that says you have an entitlement to a licence.
It's a test. If you pass your allowed to have a licence.

Raise the bar, and you'll get less "brain dead road users", and to a smaller degree, more unlicensed users.

[Coldrider]

Motorcyclists have never (yet) been a collective group.Yes, rebels, freedom, individuals.

[Genestho]

The first bit of advice given to me by a politician, was to be prepared to listen, don't put your gloves on. Locate the problem, research, find the solutions, and costings if you can. Be persistant but polite. Drive the same hammer into the same nail. BE Patient!

James is right, a protest does nothing, it's one loud voice once. Sporadic letters do nothing.
2 million misjointed individuals may make a submission, while this may be good, they may have an opposing thousand views, which in reality will achieve nothing, it's just a mess of noise.

Meanwhile you will be up against massive groups, speaking the same language. You stay on the same path, you make allies, also speaking the same language - you link up, you then have aligned groups also speaking the language with reasonable opposition.

[MadDuck]

Don't get me started on that bullshit.

Ok so take the emotion out of it (and that probably wasnt the best example for me to give) and what I was trying to say is that if the general biking community decided to get together for change...it would be possible.

[Genestho]

Ok so take the emotion out of it (and that probably wasnt the best example for me to give) and what I was trying to say is that if the general biking community decided to get together for change...it would be possible.

IMO You have to be careful with groups, as you don't want to get bogged down with commitees and things because, thats a whole different kettle of fish and consuming. You also end up with a bunch of people, opposing, and throwing more into the mix, and another mess of noise.

I recon effective groups just have to list the iniatives, each pick the iniative, figure out fortes, whether it be media soundbites, radio, letter writing, communication fortes, have each person in charge of a job, stick to it, own it and hopefully be onto it enough to make the right calls, on their own. That makes things happen. Just what I'm observing anyway.

[PrincessBandit]

What's needed is for all of us to make an effort to show we're interested in being part of an attempt to improve things. It's so easy to do nothing because we think it won't change anything - kinda like not bothering to vote because we believe our vote won't make a difference.

Putting in submissions en masse doesn't have to mean we're no longer individuals, that somehow all of a sudden we're a big happy family (:grouphug::grouphug::love::love::rofl:). What it does mean is that we can put aside our bitchiness and nit picking and present a strong statement to those who could have a major impact on our situation.

[Pussy]

IMO You have to be careful with groups, as you don't want to get bogged down with commitees and things because, thats a whole different kettle of fish and consuming. You also end up with a bunch of people, opposing, and throwing more into the mix, and another mess of noise.

I recon effective groups just have to list the iniatives, each pick the iniative, figure out fortes, whether it be media soundbites, radio, letter writing, communication fortes, have each person in charge of a job, stick to it, own it and hopefully be onto it enough to make the right calls, on their own. That makes things happen. Just what I'm observing anyway.

Very wise advice, T.G.W! :niceone:

[Genestho]

What's needed is for all of us to make an effort to show we're interested in being part of an attempt to improve things. It's so easy to do nothing because we think it won't change anything - kinda like not bothering to vote because we believe our vote won't make a difference.

Putting in submissions en masse doesn't have to mean we're no longer individuals, that somehow all of a sudden we're a big happy family (:grouphug::grouphug::love::love::rofl:). What it does mean is that we can put aside our bitchiness and nit picking and present a strong statement to those who could have a major impact on our situation.

I guess you just need for people to put aside ego's, and be motivated enough to not give up. And prepared to work hard, to change things take time. People give up too easy.

[Grahameeboy]

before we all knee jerk...is it really a major if ACC levies rise for over 600cc...still gotta be worth it just to ride...

We are all targeted...not just bikers...if you want say Health Insurance you have to complet a whole load of personal questions to establish the risk and the premium you pay...ACC is really no different...if you are male and had a unrinary tract infection then you are at risk of prostrate cancer so you pay higher premiums..if you are a smoker the same...bikers may think they are but sorry to burst the bubble but we are not the only ones targeted.

ACC is actually a great benefit...think yourselves lucky we have this when we stuff up...compared to other Countries

Looking at the flip side...maybe it is a good thing for motorcycling...

[Grahameeboy]

Sixbelly..thanks for the rep..maybe I am insane but I am insanely happy and I don't believe this is a major stress....we don't event know how much extra it will be yet...

[MarkH]

before we all knee jerk...is it really a major if ACC levies rise for over 600cc...still gotta be worth it just to ride...

Yeah, but if I find myself able to afford an SV650S to ride on the weekends and keep my AN400 for weekday commuting - how much will I be paying for Rego? I somehow doubt that it will be a fair amount!

[Cr1MiNaL]

Rego costs are already through the roof... I would not submit that letter simply based on the fact that it asks to make a distinction between motorcycles? We cannot have anarchy in the same circle. Bikes are bikes lets stand as 1. Sure crusiers r shit and a bit gay but still. lol.

[Squiggles]

Rego costs are already through the roof... I would not submit that letter simply based on the fact that it asks to make a distinction between motorcycles? We cannot have anarchy in the same circle. Bikes are bikes lets stand as 1. Sure crusiers r shit and a bit gay but still. lol.

Can still do their online ranking thing to rate what you think the important initiatives are

[Grahameeboy]

Yeah, but if I find myself able to afford an SV650S to ride on the weekends and keep my AN400 for weekday commuting - how much will I be paying for Rego? I somehow doubt that it will be a fair amount!

If you can afford 2 bikes.......

[Grahameeboy]

UK..yes it is for the roads, however, I reckon that ACC levy is a good investment


Motorcycle (with or without a sidecar) (TC17)
<table class="markuptable" summary="Motorcycle (with or without a sidecar) (TC17)"><tbody><tr class="header"> <th class="colHeader" id="X0Y0"> Engine size (cc)
</th> <th class="colHeader" id="X1Y0">12 months rate</th> <th class="colHeader" id="X2Y0">6 months rate</th> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td headers="X0Y0">Not over 150</td> <td headers="X1Y0">£15.00</td> <td headers="X2Y0">Not applicable</td> </tr> <tr> <td headers="X0Y0">151-400</td> <td headers="X1Y0">£33.00</td> <td headers="X2Y0">Not applicable</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td headers="X0Y0">401-600</td> <td headers="X1Y0">£48.00</td> <td headers="X2Y0">Not applicable</td> </tr> <tr> <td headers="X0Y0">Over 600</td> <td headers="X1Y0">£66.00</td> <td headers="X2Y0">£36.30
</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Katman]

Rego costs are already through the roof...

You're precisely the sort of rider whose rego should double in price.

[Cr1MiNaL]

You're precisely the sort of rider whose rego should double in price.

Your probably right. :D because I'm young and living life to the max eh? I'm prolly stupid/Gen Y/ Immature/ etc too :D

[Usarka]

Why isn't there an initiative for pushbike riders and pedestrians to wear fluoro protective gear?

[cowpatz]

There are a couple of points that need to be more closely scrutinized.

1. The document is titled safer journeys. How will increasing an ACC levy make the journey safer? Even if the levy were to double would that have a significant impact on the number of motorcyclists? The levy is just cost recovery and therefore in my view does not contribute to a "safer journey" and should not be an initiative.

2. From 2000 to 2008 the number of bike registrations increased by a factor of 4 . The number of casualties increased by a factor of 2. This is actually a significant reduction in rider/casualty ratio from 2000 to 2008.

What is needed is data showing the distribution of casualties per age group versus the number of riders within each group. I know that licence/age stats are available but that is somewhat meaningless.

The number of over 40 rider casualties does appear to be over represented but if they comprise the bulk of the riding community then it is what would statistically be expected based on probability.

[MarkH]

If you can afford 2 bikes.......

.....that cost less than half as much for both as some spend on one Harley or Ducati.....

[James Deuce]

Your probably right. :D because I'm young and living life to the max eh? I'm prolly stupid/Gen Y/ Immature/ etc too :D

Well you do happily drop other people in the shit without owning up, so I'd say that was a big fat yes.

[Squiggles]

Well you do happily drop other people in the shit without owning up, so I'd say that was a big fat yes.

I resent being grouped with him :eek:

[James Deuce]

I resent being grouped with him :eek:

Don't worry, you're not. You could eat my children with some fava beans and a nice chianti, and you STILL wouldn't be lumped in with him.

[Grahameeboy]

.....that cost less than half as much for both as some spend on one Harley or Ducati.....

You still have 2 bikes........or am I missing something....

[MarkH]

You still have 2 bikes........or am I missing something....

Well, I wish I had two bikes - but why should I pay more in ACC levies on my rego if I have 2 bikes than someone that has 1 bike. Suppose I have 2 bikes and someone else has 1 with the value of his 1 equal to my 2 and both of us doing the same kms.

2 bikes = 2 regos = fair enough
but
2 bikes = 2 ACC levies = not fair!

If I won Lotto I would probably have 5 bikes (at least) but then the ACC levy could be shrugged off much easier. Someone that has a weekday commuter + weekend ride + family car/van/whatever would be paying a lot more than their fair share of ACC levies! A wealthy person with one expensive car has more money, spent more on vehicles and pays less in ACC levies.

It seems that they don't really care if it isn't fair, they aren't interested in being fair - they just go with whatever is easiest to administer.

[FROSTY]

Can I ask you guys. Has anybody actually listeed to what the Minister of transport has to say ?
I know full well what politico's have to say is usually shite but he does genuinely have public safety at heart.
Re the ABS thing I suspect all it would take is someone to point out to him that a lot of bikes don't actually come out with ABS brakes for him to reconcider.
He made a wonderfull comment that actually has me thinking--Hey he might have a few clues. To paint a picture the interviewer kept baiting him into saying that YOUNG drivers were a big issue.His reaction was to say NO its INEXPERIENCED drivers regardless of age that are the issue
I just love it -- a MOT with some bloody brains

[Usarka]

His reaction was to say NO its INEXPERIENCED drivers regardless of age that are the issue

A lot of experienced drivers drive pissed.

I'd say it's stupid drivers that are the issue.....

[Ixion]

The BAS thing is only bikes over 600cc and only from 2015 (ie new bikes first registered after 2015. It's not retrospective) . There are ABS models available now for a lot of >600cc bikes, just we don't see them because the demand isn't there. I suspect by 2015 most big bikes will have ABS available.

Whether that will make much difference to the injury rate is another matter

Arguably ABS would be more useful on smaller bikes. But that ain't going to happen

[p.dath]

...
1. The document is titled safer journeys. How will increasing an ACC levy make the journey safer?

We don't want to increase the ACC levy. The problem is there is a large deficit building ($1.5b) - an overdraft if you like. The country has to pay it back.



2. From 2000 to 2008 the number of bike registrations increased by a factor of 4 . The number of casualties increased by a factor of 2. This is actually a significant reduction in rider/casualty ratio from 2000 to 2008.
...
The number of over 40 rider casualties does appear to be over represented but if they comprise the bulk of the riding community then it is what would statistically be expected based on probability.

Devils Advocate. Do we really want such a fine grained billing system so as to target people ring down to their age? Such a system could be very expensive to administer, and can you imagine the hoops you would have to start jumping through to renew your registration. No more just specifying the bike and paying the bill. Now you will be proving your age, fronting up in person with birth certificates and the like.


Now if you tell me that private "ACC" cover was bought back, then I would be very keen. The private sector will naturlally do what is best to maximise profit (and hence costs). Those that are "less expensive" (aka, less risk) individuals will go to cheaper providers that will accept them.
Those that can't will have to stick with ACC - but with only higher risk candidates ACC would cost a lot more.

Of course, this doesn't help the sector who ride without a rego, licence, etc and make no direct contribution to ACC.

Someone did make some mention to adding an ACC level to petrol. I'm still mulling that over, but I think it has some merit - until electric or non-petrol bikes start becoming the normal thanks to a market distortion caused by an added "tax".

Oh the conundrum. There is no perfect system. Just a matter of choosing a system that meets most of our needs, and leaving it alone (otherwise we risk stuffing it up by trying to make it perfect).

[p.dath]

...
Re the ABS thing I suspect all it would take is someone to point out to him that a lot of bikes don't actually come out with ABS brakes for him to reconcider.
...

I made a submission, and was generally in favour of ABS - in the future, but not right now. I put forward that there is quite some variation in the "quality" of ABS systems between manufacturers at this point in time, and that legislating their use poses some risk.

[Grahameeboy]

Well, I wish I had two bikes - but why should I pay more in ACC levies on my rego if I have 2 bikes than someone that has 1 bike. Suppose I have 2 bikes and someone else has 1 with the value of his 1 equal to my 2 and both of us doing the same kms.

2 bikes = 2 regos = fair enough
but
2 bikes = 2 ACC levies = not fair!

If I won Lotto I would probably have 5 bikes (at least) but then the ACC levy could be shrugged off much easier. Someone that has a weekday commuter + weekend ride + family car/van/whatever would be paying a lot more than their fair share of ACC levies! A wealthy person with one expensive car has more money, spent more on vehicles and pays less in ACC levies.

It seems that they don't really care if it isn't fair, they aren't interested in being fair - they just go with whatever is easiest to administer.

It's the same in other countries dude...life ain't fair eh?...or is if different in the NZ....

[FROSTY]

A lot of experienced drivers drive pissed.

I'd say it's stupid drivers that are the issue.....
I'm not going into the drink driving debate as thats a whole other ketle of fish. There statisticly does seem to be a relationship more with inexperienced drivers ,alchohol and accidents than with experienced drivers,alchohol and accidents.
Ie the more common denominator is lack of experience --Gee go figure

[cowpatz]

Devils Advocate. Do we really want such a fine grained billing system so as to target people ring down to their age?

No we don't and I was not suggesting that this be done. I was just trying to come to grips with the 40 plus blip in casualty statistics.

[Grahameeboy]

No we don't and I was not suggesting that this be done. I was just trying to come to grips with the 40 plus blip in casualty statistics.

Why should age not be targeted...ACC is an insurance....insurance target age which is the best way, maybe not always the fairest way, to approach this

[Usarka]

Why should age not be targeted...ACC is an insurance....insurance target age which is the best way, maybe not always the fairest way, to approach this

What does insurance have to do with road safety?

[Coldrider]

I made a submission, and was generally in favour of ABS - in the future, but not right now. I put forward that there is quite some variation in the "quality" of ABS systems between manufacturers at this point in time, and that legislating their use poses some risk.Why would you want to impose ABS brakes on me, never needed them, perhaps you should get off motorcycles and leave them to those that can ride without being wrapped up in cottonwool. Perhaps all learners should be made to ride moto cross & enduroes so thay getsome idea of how to handle a bike, instead of getting straight to road bike, or dear where is that cruise control buttom again.

[Squiggles]

Theres every chance that new bikes will come with ABS around 2015 anyway... just as few new bikes can have their lights turned off

[MarkH]

It's the same in other countries dude...life ain't fair eh?...or is if different in the NZ....

So the rest of the world has ACC levies as well? Oh well, if it is done in an unfair way elsewhere then I guess there is no point in trying to do it any better here. As long as we aren't the worst in the world at whatever then I suppose we can consider ourselves to be doing REALLY well eh?

[Coldrider]

You mean the bikes are going to be covered in stickers:
ABS,Dynamic Stability Control, Power Assist Braking, Air Bag, Supplementary Air Bag, might as well take the car before motorcycles have to have four wheels to remain upright, shit am I grumpy today.

[cowpatz]

Why should age not be targeted...ACC is an insurance....insurance target age which is the best way, maybe not always the fairest way, to approach this

So are you suggesting we also target high risk sports and activities.....motorsport, rugby, netball, squash, basketball, sky diving, push bikers, infants and those that do things with Gerbils? Better still make it age based. Kinda cuts right across the population doesn't it? So why target motorcyclists?

[MarkH]

Someone did make some mention to adding an ACC level to petrol. I'm still mulling that over, but I think it has some merit - until electric or non-petrol bikes start becoming the normal thanks to a market distortion caused by an added "tax".

Surely anything that encourages the development and use of alternative power sources such a electric would be a good thing? The supply of petrol wont last forever and with the increasing demand from China and India it is only going to get more expensive. Obviously there will come a time when electric vehicles achieve a high enough percentage of NZs vehicle fleet that they will have to be levied somehow - but that isn't a problem for today.

I notice that the 2009 model of my scooter is available with an ABS option, but I don't know what percentage of bikes will offer that in 2015 - I guess there could be quite a large number of bikes that wouldn't be available in NZ if they brought in the ABS legislation. Maybe they should just put a $500 or $1000 levy on non-ABS bikes over 600cc to encourage riders to opt for the ABS models, while keeping the bikes without ABS available for those that couldn't give a rat's arse about ABS.

[Grahameeboy]

What does insurance have to do with road safety?

Okay..ACC is the issue..it's an insurance policy that levy's pool into...

[Coldrider]

Surely anything that encourages the development and use of alternative power sources such a electric would be a good thing? The supply of petrol wont last forever and with the increasing demand from China and India it is only going to get more expensive. Obviously there will come a time when electric vehicles achieve a high enough percentage of NZs vehicle fleet that they will have to be levied somehow - but that isn't a problem for today.

I notice that the 2009 model of my scooter is available with an ABS option, but I don't know what percentage of bikes will offer that in 2015 - I guess there could be quite a large number of bikes that wouldn't be available in NZ if they brought in the ABS legislation. Maybe they should just put a $500 or $1000 levy on non-ABS bikes over 600cc to encourage riders to opt for the ABS models, while keeping the bikes without ABS available for those that couldn't give a rat's arse about ABS.And add GST onto ABS increased prices as well,what coffa does that go into.

[Grahameeboy]

So the rest of the world has ACC levies as well? Oh well, if it is done in an unfair way elsewhere then I guess there is no point in trying to do it any better here. As long as we aren't the worst in the world at whatever then I suppose we can consider ourselves to be doing REALLY well eh?

I was talking about Rego...I think ACC is great but it also targets certain categories where the issues for me start..but that's life.

ACC is just another tax to fund the Health System...

[Grahameeboy]

So are you suggesting we also target high risk sports and activities.....motorsport, rugby, netball, squash, basketball, sky diving, push bikers, infants and those that do things with Gerbils? Better still make it age based. Kinda cuts right across the population doesn't it? So why target motorcyclists?

All we are being asked for is to pay a bit more for ACC levy's and lets face it we are more vunerable than those in motorsport being the higher risk item you use...I don't believe that is unreasonable...over 600cc bikes are capable of 160mph speeds with minimal protection...

[Katman]

All we are being asked for is to pay a bit more for ACC levy's and lets face it we are more vunerable than those in motorsport being the higher risk item you use...I don't believe that is unreasonable...over 600cc bikes are capable of 160mph speeds with minimal protection...

Speak for yourself Graham.

I have no desire to hand more money over to ACC.

[Coldrider]

All we are being asked for is to pay a bit more for ACC levy's and lets face it we are more vunerable than those in motorsport being the higher risk item you use...I don't believe that is unreasonable...over 600cc bikes are capable of 160mph speeds with minimal protection...ACC EFTPOS direct debit throttle by wire, another sticker for my bike perhaps.

[cowpatz]

All we are being asked for is to pay a bit more for ACC levy's and lets face it we are more vunerable than those in motorsport being the higher risk item you use...I don't believe that is unreasonable...over 600cc bikes are capable of 160mph speeds with minimal protection...

Yeah and the speed limit is 100 kmh. A bigger bike just gets there quicker and safer.

[masterofpuppets]

what i can't undersand is the legislation regarding scooters. a motocyclist on aq learner licence cant carry a pillion, cant do over 70k, and cant ride at night. tey've done a basic handling skills course, and have a machine that is much better equipped to carry a pillion than some cereal box chinese scooter.
if they want to reduce two wheeled accidents, then introduce a scheme for scooter riders. i'd say they need the BHS test more than any motorcyclist. the amount of crashes that i've seen involving scooters at fault is horrendous. i wonder what percentage of the ACC claimants they represent.
Nick

[Grahameeboy]

Speak for yourself Graham.

I have no desire to hand more money over to ACC.

I look at ACC as a form of Insurance....most important thing is to protect our wellbeing.

Your bike levy also covers a) your pillion b) a pedestrian that you hit....remember that fault does not come into it.

I would be very impressed if you could buy private insurance that would provide the extent of cover provided by ACC for anything remotely close to what you pay in motorbike ACC levies...I would take a punt and say unlikely.

Say you end up being paralysed from the waste down after a crash on your bike.

ACC will cover:



Health Care
Rehab
Occupational Therapy
80% of your salary - future earnings
Housing Mods
Mobility Vehicle that you can drive - $120,000
Paid Family Care

Call Asteron, Sovereign, Tower etc and ask what they would cover...those in Bold are what you do not get if you are born with a disability.

If you had the choice of either taking ACC or taking Private, you will realise that paying extra ACC levies is the best option

ACC charges (in your words "Targets") people like any other form of Insurance..so what is wrong with a variable rate for cc's

[Grahameeboy]

for owning a bike as they have lower emissions than cars mostly and if everyone rode bikes the planet would "Cool" quicker. (For those that believe
that Carbon Emissions are warming the planet)

Mmmm..the levy has nothing to do with emissions....but we are not friendly when it comes to rubber for our tyres...

[glanvillejon]

It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.
HAVE YOUR SAY ITS YOUR RIGHT.

"We are preparing a road safety strategy called Safer Journeys to take us through to 2020, and we want to hear what you think about our ideas to improve road safety in New Zealand.

We have launched a discussion document that presents New Zealand's key road safety challenges and outlines 60 possible initiatives to address them. It is not the intention to introduce this many initiatives, but we want to have a public discussion which gathers together all possible interventions and considers which are the most important to adopt.

This is why we want to hear your ideas. We want to have a debate about which ones we should focus on. "

[glanvillejon]

Go to Page 31 and 32 of the discussion document. This is the section based on motorcycles. I have just completed the online submission, if you scroll down in this online submission you can just answer the questions that relate to motorcycles or answer other questions if you feel like it. Some of the initiatives being discussed are actually quite good, the only one I wouldn't agree with is increasing ACC levies for bikes over 600cc as discussed above but you can answer that with your own reasons for disagreeing. There is also room to make your own suggestions for improving safety for motorcyclists, a good chance to have your say! Im sure there are lots of things you could think of, like out lawing Cyclist group riding on open roads! lol - thats another can of worms that maybe I shouldn't open! grrrr lol

[Grahameeboy]

Go to Page 31 and 32 of the discussion document. This is the section based on motorcycles. I have just completed the online submission, if you scroll down in this online submission you can just answer the questions that relate to motorcycles or answer other questions if you feel like it. Some of the initiatives being discussed are actually quite good, the only one I wouldn't agree with is increasing ACC levies for bikes over 600cc as discussed above but you can answer that with your own reasons for disagreeing. There is also room to make your own suggestions for improving safety for motorcyclists, a good chance to have your say! Im sure there are lots of things you could think of, like out lawing Cyclist group riding on open roads! lol - thats another can of worms that maybe I shouldn't open! grrrr lol

Interesting with cyclists....one serious accident and it's all over the tabloids and on Breakfast TV..would be a different story if it was motorbikes

[cowpatz]

Out of interest are mopeds lumped in with the motorcycle casualty stats?

[glanvillejon]

Interesting with cyclists....one serious accident and it's all over the tabloids and on Breakfast TV..would be a different story if it was motorbikes
Absolutely, I was out Gebes pass on Sunday and just about took out a pack of cyclists and myself in the process of trying to avoid them. It was only a matter of time before it happened.

[Grahameeboy]

Absolutely, I was out Gebes pass on Sunday and just about took out a pack of cyclists and myself in the process of trying to avoid them. It was only a matter of time before it happened.

The problem is that they are often in packs of 20 going at race speed...down my road..residential...they go past my house taking up the whole road...

[dpex]

It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.


I had a similar discussion with another couple of KBer's the other day. Their attitude being like yours..."What's the point? After all, the Gov ignored the anti-smacking referendum results, so why would they consider any biker submissions?"

Oh yes. That's the guaranteed method of losing. Just assume you're beaten before you start.

It takes so little effort to put in a submission; so why not do one?

For example, you might like to submit on the issues regarding moped riders. They require no bike licence, yet a 70Kg Moped rider, plus 50KG moped, hitting a solid object at 50Ks will see the moped rider either very ill or very dead.

What about ABS brakes? Great for straight-line stopping, but do they help when a frightened biker squeezes the lever during an 'Oh Fuck! I'm too hot into this corner'?

What about saying something about engine size? Surely, if the wee girl from Orewa can get around the track on a 125 at near the same speed...and frequently better than those on way bigger bikes, is the size of the bike the issue?

You see, on the one side the panel looking into submissions are being driven by ACC and the cops. The warts from ACC have no idea about bikes and bikers, other than what they cost ACC. The cops, like our good friend Scumdog spend their days picking up after some twit splats. And so the cops have a seriously jaundiced view (and quite reasonably in the circumstances).

But we, the riders, being from neither the ACC or the cops can contribute with well-crafted, well-reasoned submissions.

Remember, the main driver behind this 'Let's get the crash-rate to zero,' crap is being driven by ACC who are under huge pressure to reduce costs.


And so the focus is on reducing costs. Costs will not be reduced by invoking ever-more penalty rules. Understanding the issues and applying reasoned solutions might.

But if you don't tell them what you know or believe, they'll never know and therefore make their decisions in a one-sided vacuum.

[dpex]

You'll notice, if you have read the discussion document, that there is but a slight tilt at making bicycling safer. And those initiatives generally tilt toward other road-users giving bicyclists extra favour. Why?

Should those pretty boys and gals be accorded any more room on the road simply because they're no using petrol or diesel? Why?

Did you notice any suggestion that bicyclists should be required to wear proper protective gear?

Is there any suggestion that they should pay an ACC levy?

Is there any suggestion they should be constrained to riding one-by-one, as opposed to pairs or in wide groups?

Is there any suggestion bicyclists riding racing bikes should undergo some form of licencing?

The answer to all of the above is a resounding NO!'

The facts are, the modern racing bikes can get up to awesome speed...better than some Mopeds. But as we have all observed, bicyclists, on account of they all think they're doing God's work in the clean-green department, act often as a law unto themselves.

perhaps, by making a submission on bicyclists, dressed in their bullshit lycra, body-huggers, bereft of any training requirement, ACC levy, or licence, and generally treating the roads as their personal highways, might cause the commission to think a bit harder about penalising motor cyclists.

You'll never know till you try.

At the end of the day, as mentioned, this whole thing is being driven by a demand that ACC reduce its costs.

To get the annual road toll below a certain level becomes an exercise in reductio ad absurdum. Ergo, while mechanical things roll on the roads a certain number of their navigators will become road-kill, no matter what we do short of stopping all rolling things on all roads.

But, we have to play the game.

So submit something, even it it means nothing more than; YOU MADE AN EFFORT.

[dpex]

I look at ACC as a form of Insurance....most important thing is to protect our wellbeing.

Your bike levy also covers a) your pillion b) a pedestrian that you hit....remember that fault does not come into it.

I would be very impressed if you could buy private insurance that would provide the extent of cover provided by ACC for anything remotely close to what you pay in motorbike ACC levies...I would take a punt and say unlikely.

Say you end up being paralysed from the waste down after a crash on your bike.

ACC will cover:



Health Care
Rehab
Occupational Therapy
80% of your salary - future earnings
Housing Mods
Mobility Vehicle that you can drive - $120,000
Paid Family Care

Call Asteron, Sovereign, Tower etc and ask what they would cover...those in Bold are what you do not get if you are born with a disability.

If you had the choice of either taking ACC or taking Private, you will realise that paying extra ACC levies is the best option

ACC charges (in your words "Targets") people like any other form of Insurance..so what is wrong with a variable rate for cc's

Hmmmm. You make an interesting point, Grahameboy, except for one small issue. That is, ACC is about to be privatised. The gov can no longer accept the toll of ACC.

It was a sort've fine idea when first introduced, especially to by-pass the American, litigious ethic AKA sue, for the slightest.

But as with all social freebies, and that is what ACC really is; a get out of jail card free, despite the gross ineptitude of the claimant.... it has bred an 'I don't have to care because I'm covered,' mentality.

Crash ya bike? Make a mess of ya self? 'Ho hum. I could do with a few months holiday on 80% of my current income.'

Make a mess of someone else? 'Ho hum. Sorry about that, but ACC will see you right.'

But ACC is looking not just at road injuries. They're looking at a whole bunch of costs.

Just latterly they put out a moot that sexual abuse claimants actually had to demonstrate that they have been actually hurt by the 'abuse'.

The psychologists are screaming 'Not fair!' Every sexual abuse victim has been hurt.

They probably have but ACC's actual thrust is to determine if in fact a claimant has been sexually abused or is just playing the system.

In the new regime the 'victim' has to identify the abuser and then demonstrate some DSM1V level of damage.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not minimizing the pain of genuine victims, simply highlighting the fact that ACC has become a good earn for so many.

Sadly, that good earn is about to cease because we, the people, can no longer afford to pay folk to step out on Sunday morning with absolutely no care for their self preservation.

Thus ACC IS driving the road-safe issue because, very soon now, ACC will be put in the hands of private insurers. And so, behind ACC's demands for greater self protection is a requirement from the private insurers that their risk will be minimised.

So submit something intelligent.

[Grahameeboy]

.

So who will fund the non work place "ACC" then? Is that an intelligent comment?:whistle:

[dpex]

So who will fund the non work place "ACC" then? Is that an intelligent comment?:whistle:

I think that's all a part of the scheme to reduce ACC costs. Private insurance will be required, but I'll lay odds they will still keep the concept of no-fault as regards suing a third party for a real or imagined injury.

[Grahameeboy]

I think that's all a part of the scheme to reduce ACC costs. Private insurance will be required, but I'll lay odds they will still keep the concept of no-fault as regards suing a third party for a real or imagined injury.

I think you will find that they will just privatise "In The Workplace" ACC because Employers pay this anyway so it has less impact.

No Health provider is going to cover the costs that ACC can end up paying out i.e. quadraplegic motorcycle accident...if they did the premiums would be sky high...and they cannot sue a TP for injury anyway...

You would have to have Health cover plus Income Protection cover amongst others...it would not be cheap

[rocketman1]

It's not about fair, and I can guarantee that you wouldn't like the increased ACC levies the bureacracy around your idea would bring.

Fair? Don't make me laugh. Motorcyclists are a minority and do not even comprise a credible, threatening voting bloc, because they can't even stop giving each other shit for the type of bike they ride, let alone mount a campaign to prevent a change in Government policy.

A ride on Parliament doesn't let "them" know anything, show 'them" anything, inform "them" of anything.

Protest is a thing of the past. Governments need sound economic reasons to not ban motorcycles, and they need to be informed by professional lobby groups who can demonstrate the sound political and economic benefits of doing so.

Public submissions are a waste of time and change nothing.

Political power is horse trading. If keeping motorcycles legal in NZ came down to banning adventure riding to gain Green support against the bill banning motorcycling would the Adventure riders give publicly voiced support to the idea?

I think not. We're not a political movement, we have no clear long term goals or motivation to meet them and our Modus Operandi seems to consist of impotent whining in forums that have no bearing on outcomes. Like Public Submissions.

The submission letter we are suppose to sign IMHO is a waste of time. If I was a minister of this government I would not take any more notice of that than a scammed email. What ever we as a minority will not make the slightest bit of difference. It may help if some of the ministers actually ride bikes themselves. I'm not sure many do. Its all about money $$, far to many bikers are killing and injuring themselves, this costs big bucks to the tax payers that have to pay for fixing up busted bodies on ACC. You will get very little support from Joe Public to stop the Govt introducing rules to stop bikers getting hurt. If Govt changes are considered to save lives it will happen.

If I were making the rules I would, ensure all born again bikers, eg.that can now go and buy a 1200cc bike... attend rider training and biker education courses. Which you should have to pass, before you get permission to insure, register, and ride a large bike.
I can say this because I have been there and done that, and would have welcomed that ruling when I returned to the biking fraternity. It wouldnt have done me any harm at all.

[Ixion]

BRONZ submission. 15 pages of it.

Note that this does not necessary represent my personal opinions.

[Katman]

Some great suggestions in there Ixion.

I particularly like the suggestion for an added license class between restricted and full.

Interesting (and very valid) view on the lowering of the breath/alcohol limit too.

[James Deuce]

I had a similar discussion with another couple of KBer's the other day. Their attitude being like yours..."What's the point? After all, the Gov ignored the anti-smacking referendum results, so why would they consider any biker submissions?"

Oh yes. That's the guaranteed method of losing. Just assume you're beaten before you start.

It takes so little effort to put in a submission; so why not do one?

For example, you might like to submit on the issues regarding moped riders. They require no bike licence, yet a 70Kg Moped rider, plus 50KG moped, hitting a solid object at 50Ks will see the moped rider either very ill or very dead.

What about ABS brakes? Great for straight-line stopping, but do they help when a frightened biker squeezes the lever during an 'Oh Fuck! I'm too hot into this corner'?

What about saying something about engine size? Surely, if the wee girl from Orewa can get around the track on a 125 at near the same speed...and frequently better than those on way bigger bikes, is the size of the bike the issue?

You see, on the one side the panel looking into submissions are being driven by ACC and the cops. The warts from ACC have no idea about bikes and bikers, other than what they cost ACC. The cops, like our good friend Scumdog spend their days picking up after some twit splats. And so the cops have a seriously jaundiced view (and quite reasonably in the circumstances).

But we, the riders, being from neither the ACC or the cops can contribute with well-crafted, well-reasoned submissions.

Remember, the main driver behind this 'Let's get the crash-rate to zero,' crap is being driven by ACC who are under huge pressure to reduce costs.


And so the focus is on reducing costs. Costs will not be reduced by invoking ever-more penalty rules. Understanding the issues and applying reasoned solutions might.

But if you don't tell them what you know or believe, they'll never know and therefore make their decisions in a one-sided vacuum.

I simply don't agree with you. ACC levies for over-600cc bikes are going up whether you like it or not. The request for submissions is simply regarded as "Fair Warning" by the Government.

I don't think many people understand that the guys & gals forcing these changes aren't doing it because they don't like bikes. They're doing it because they have been charged with reducing casualty stats and the ongoing social cost of road deaths and injuries and Motorcycles are an easy start due to the general lack of impulse control exhibited by motorcycling in general.

Save dosh, or recover the cost.

You also seem to be unable to grasp the idea I am pushing.

Active participation in politics for a motorcycle lobby.

Not grievance based entitlement oriented whinging, active partnership with the aspects of Government that have the most scope to make sure that motorcycling is too expensive for kiddies to get into in the first instance.

Adversarial attitudes will achieve nothing, neither will letters from individuals. Motorcycling as a group needs to identify where its political and economic power lies (albeit limited) and leverage from that. By far the best suited and most active political group open to motorcyclists are Farmers. Banning motorcycles altogether can be presented as a negative cost benefit for the NZ farming economy.

Personally, I think your Mum spent far too much time telling you you were special. Individuals hold no power in a Democracy. The key to preserving rights is organisation, a solid support base, lots of money, and a genial mode of operation.

[dpex]

The submission letter we are suppose to sign IMHO is a waste of time. If I was a minister of this government I would not take any more notice of that than a scammed email. What ever we as a minority will not make the slightest bit of difference. It may help if some of the ministers actually ride bikes themselves. I'm not sure many do. Its all about money $$, far to many bikers are killing and injuring themselves, this costs big bucks to the tax payers that have to pay for fixing up busted bodies on ACC. You will get very little support from Joe Public to stop the Govt introducing rules to stop bikers getting hurt. If Govt changes are considered to save lives it will happen.

If I were making the rules I would, ensure all born again bikers, eg.that can now go and buy a 1200cc bike... attend rider training and biker education courses. Which you should have to pass, before you get permission to insure, register, and ride a large bike.
I can say this because I have been there and done that, and would have welcomed that ruling when I returned to the biking fraternity. It wouldnt have done me any harm at all.

Let me see if I've got this right.

1. You're in 'What's the point of submitting cos nobody cares," camp. Right?

2. You assert bikers are costing ACC big bucks, but in a way suggestion we have no peers. So what about rugby, league, bicycling, scate-boarding, falling off ladders, falling off mountains, falling over when pissed? The list could take a book. The fact is, compared to many 'other' groups claiming ACC, Bikers are small fry.

3. But what really first laugh then almost spit was reading that instead of having sufficient intelligence to go do some training courses, you reveal you didn't, then splatted then have the gargantuan temerity to blame the system because you weren't forced to do some training.

That very statement of yours, rocketman, encapsulates all which is wrong with modern society. Nobody has personal responsibility unless they have been told.

And I used to think Katman was a dickhead. Jesus, compared to you he's a genius.

[dpex]

Personally, I think your Mum spent far too much time telling you you were special. Individuals hold no power in a Democracy. The key to preserving rights is organisation, a solid support base, lots of money, and a genial mode of operation.[/QUOTE]

Two points. The first being, my mother made both Atilla The Hun, and Vlad The Impaler look like pussycats who never spoke, only screamed. Good stuff. Served to toughen me up.

Second, this site does not have the space available for me to list the number of individuals who have made a small to a huge difference.

But what fascinates me about you, "What's the point submitting," lot is, 'Why not? What have you got to lose?' Or are you so inarticulate that you simply can't craft a half-readable letter?

[dpex]

Speak for yourself Graham.

I have no desire to hand more money over to ACC.

Jesus H Christ! What an end to the week. Not only were the fish hard to catch in Tongariro over the first two days of the season, now I have to clutch for the barf-bag as I find a need to agree with Katman.

Bugger me. I might just suicide.:--((((

[glanvillejon]

Look here all you winers and wingers who obviously enjoy all this banter! lol JUST FILL IN THE BLOODY SUBMISSION! IT TAKES 2 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME AND YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE!:argh::argh::calm:

[dpex]

You have no excuse for not making a submission to the latest Road-Safe discussion.

To make the submission effective, pick on just one point and discourse a little on that.

You can submit as many opinions as you wish, but to be affective, do one at a time.

Counterpoint is a very affective method. Bikes V Cyclists (as regards risk and cost) Bikers V In-home accidents. Bikers V Rugby or League players.

Enough submitters submitting counterpoints gets the thinking of the panel shifted off their current target (bikers) and onto something else.

Don't attack their attitude or ideas. Submit short, to the point, interesting stuff.

But, if you don't submit then don't bleat when the hammer falls and you find yourself paying more and suffering greater restrictions.

[p.dath]

You can no longer make a submission. Submissions closed at 5pm on Friday 2 October 2009.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Makeasubmission/

[Grahameeboy]

Let me see if I've got this right.

1. You're in 'What's the point of submitting cos nobody cares," camp. Right?

2. You assert bikers are costing ACC big bucks, but in a way suggestion we have no peers. So what about rugby, league, bicycling, scate-boarding, falling off ladders, falling off mountains, falling over when pissed? The list could take a book. The fact is, compared to many 'other' groups claiming ACC, Bikers are small fry.

3. But what really first laugh then almost spit was reading that instead of having sufficient intelligence to go do some training courses, you reveal you didn't, then splatted then have the gargantuan temerity to blame the system because you weren't forced to do some training.

That very statement of yours, rocketman, encapsulates all which is wrong with modern society. Nobody has personal responsibility unless they have been told.

And I used to think Katman was a dickhead. Jesus, compared to you he's a genius.

2. I disagree that that we have peers as you suggest...rugby..even mountain climbing are no where near being our peers...
3. Fair comment

[James Deuce]

Personally, I think your Mum spent far too much time telling you you were special. Individuals hold no power in a Democracy. The key to preserving rights is organisation, a solid support base, lots of money, and a genial mode of operation.

Two points. The first being, my mother made both Atilla The Hun, and Vlad The Impaler look like pussycats who never spoke, only screamed. Good stuff. Served to toughen me up.

Second, this site does not have the space available for me to list the number of individuals who have made a small to a huge difference.

But what fascinates me about you, "What's the point submitting," lot is, 'Why not? What have you got to lose?' Or are you so inarticulate that you simply can't craft a half-readable letter?

There is no point making submissions as individuals. I've been involved in motorcycle "politics" in the past and I simply can't be bothered being involved ever again for the simple reason that human beings, motorcyclists in particular, cannot seem to understand that a simple message delivered by a collective of 1000s has vastly more impact than an unplanned letter writing campaign (usually APPALLINGLY badly written) pushing 1000s of indivdual barrows.

A managed campaign, fronted by rational well-presented individuals, rather than bearded, greasy, smelly, umkempt, shouting loonies demanding "rights" over other road users could easily insert motorcycles into the transport plan. That's all we need to do for a start. At the moment they are perceived as lethal toys and excluded from transport planning altogether.

I can write submissions. They are thoroughly pointless without any political weight behind them. Motorcyclists laud individuality over everything, but are incredibly inflexible in their approach to ever organising and achieving anything. The social framework has changed since the '60s. Successful partnerships by NGOs with Governments are achieved by actively seeking middle ground and creating an understanding around which both parties can work.

Every, and I mean EVERY "protest" action by motorcyclists in New Zealand for the last 25 years has done nothing to change public and political perception of motorcyclists. They amount to some untidy bush shirt wearing mongrel popping up on telly, growling unintelligibly, and then leading a ride on Parliament. Which achieves nothing but another increment in the entropic destruction of the Universe.

The feeling I have from following this thread is that rather than "motorcycling" engaging in a constructive manner with the transport planners, accident insurers, and the people cleaning up "our" (perception is everything) mess, "we'd" much rather go on a character assasination programme targetting other Kiwis doing the stuff that they enjoy to divert attention away from the perception that motorcyclists are at the head of the irresponsible idiots queue.

I've been looking around at the world at fatality stats and they all show a similar pattern. A doubling of registered motorcycles on the road in the last 5 years and a one third increase in fatalities. Motorcyclists in general are actually doing bloody well as road users, especially compared with automobile fatalities whijch have largely plateaued or begun a slight increase.

But there is no organised approach from informed and educated motorcyclists presenting the good PR. Just angry, threatening, entitlement syndrome afflicted Neanderthals demanding that someone do something about everyone else, without ever presenting documentation accepted as factual by the majority of NZ motorcyclists happy to be represented by people who talk the same language as politicians and regulators, with the clear goal of improving the status of motorcycles within the scope of the transport portfolio.

Can you not see how that looks to a panel of people charged with reducing injuries and fatalities on NZ roads?

[glanvillejon]

:done:Hmmmm just fill in the submission, it's our chance to have a say about making our roads safer. There are some good things in there as well which we should show our support for, and something maybe we aren't too keen on. If the government DIDN'T want INDIVIDUALS opinions, they wouldn't have asked for it.

If you don't want your say, go and live in North Korea, I hear that is nice this time of year. :done:

[James Deuce]

:done:Hmmmm just fill in the submission, it's our chance to have a say about making our roads safer. There are some good things in there as well which we should show our support for, and something maybe we aren't too keen on. If the government DIDN'T want INDIVIDUALS opinions, they wouldn't have asked for it.

If you don't want your say, go and live in North Korea, I hear that is nice this time of year. :done:

Too late. Closed yesterday.

Public submissions does not necessarily mean individual submissions.

So an organised response means a "Communist" response?

Don't forget to bitch and moan when ACC levies for motorcycles over 600cc go through the roof, simply because they are perceived as toys.

[Ixion]

Dog bear in mind that the Strategy document is NOT draft legislation. Before anything it proposes can actually become law , legislation must be drafted , and there is a formal process which must be gone through. Part of that process (usually) is an ability for the public to make (further) submissions on the draft law. Usually in more detail.

However, it is certainly better to quash silly ideas as early in the process as possible.

[dpex]

:done:Hmmmm just fill in the submission, it's our chance to have a say about making our roads safer. There are some good things in there as well which we should show our support for, and something maybe we aren't too keen on. If the government DIDN'T want INDIVIDUALS opinions, they wouldn't have asked for it.

If you don't want your say, go and live in North Korea, I hear that is nice this time of year. :done:

Yes! Glanville. That's the fact so many of these twits have missed.

That's the trouble with this land. We have so many freedoms to do whatever we wish, say to whom whatever we wish, poke a finger at Jonny Cop, snub our nose at the courts, and then expect ACC to pick up the cost when poke the finger and get it broken, then demand costs for breaking a leg when falling off a wall during an escape from prison.

You're right. So right. Ten minutes in North Korea or Afghanistan would cure many on this site.

But what do e do to inspire them? The answer is; nothing. The freedoms they have are so wide, and the constrictions they have are so few, that they simply don't care.

They will all wail and moan when the new regime comes into being, and demand to know why 'they' didn't do something about it. But in the end, they'll all just sit down and do nothing. The new regime, whatever it will be, will simply foll over them. They'll pay the fees, mumble at the cost and remain the most pathetic group of humans on earth.

Fuck me! Even the Inuits (those are folk who live in make-shift ice houses, AKA Igloos, and who leave their aged out in the snow to die, thereby lessening the impact on what little social welfare they have) have the balls to get up and protest about the politically incorrectness of New Zealand's very own Eskimo Pie....Although I suspect Green Peace had a bit to do with it.

But throbbing, take it slowly, protest works.

Look at 1080? When the Graff brothers made their video about this hideous poison all but hunters shunned it....well, there may have been a few 'Bambi TV watchers who were affected' but it went nowhere.

Suddenly, the Taupo District Council has realised the damage this shit is causing.

See the lineal progression? 1. A few hunters see what's going on. Most ignore them. The hunters then turn up with bags of native birds, and trout guts with weird polyps (I caught one of those just yesterday), and deformed Kura. Suddenly, they get a voice with the powers.

But It's taken years. We hunters have been batting on about 1080 almost since the end of WW2. Suddenly, sense has overtaken bureaucratic convention.

And that's what we're up against here. Bureaucratic convention.. Ergo, all bikers are a danger to themselves and others so we...the powers at be...have to enforce some more rules to prevent them hurting themselves.

More rules!? Fuck me! Look at the rule book now. It's almost novel length. And they want to add more.

I come back to a point I made some posts ago about reducing the injury/death toll below a certain level.

The bureacrats (read ACC want it at zero). Rationale says there is a certain level of chance below which no nation can descend.

To align us, as so many do with Northern European countries, and ask why we can't get down to their levels is insane.

In NZ we don't have six months of the year during which we are covered in snow and need chains to get our four-wheels from here to there.

We don't have four hours of daylight during winter.

Have any of you ever been to Sweden in winter? It's like being muffled in wall-to-wall white stuff. No wonder their annual crash rate is less than hours. But I'll bet that if you compared their summer crash-rate with ours....Given they're Swedes and Danes, and generally act stoned most of the time on account of they pay 85% taxes but live off timber sales....thy would be equal or greater.
]
But let's not have a truth get in the way of a good statistic.

Protest. Fuck it! Protest! Make your voice heard.

David beat Goliath, the Russians beat Napolean and the bosch. David Tua beat....Oh well we might forget that one...

The point being, the little guy has beaten the big guy so often, yet the little guys of the future seem to forget.

We bikers are the little guys.

For christ's sakes. Get up and say your bit, and be heard.

[James Deuce]

Well, that confirms that then.

[kevfromcoro]

I went to court on friday.
Did the crime and paid up
just one thing.. the courtroom was full of police.. i mean 8 or 10 of them..
seemed a bit unusual.... well i got sentanced and went outside.. there were 2 police guarding the door.. then these 2 big maori muthas came in.. but they had police badges on... they wanted to go in the court room.. but the police stopped them.. well not really police badges.. something made up.... when i was in the office they came in. and they started talking to me...started about the badges were different,, and this is our queen. not NZ queen..
they were there to stir shit,,, had note books and all the imfo about law
couldnt believe this was happening in NZ
anyone know about this lot?

Whoops.... looks like i put this the wrong thread.

[MarkH]

well not really police badges.. something made up.... when i was in the office they came in. and they started talking to me...started about the badges were different,, and this is our queen. not NZ queen..
they were there to stir shit,,, had note books and all the imfo about law
couldnt believe this was happening in NZ
anyone know about this lot?

Sounds like apartheid supporters. Somehow one law for all is not good enough for them.

[cromagnon]

Not sure if this has been posted up yet... did a search but couldnt find the new link anywhere. The govt has put out the "Draft Safer Journeys for Motorcycling Guide" LINK (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/consultation/draft-safer-journeys-for-motorcycling-guide/index.html). The following is from the email that was forwarded on:



The NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) has just released a draft version of our motorcycling safety guide, Safer Journeys for Motorcycling, and we need your input.
The intent of the guide is to address the disproportionately high crash risks associated with motorcycling in New Zealand, by providing best-practice guidance for reducing the numbers of fatal and serious injury crashes involving motorcyclists. The document reflects the Safe System approach, although it does emphasise safe roads and roadsides.
Thus far, the guide has been prepared with input from a variety of stakeholders who each represent a range of interests and perspectives. This includes the NZTA as the delivery agent, and other key stakeholders such as MOTO NZ (Motorcyclists Own The Options), road controlling authorities, and ACC.
But to help ensure success, we need to hear from everyone that has an interest in improving motorcycling safety.
Take a look at the draft version of Safer Journeys for Motorcycling and let us know what you think. Please forward this to any groups or individuals that you think might also be interested in contributing their thoughts.
For more information and to download a copy of Safer Journeys for Motorcycling, go to http://www.nzta.govt.nz/consultation/draft-safer-journeys-for-motorcycling-guide/index.html
Comments are needed by Friday, 20th January 2012.

Thank you for your support and participation.
Kind regards,
Patrick Golier
Principal Advisor - Network Optimisation
DDI 64 4 894 6440
E Patrick.Golier@nzta.govt.nz

NZ Transport Agency
National Office
Victoria Arcade
50 Victoria Street
Private Bag 6995
Wellington 6141
New Zealand
T 64 4 894 5400
F 64 4 894 6100
www.nzta.govt.nz

[Berries]

Probably worth starting a new thread on that one, chance for people to have some input rather than moan on KB.

EDIT - Just did it. (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/144689-Safer-Journeys-for-Motorcycling?p=1130209898#post1130209898)

[p.dath]

Probably worth starting a new thread on that one, chance for people to have some input rather than moan on KB.

EDIT - Just did it.

You should post a link to the new thread ... :)