ACC Levies. BRONZ meeting

[chrispy121]

How many accidents are caused by unmarked road works that we already pay an extra few cents a litre to do?

[NighthawkNZ]

How many accidents are caused by unmarked road works that we already pay an extra few cents a litre to do?

I nearly had one of them last year going to the mates rally... fresh road works on a corner, no marking or signs the road crew were still there and had just packed them up but there was still a hell of a lot of loose grit... we were lucky

[jeffs]

Food for thought. What is an ACC bike claim ? Its not just accidents that add to the stats.

Real Example.
My last bike was a Xt660, when I went to look at it, I wore shorts. The previous owner had just done a warm up ride. I leaned over the bike and burnt my leg on the exhaust. The burn was bad enough to have to go to A&E and have it treated, with several follow up re-dressings.

The incident was put down as a MotorBike related ACC injury. So was added to the stats for Bikes. The bike was parked, I have never turned the key and or even sat on it. But ACC added one more claim to the stats.

The nurse who was treating me informed me this was a common type of burn, and even showed me hers.

At the time everyone laughed at my story.

Go figure, if I have burnt myself on a cigarette, no one would be making me pay $500 a year more and I would still be laughing.

[jeffs]

BTW I hope what ever the outcome of tonight's meeting will to posted to this thread. And sorry for not making tonight, but I will be at what ever rally is organized to show our feeling.

[NighthawkNZ]

hmmmm W.O.F

Flat fee on WOF's (say $5 or $10) ie 2,919,151 vehicles (again not not counting trucks etc and assuming that all these are once a year, but there will be a good percentage that are every 6 months.)

2,919,151 x $5 = $14,595,755 (this would be a lot higher counting the older vehicles in the fleet)

[Redstar]

Heres a paste from the UK tax costs
Motorcycle (with or without a sidecar) (TC17)
Engine size (cc) 12 months rate 6 months rate
Not over 150 £15.00 Not applicable
151-400 £33.00 Not applicable
401-600 £48.00 Not applicable
Over 600 £66.00 £36.30
now at 45p to the $ perhaps I should stop wingeing and go home? :zzzz:

[Reckless]

BTW I hope what ever the outcome of tonight's meeting will to posted to this thread. And sorry for not making tonight, but I will be at what ever rally is organized to show our feeling.

Yes Plus one for me to! Sorry all!!
I was about to leave at 6:30 and my plumber turned up to put in a vanity as he couldn't come tomorrow as planned for the tile layer on Friday. You see I'm not allowed another road bike till I get the renovations done. Fair enough I've bought 1, crashed it, and 3 MX bikes in the mean time so gotta give her, her wish.

Anyway did you have a good turn out???

Any great new ideas??

[AD345]

pretty reasonable turn-out, must have been around 200 people there.

Most that wanted to got a chance to vent about something or other

The biggest resolutions (IMO) were -
1.Unlawful protests are not condoned but unpeaceable was struck down (yay - loud pipes FTW!)

2. National protest date set for the 17th of November

the rest was pretty much just venting and semantics, so a reasonable result all in all.

[Danae]

Some photos :]

[PrincessBandit]

I thought Ixion did a great job chairing what could have been a potentially unruly/volatile meeting. Everything was kept on track and finished on time with most people getting the chance to say their piece if they wanted.

Great to meet some more kber's and nice to be able to put names to faces now Mom and Maha. And Donor - so nice to see you again!

[kwaka_crasher]

The reality is most motorcycle accidents ARE SINGLE VEHICLE ACCIDENTS.

No. We've been through this. Only 33% of all motorcycle crashes are single vehicle.

Of the multivehicle crashes which make up 67% of all crashes, 62% are other vehicle fault, so 38% of those are the motorcyclists fault. That's 38% of the 67% of multivehicle crashes which is 25% (0.38 x 0.67) of ALL accidents.

So 58% (33% + 25%) of all crashes are motorcyclist fault. But that's not to say 58% of the cost should be laid at the feet of motorcyclists since ACC are playing the blame game.

[crash harry]

Was a good meeting, run well I thought. Thanks to the BRONZ comittee for everything you are doing!

[Jantar]

No. We've been through this. Only 33% of all motorcycle crashes are single vehicle.

Of the multivehicle crashes which make up 67% of all crashes, 62% are other vehicle fault, so 38% of those are the motorcyclists fault. That's 38% of the 67% of multivehicle crashes which is 25% (0.38 x 0.67) of ALL accidents.

So 58% (33% + 25%) of all crashes are motorcyclist fault. But that's not to say 58% of the cost should be laid at the feet of motorcyclists since ACC are playing the blame game.

But even this doesn't tell the full story. According to the Police data for year ended 2008:
96 injuries and 3 fatalities (in single vehicle motorcycle accidents) were due to road conditions;
10 juries and 0 fatalities were due to vehicle fault (so technically still a rider fault);
26 injuries and 1 fatality were due to Avoiding another vehicle,
pedestrian, party or obstacle;
So 10% of injuries and 8% of fatalities were not the fault of the rider even though they were single vehicle accidents.

Or that 58% that are supposedly motorcyclist fault is now reduced to 49%.

[TerminalAddict]

even the out of towners got a voice or two :shifty:

[PrincessBandit]

even the out of towners got a voice or two :shifty:

Even Katman got the opportunity to speak.

[kwaka_crasher]

But even this doesn't tell the full story. According to the Police data for year ended 2008:
96 injuries and 3 fatalities (in single vehicle motorcycle accidents) were due to road conditions;
10 injuries and 0 fatalities were due to vehicle fault (so technically still a rider fault);
26 injuries and 1 fatality were due to Avoiding another vehicle,
pedestrian, party or obstacle;
So 10% of injuries and 8% of fatalities were not the fault of the rider even though they were single vehicle accidents.

10% of all injury or 10% of single vehicle injury? i.e how many single vehicle injury motorcycles crashes were there in that period according to the Police - 260?

[Jantar]

10% of all injury or 10% of single vehicle injury? i.e how many single vehicle injury motorcycles crashes were there in that period according to the Police - 260?
A total of 1362 crashes which included 48 fatalities. So this is 10% of ALL crashes that have been included in single vehicle crashes.

[The Pastor]

oh man katman was there i missed him lame.

Very well done, thanks to bronze and Ixion. Good job.

Big thanks to all who turned up, and to those who didnt - nothing will get done if you dont turn up to meetings. Everyone was well behaved.

[Phurrball]

Great meeting BRONZ!

The meeting and proposed protest action made the main RNZ National news bulletin at 6am.

Sadly, I'm off to work shortly, but I assume there will be something on Morning report :YES:

[cstrat007]

You can argue one way or another that your big bike is not dangerous but the reality is that it is.
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently.
Acc doesnt care about whether or not you are more comfortable on a 1000cc and find it more pleasurable to ride. Their interests are in keeping the accident rate down (or so they say)

However just becuase this may be the case it does not mean that we should be discriminated against just because the activity is dangerous.

Acc is fundamentally a no fault, no liability scheme and is a corrupt one at that in that we have always payed higher levies than other modes of transport. There is no increase for drunk drivers who cause massive damage in collisions nor for people who drive their car into a crowd of people.
If big bikes are dangerous then perhaps acc should look at providing further training to make it safer. If it is an issue of wrecklessness then perhaps it needs to be policed more thoroughly.

It's not Acc's problem that we enjoy riding big bikes but it is not OUR problem that they're suffering financial hardship and that they're system is flawed. So this is a fundamental question of legaility. It seems they want the best of both worlds and want no liability for people who break the law and cause accidents but take advantage of people who have ridden for a number of years claim free.

Uh, shouldn't this be the other way around?

[Mom]

even the out of towners got a voice or two :shifty:


Even Katman got the opportunity to speak.

Yeah, big ups to those that travelled to get there last night. I thought it was a good meeting, contructive and very well behaved. I am almost sorry that there was not a bit more :girlfight: would have been interesting to see Mr Chairman in full flight :yes:

[James Deuce]

You can argue one way or another that your big bike is not dangerous but the reality is that it is.
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently.
Acc doesnt care about whether or not you are more comfortable on a 1000cc and find it more pleasurable to ride. Their interests are in keeping the accident rate down (or so they say)

However just becuase this may be the case it does not mean that we should be discriminated against just because the activity is dangerous.

Acc is fundamentally a no fault, no liability scheme and is a corrupt one at that in that we have always payed higher levies than other modes of transport. There is no increase for drunk drivers who cause massive damage in collisions nor for people who drive their car into a crowd of people.
If big bikes are dangerous then perhaps acc should look at providing further training to make it safer. If it is an issue of wrecklessness then perhaps it needs to be policed more thoroughly.

It's not Acc's problem that we enjoy riding big bikes but it is not OUR problem that they're suffering financial hardship and that they're system is flawed. So this is a fundamental question of legaility. It seems they want the best of both worlds and want no liability for people who break the law and cause accidents but take advantage of people who have ridden for a number of years claim free.

Uh, shouldn't this be the other way around?

Oh shut up.

[nodrog]

.....
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently.......

what a crock of shit, i have a 250cc motorcycle that as standard has more horsepower and is faster than a standard 1200cc harley davidson. so how does that work out in your magical world of bubblewrap and common sense?

[Damon]

You can argue one way or another that your big bike is not dangerous but the reality is that it is.
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently.


I totally disagree with this statement, if you put my 1300 next to 250 or 400 in the same conditions and ridden with in the law how is my 1300 more dangerous?? the fact that it can go faster?? isn't that governed by my wrist? when I was a learner on my 30hp 250 i was far more dangerous than i am on my 180hp 1300, 6 accidents to zero confirm that, it's the size of the brain on the bike that determines the level of danger not the size of the engine

[jrandom]

The meeting and proposed protest action made the main RNZ National news bulletin at 6am.

Yeah. How about that RNZ chick standing behind me? Phwoarrrr.

Such a pity that she looked more or less appalled by the entire proceedings, not to mention repulsed by the large collection of hairy men in leather jackets. Sniff.

[StoneY]

You can argue one way or another that your big bike is not dangerous but the reality is that it is.
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently.




I have 2 big capacity bikes
Havent even ridden anything smaller than a 350 in over 20 years!

Last accident I had that needed any ACC cover was on a 250 cc dirt bike
Over 21 years ago!

Size of the bike has no part in it once a rider is experienced enough, and there is the key to the issue
The stats dont back your viewpoint any more than they back ACC's

[jrandom]

oh man katman was there i missed him lame.

If it hadn't been past my bedtime already when the meeting finished, I would've taken Katman in tow and started introducing him to people. The reaction is always golden.

[StoneY]

I guarantee you that when such a ride takes place, at least one fuckwitt will be caught riding dangerously, thus giving ACC, the politicians and media EXACTLY what they are looking for. Happens every time.

No, the Wellington team have agreed we will shoot on the spot ANYONE who acts out during the protest ride-
I have SAS snipers in support vans to make sure!! SO BEHAVE!

Jokes aside
Seriously this is a very high concern, as the nominated Wellington BIKOI coordinator I am begging attendee's to be on good behaviour, we cant afford one maniac ruining it for us all, riding in AND going home as well

Glad to hear the meeting went well, we hope to have minutes and facts presented at BRONZ for the meeting tonight at Parrot n Jigger

[ital916]

Katman was there! Oh man....

Jrandom was there tooo!..I missed all the A list kb celebrities.

And yes, that RNZ lady was...:drool:

I laffed when it was called upon by one irate gentleman that we should take "militant" action.

[Mom]

Here is a link to the Campbell Live show last night.

http://www.3news.co.nz/BRONZ-President-Les-Mason-on-hikes-in-bikers-ACC-levies/tabid/367/articleID/126380/cat/84/Default.aspx

[Pixie]

Food for thought. What is an ACC bike claim ? Its not just accidents that add to the stats.

Real Example.
My last bike was a Xt660, when I went to look at it, I wore shorts. The previous owner had just done a warm up ride. I leaned over the bike and burnt my leg on the exhaust. The burn was bad enough to have to go to A&E and have it treated, with several follow up re-dressings.

The incident was put down as a MotorBike related ACC injury. So was added to the stats for Bikes. The bike was parked, I have never turned the key and or even sat on it. But ACC added one more claim to the stats.

The nurse who was treating me informed me this was a common type of burn, and even showed me hers.

At the time everyone laughed at my story.

Go figure, if I have burnt myself on a cigarette, no one would be making me pay $500 a year more and I would still be laughing.

A lesson to be learnt here: you should have said you burnt your leg on a lawn mower,or a satanic sacrifice or a hot skank or something

[DidJit]

I laffed when it was called upon by one irate gentleman that we should take "militant" action.

I think what that "irate gentleman" meant was that we, as a collective, should stand firm for our cause/goals. We should not fold at Key's first signs of, "Oh ok, it is a little exorbitant — how about a $400 increase/token gesture/privatisation instead?" We should not be afraid to make our point — even if it does put a few whingers out. We should not just ride one little protest ride and leave it at that.

Look at the truckees' protest — with enough forewarning and organisation, people were happy enough to let them have their day in the sun. I don't remember a huge uproar decrying their use of a motorway blockade strategy.

So what that gentleman was suggesting was that we should also not be afraid to use such tactics. It goes against our laid-back Kiwi nature to deliberately piss off our fellow Kiwis, but when it is something this important — and there is more at stake here than just the levy hikes — then we really need to make a stand.

If we can educate the greater public and show them how they will also lose out, they will be in full support of our action — hell, they'll probably join our rides!

[Pixie]

I think the most effective protest would be mass refusal to register our bikes.
It wouldn't piss off Joe Public.
It worked in France,but I guess they are made of sterner stuff.

[Okey Dokey]

Yeah. How about that RNZ chick standing behind me? Phwoarrrr.

Such a pity that she looked more or less appalled by the entire proceedings, not to mention repulsed by the large collection of hairy men in leather jackets. Sniff.

Nearly the first thing she said on the report this morning was "...motorcyclists, most of them wearing leather, ..." She seemed to emphasize the fact that the meeting had opted for disruption to the public as being the chosen option. I was dissappointed with that spin. It sort of emphasised the "outlaw" bikers image, more likely to upset people than get them on our side. *sigh*

[DidJit]

She (or her editor) obviously does not like bikers and their stereotypical image. It would be beneficial to us if anyone here with (biker friendly) media contacts/journalists could keep them in the loop and get them onside. The agendas from on high are to play on the "outlaw" image, so as to discredit us as a whole.

[James Deuce]

I think the most effective protest would be mass refusal to register our bikes.
It wouldn't piss off Joe Public.
It worked in France,but I guess they are made of sterner stuff.

That's my take too.

I think unlike most Kiwi protests that are all show, no go, the not paying rego needs to be the actual active political protest. The ride is a raising awarenes gambit. Not paying rego forces the issue.

[kunoichi]

i think most of us will be doing that anyways. The whole point of fines is that it will cost u more to get a fine, than it is to actually do what ever it was needed to avoid the infringement. In this case, it's cheaper to get fined twice a year (200 per ticket) for an unregistered bike, than it is to register our bikes for a year.
Plus there is always the option of scanning the rego, changing the date and stickign it back on the bike, doubt the cops would be pulling out the rego to check if it's genuine if just go through a check point, might b a different issue if u got pulled over for speeding though...

[James Deuce]

You'll never get "most" Kiwis to perform an act of mass disobedience. They're too spineless.

It's not a given that people won't pay their rego. The concept needs more thought and needs to be delivered convincingly.

We also need to do this for the right reasons.

It's not the price hike.

It's the principle of motorcyclists being excluded from a no fault Accident Compensation scheme.

[buellbabe]

Personally, NOT paying the rego as an act of defiance is a complete no go area for me because if my bike ain't registered then its not 'road legal' and that makes my insurance void...

I will protest in other ways but that one just doesn't work for me.

Bugger!

[Morcs]

My rego is on hold, and im riding around.

So ive started, come on you guys!

Just make sure you obey the law so you dont get pulled over eh.

[scissorhands]

You'll never get "most" Kiwis to perform an act of mass disobedience. They're too spineless.

I'm always complaining to council or whatever and used to protest a lot. My dads side used to be french so maybe its in the blood.

One thing that strikes me about state institutions is the level of poor management and ineptness at the lower levels, and the level of speak with forked tongue, public relations conscious, false agenda motivation, by those very highly paid at the top.

Sort of like right hand advisers to a corrupt caesar. These people are not inept at all.

[James Deuce]

Personally, NOT paying the rego as an act of defiance is a complete no go area for me because if my bike ain't registered then its not 'road legal' and that makes my insurance void...

I will protest in other ways but that one just doesn't work for me.

Bugger!

As I said spineless.

[Reckless]

You'll never get "most" Kiwis to perform an act of mass disobedience. They're too spineless.

It's not a given that people won't pay their rego. The concept needs more thought and needs to be delivered convincingly.

We also need to do this for the right reasons.

It's not the price hike.

It's the principle of motorcyclists being excluded from a no fault Accident Compensation scheme.

Start a Rego poll James.
1 bike are you gonna pay-NO!!
1 bike are you gonna pay-YES (stop whinging then)
More than 1 bike are you gonna pay-NO!! (Staunch)
More than one bike register 1 only (1/2 a cop out)
Register the lot ( Biggest cop out)
Rego on hold for 6 months per year

Try and keep it simple though LOL!!!

[Rayray401]

i do wonder though..what the original people who started ACC was thinking in the first place, according to my lecturer at the start it was good, but now apparently they all just shake their heads at how fail it has become because of how bad its been manageed.

[yachtie10]

buellbabe
Personally, NOT paying the rego as an act of defiance is a complete no go area for me because if my bike ain't registered then its not 'road legal' and that makes my insurance void...

I will protest in other ways but that one just doesn't work for me.

Bugger!

Does your policy actually say this?
My understanding is that incorrect (even against the law)
i.e. Insurance companies need a reason to deny the claim and rego running out isnt one of them

It maybe different if you choose not to pay your rego long term (that would be an individual policy issue)


I am happy to not pay my rego as part of a protest and if it becomes an issue i wont pay my insurance either

[Katman]

If it hadn't been past my bedtime already when the meeting finished, I would've taken Katman in tow and started introducing him to people. The reaction is always golden.

That wasn't Katman - I sent my friendly twin brother.

[kunoichi]

managed or not, they no doubtedly were going to meet resistance from all those effected (a growing number of us). It's ridiculous and was never a good idea. If they want to make up for their short fall, yes that is a good idea, doing it this way, to exclude a selection of the population from ACC claims, was definatly the wrong way to go. Goes against the very foundation of justice. If they thought it was a good idea to start with, they are stupider than i thought.

[kunoichi]

Does your policy actually say this?
My understanding is that incorrect (even against the law)
i.e. Insurance companies need a reason to deny the claim and rego running out isnt one of them

It maybe different if you choose not to pay your rego long term (that would be an individual policy issue)


I am happy to not pay my rego as part of a protest and if it becomes an issue i wont pay my insurance either

I reckon it differs from contract to contract. My one says to abide by the restrictions of my license (no riding past 10pm etc), but doesn't say anything about rego. does say WOF tho, that my Wof does need to be continuingly renewed...anybody have something else in their contracts?

[Naki Rat]

You'll never get "most" Kiwis to perform an act of mass disobedience. They're too spineless.

It's not a given that people won't pay their rego. The concept needs more thought and needs to be delivered convincingly.

We also need to do this for the right reasons.

It's not the price hike.

It's the principle of motorcyclists being excluded from a no fault Accident Compensation scheme.

The problems with non-registration of rego as a sole protest is that it is essentially silent and too easily becomes an action by single individuals, who can then be targeted one by one by police, insurance providers and finance companies with little public awareness of the battle that is being fought.

The whole point of the ride on parliament is to raise public awareness of the ACC levy issue and its wider implications on other high injury risk groups. By way of the wording of the catch cry "Who's Next" we are hopefully sowing the seeds of fear and uncertainty in those car owners, cyclists, sports participants and Joe Public in general, that they are likely to be targeted next by the Government/ACC in this cash grab. The idea is as old as:

First they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

Now they are coming for the Palestinians
I am speaking out.

And we need as much help as we can get on this issue :grouphug:

[martybabe]

It's the principle of motorcyclists being excluded from a no fault Accident Compensation scheme.

Exactly, that and being effectively priced off the road are my primary objections here.

Frankly I'm so over all the statistic analysing flying around, but essentially we are a small portion of the overall pie, as far as payouts go. Any number of other categories suck up bigger wedges of the ACC pot, yet I see no other sport/pastime /hobby, being singled out for massive increases due to the likelihood of accident frequency and or expensive after-care.

We are therefore effectively being excluded as you rightly point out, it's not fair, it's not right and it makes little sense to me unless, 1. the ultimate goal is simply to get us off the road, or 2.this is simply the tester, pick on a minority group with little clout then move on to the bigger boys? ACC levies for every Rugby game ? No payouts for DIY, who bloody knows.

[cold comfort]

You can argue one way or another that your big bike is not dangerous but the reality is that it is.
If you take all the big bikes off the road and put everyone on 250s or 400s it would no doubt result in less accidents and we are fooling ourselves by trying to say any differently

Not according to Prof Lamb of the Australasian Institute of Motorcycle studies- " of 420 crashes in Auck and Chch last yr 43% did not even mention the engine size. Of the remaining 57% the most common size was 250c" (from the ChCh Press)

[kunoichi]

sounds like there just isn't enough data to support either point. if they don't record the engine size then there simply is no reliable data to suggest either way. In which case it should b no discrimination until proof that discrimination needs to occur...??

[Eng_dave]

Not according to Prof Lamb of the Australasian Institute of Motorcycle studies- " of 420 crashes in Auck and Chch last yr 43% did not even mention the engine size. Of the remaining 57% the most common size was 250c" (from the ChCh Press)

All that means is that people who ride bigger cc are in general more experienced and have gone through the Stats games before so never say what CC bike they were on. If im ever going to be asked i'll say push bike. I would like to see them prove that im talking shit.

[Littlewheels]

I sent an email to as many MPs as I could got some interesting replies, the Nats are all towing the party line, however this is the reply from the green Party.
Dear Barbara



I have been asked to respond on behalf of all nine Green Party MPs Metiria Turei, Russel Norman, Jeanette Fitzsimons, Sue Bradford, Sue Kedgley, Keith Locke, Kevin Hague, Catherine Delahunty and Kennedy Graham, to your email below.



The Green Party opposes the proposed levy increase for motorcycles. We consider this levy increase to be contrary to the original principles set out by Sir Owen Woodhouse under which ACC was established. One of those principles was that of "community responsibility". Sir Owen himself, at the age of 93, has spoken out against the approach the Government is taking to ACC, stating that proposals to double and treble levies on heavy motorbikes and mopeds, and to push accident victims back to work on much lower incomes than they earned before their accidents, breach the principles of the scheme he authored as head of the 1967 Royal Commission that recommended the ACC scheme.



The community responsibility principle recognises that the various activities that we undertake in society are all inter-related, and that harm and benefit flow on to others, rather than rest solely with the people undertaking those activities.



In the particular example of motorcycle use, the community responsibility principle recognises that even though a disproportionately high number of motor vehicle injuries involve motorcyclists, a significant proportion of those injuries are actually caused by someone other than the motorcyclist. It also recognises that increased use of motorcycles where practicable has environmental benefits if single driver car usage is consequently reduced, since the greenhouse gas emissions generated by a motorcycles is significantly less than from cars and the fuel used per kilometre of travel is significantly less for a motorcycle than a car. From that perspective, the Green Party would want to encourage motorcycle use as opposed to car use - however, the Government's proposed levy increase for motorcycles does the opposite.



It is Green Party policy to restore the social contract envisioned in Sir Owen Woodhouse's report from which the original ACC scheme was derived, including the community responsibility principle, and we therefore oppose pinch-paring measures such as the Government's proposals that attempt to assess the injury risk of every specific activity undertaken in society and set levies based solely on that risk.



Thank you for the figures you have provided. They affirm the view the Green Party MPs already have that much of the so-called "crisis" in ACC is manufactured by the Government to suit its political agenda.





Kind regards

Ivan Sowry

Issues Assistant to Green Party MPs

[buellbabe]

Does your policy actually say this?
My understanding is that incorrect (even against the law)
i.e. Insurance companies need a reason to deny the claim and rego running out isnt one of them

It maybe different if you choose not to pay your rego long term (that would be an individual policy issue)


I am happy to not pay my rego as part of a protest and if it becomes an issue i wont pay my insurance either

Yes my policy does say this. End of story.

Choosing to keep my bikes FULLY covered does not make me spineless.

I couldn't give a shit about being pulled over and getting fined for no rego but I do care very MUCH about being involved in an accident and having no $$s to get my bike back on the road or having the bike stolen...

I will do every protest ride I am able to and I have already written to my local paper. Plus I am gonna hammer the MPs and ACC as well.
If it comes down to it I will contact my insurance company and get a waiver added to my policy as well. Afterall I have 3 bikes insured with them so I am hoping they will play ball.

I am NOT spineless and am deeply offended at the suggestion.

[Eng_dave]

Nice reply good work:2thumbsup

[James Deuce]

I am NOT spineless and am deeply offended at the suggestion.

Good you are supposed to be, and as many other people as possible are supposed to be too.

There is only one way to make the point required and Kiwis aren't prepared to do it, so there is no way to make a committed politically motivated response to public servants attempting to keep motorcyclists out of the no fault accident compensation scheme and from demanding that they pay their way.

So so long as everyone understands that without all motorcyclists refusing to pay rego, there is no point some of you doing it.

So what we're actually saying is that we don't oppose motorcyclists being excluded from the no fault Accident Comensation scheme every other Kiwi irrespective of lifestyle enjoys, we just don't want to pay the proposed increase and will settle for a smaller increase?

Just so it's clear.

[Pixie]

i think most of us will be doing that anyways. The whole point of fines is that it will cost u more to get a fine, than it is to actually do what ever it was needed to avoid the infringement. In this case, it's cheaper to get fined twice a year (200 per ticket) for an unregistered bike, than it is to register our bikes for a year.
Plus there is always the option of scanning the rego, changing the date and stickign it back on the bike, doubt the cops would be pulling out the rego to check if it's genuine if just go through a check point, might b a different issue if u got pulled over for speeding though...

I thought of this too,What's the penalty for this kind of fraud?

[kunoichi]

that's a good point.
And james, i think u'r going about doing exactly what the govt is hoping to do, that we end up dividing off into little groups, which makes each group easier to target. Best to stick together on this one, put aside the name calling or other bones u have to pick with people and get everyone on board.

[James Deuce]

that's a good point.
And james, i think u'r going about doing exactly what the govt is hoping to do, that we end up dividing off into little groups, which makes each group easier to target. Best to stick together on this one, put aside the name calling or other bones u have to pick with people and get everyone on board.
I haven't changed my theme on this issue.

Many of you have.

Hence my spineless comment.

[R-Soul]

Exactly, that and being effectively priced off the road are my primary objections here.

Frankly I'm so over all the statistic analysing flying around, but essentially we are a small portion of the overall pie, as far as payouts go. Any number of other categories suck up bigger wedges of the ACC pot, yet I see no other sport/pastime /hobby, being singled out for massive increases due to the likelihood of accident frequency and or expensive after-care.

We are therefore effectively being excluded as you rightly point out, it's not fair, it's not right and it makes little sense to me unless, 1. the ultimate goal is simply to get us off the road, or 2.this is simply the tester, pick on a minority group with little clout then move on to the bigger boys? ACC levies for every Rugby game ? No payouts for DIY, who bloody knows.

Actually we are a bigger payout than any sport besides rugby.
FACT:
We DO have a lot of injuries for the number of riders
A lot of it is self inflicted by speed.
But not all o fit.


BUT:
I think that the ACC figures have been assigned to incorrect divisions.
The ACC divisions are currently between cars and bikes (easy to do I guess).
They should actually be between sober and drunken road users, or between responsible and speeding road users.

Having the designations merely between cars and bikes is arbitrary - as the spotless rcord of many old bike riders can attest to. And especially when the bike riders are being asked to pay for carneage that in many cases has been wreaked on them by car drivers!

The level of ACC levies for ALL road users (actually boat users too) should go up massively for people caught DUI, or nabbed on drug or speeding charges.

Further, to preven the "rider losing control" type accidents (that dont involve booze or speed) , ACC levies should be reduced for all riders attending regular riding courses.

These type of suggestions show the ACC broadsword up for wht it is - lazy and uncreative. They also get to the root of the problem - that fact that so many bike riders are getting hurt (regardless of fault or reason). Its pointless asking the injured to pay after the fact, the policies should try and target the problem.

If we present ideas like these as an alternative, public sentiment will swing towards us. If they see that we recognise we have a subversive element amongst us, and that we dont mind these few being targetted for their irresponsible actons, but we want the same response from car drivers, I cant see them objecting to policies like this.

I can see them objecting to being lumped with yet more fuel tax.

[vifferman]

The problem is, Noo Zilund drivers are tards. They can get away with being tards while driving a car, as they can crash them mostly with impunity (as far as injury goes). However, get them on a bike, and the paucity of skills, and poor attitudes, show up very quickly indeed.
It's only right that motorcyclists (including scroterists) pay, but it should be up-front, in the form of decent training, and some testing designed to weed out of the chronically inept. Any that survive this should be happy to pay for the privilege of riding.
Some people just shouldn't be on a bike, and they demonstrate this by crashing. Many times, even when it's 'technically' or 'legally' not their fault, it still is, as they haven't done all they could to prevent the incident.
So. Think of the ACC levy as part of the entrance fee for enjoying your expensive toy. Pay up or take up knitting or macrame.

(Yes, I am actually Katman thinky disguised as vifferdork).

[jeffs]

Asking people to break the law, then calling them spineless or explain themselfs for not wanting to break the law, is really helping unify the biking community NOT !!!.

One thing about Kiwibiker.co.nz that needs to be made very clear is, this is a very public forum with the ability for any media to read. Keep putting crap like this on the forum and we might as well all just pay the $500 extra now, because no one is going to listen to 1000 different voices shouting 1000 different point of views. If there is not 1 or 2 focused approaches and ones that are legal, we will look like a bunch of dipshits who are to stupid to fight for our rights.

If you want to ride around without a rego, then you do so, but DO NOT ASK OTHERS TO DO SO.

If you do not get what I am saying, then I for one will not be at any rally that proves the point that ACC are making. And I would not be the only one not at the rally.

[Clubbie]

Here you go, looks like this guy is the man to crunch the numbers, or at least offer advice- see attached PDF

And the web link to the same article....
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2969309/Researcher-criticises-motorbike-levy-logic

[Brian d marge]

Good you are supposed to be, and as many other people as possible are supposed to be too.

There is only one way to make the point required and Kiwis aren't prepared to do it, so there is no way to make a committed politically motivated response to public servants attempting to keep motorcyclists out of the no fault accident compensation scheme and from demanding that they pay their way.

So so long as everyone understands that without all motorcyclists refusing to pay rego, there is no point some of you doing it.

So what we're actually saying is that we don't oppose motorcyclists being excluded from the no fault Accident Comensation scheme every other Kiwi irrespective of lifestyle enjoys, we just don't want to pay the proposed increase and will settle for a smaller increase?

Just so it's clear.

Now you have done it ....... Now look what you have gone an did

Toys will start appearing from cots

Ya cant go tellin em they have to do something , its just not cricket ....

Stephen

[James Deuce]

Asking people to break the law, then calling them spineless or explain themselfs for not wanting to break the law, is really helping unify the biking community NOT !!!.

One thing about Kiwibiker.co.nz that needs to be made very clear is, this is a very public forum with the ability for any media to read. Keep putting crap like this on the forum and we might as well all just pay the $500 extra now, because no one is going to listen to 1000 different voices shouting 1000 different point of views. If there is not 1 or 2 focused approaches and ones that are legal, we will look like a bunch of dipshits who are to stupid to fight for our rights.

If you want to ride around without a rego, then you do so, but DO NOT ASK OTHERS TO DO SO.

If you do not get what I am saying, then I for one will not be at any rally that proves the point that ACC are making. And I would not be the only one not at the rally.

It's not crap.

You guys are reacting to the levy increase, not the crux of the problem which is NZ Motorcyclists are being evicted from the no fault Accident Compensation scheme and not provided with any alternative except "paying their own way" via compulsory contributions to to scheme that wants them to fund their own way.

Every other country with citizens with an understanding of democratic process understand that their primary role in that society is to protect their rights in the face of abuses by Government organisations. The Bikoi will achieve potentially raised awareness, but what seems to have been forgotten is that a large chunk of "middle" NZ knows we deserve to be singled out despite "middle" NZ costing ACC 610 million in claims generated by cooking, bathing, and DIY. The Bikoi will not achieve the desired result of getting motorcyclists included back in the ACC scheme.

The sustained illegal activities of motorcyclists on the Queen's Highway have generated the poor publicity that makes it a goer for the Government to attempt to raise levies beyond the pale in the first instance. Lecturing other motocyclists about not performing illegal activities is a little bit hypocritical to say the leaste.

[Big Dave]

The Press release from last night's meeting:

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com

[Brian d marge]

I sent an email to as many MPs as I could got some interesting replies, the Nats are all towing the party line, however this is the reply from the green Party.
Dear Barbara



I have been asked to respond on behalf of all nine Green Party MPs Metiria Turei, Russel Norman, Jeanette Fitzsimons, Sue Bradford, Sue Kedgley, Keith Locke, Kevin Hague, Catherine Delahunty and Kennedy Graham, to your email below.



The Green Party opposes the proposed levy increase for motorcycles. We consider this levy increase to be contrary to the original principles set out by Sir Owen Woodhouse under which ACC was established. One of those principles was that of "community responsibility". Sir Owen himself, at the age of 93, has spoken out against the approach the Government is taking to ACC, stating that proposals to double and treble levies on heavy motorbikes and mopeds, and to push accident victims back to work on much lower incomes than they earned before their accidents, breach the principles of the scheme he authored as head of the 1967 Royal Commission that recommended the ACC scheme.



The community responsibility principle recognises that the various activities that we undertake in society are all inter-related, and that harm and benefit flow on to others, rather than rest solely with the people undertaking those activities.



In the particular example of motorcycle use, the community responsibility principle recognises that even though a disproportionately high number of motor vehicle injuries involve motorcyclists, a significant proportion of those injuries are actually caused by someone other than the motorcyclist. It also recognises that increased use of motorcycles where practicable has environmental benefits if single driver car usage is consequently reduced, since the greenhouse gas emissions generated by a motorcycles is significantly less than from cars and the fuel used per kilometre of travel is significantly less for a motorcycle than a car. From that perspective, the Green Party would want to encourage motorcycle use as opposed to car use - however, the Government's proposed levy increase for motorcycles does the opposite.



It is Green Party policy to restore the social contract envisioned in Sir Owen Woodhouse's report from which the original ACC scheme was derived, including the community responsibility principle, and we therefore oppose pinch-paring measures such as the Government's proposals that attempt to assess the injury risk of every specific activity undertaken in society and set levies based solely on that risk.



Thank you for the figures you have provided. They affirm the view the Green Party MPs already have that much of the so-called "crisis" in ACC is manufactured by the Government to suit its political agenda.





Kind regards

Ivan Sowry

Issues Assistant to Green Party MPs

Which is what some have been saying for a long time , but some ( Donny Ron, Bobby and Ricky and of course bubbles )

Are so enamored with on laisse faire la nature ,,,they cant see the pain approaching


Stephen

[Mystic13]

Personally, NOT paying the rego as an act of defiance is a complete no go area for me because if my bike ain't registered then its not 'road legal' and that makes my insurance void...

I will protest in other ways but that one just doesn't work for me.

Bugger!

I've already gone down the put rego on hold route.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=110727

The deal seems to me to use it as a tool for protesting. The idea is to get the noise heard by the 17th of November.

- I have bikes coming up for renewal at various points throughout the year.

- I have rung in and put all of them on hold from the end of their current period. (So I am still riding a road registered bike in the interim)

- I have advised LTSA verbally and by email that I have put the bikes on hold due to the proposed increase. I should have also asked them to advise the government of the same.

- When bikes come up for renewal I can choose what I do then. it's a case of right now making as much noise a possible. I want LTSA, ACC and the government to know this route won't work. I've put my rego's on hold and you'll not get the money you thought you would so go elsewhere.

- If you have a bike due for renewal now you could renew for 3 months and put it on hold from there with doing the putting on hold notice now and then email them.

I have checked my insurance and intend to comply with it's requirements.

This seems a really good move in terms of making noise and yes it needs numbers. Putting on hold costs nothing, you can remain registered it just says in a big way we're pissed off now leave us alone.

[short-circuit]

Are so enamored with lassie fare politics ,,,they cant see the pain approaching


Stephen

Ignorance, selfishness and a belief that "it won't cost me"

[Eng_dave]

The Press release from last night's meeting:

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com

Cheers Dave managed to get some pics were you the one asking for press information I know a reporter for 20/20 friend of a friend realy if your interested.

[Katman]

I have had three customers so far express their surprise and disappointment that an unsolicited email would be sent to them containing the sentence "The chairman is a grumpy cunt".

I think we should be very careful about what we say and who we say it to.

[TerminalAddict]

I have had three customers so far express their surprise and disappointment that an unsolicited email would be sent to them containing the sentence "The chairman is a grumpy cunt".

I think we should be very careful about what we say and who we say it to.


agree !!! I edited that bit out went I spammed people :oi-grr:

[Thani-B]

If it hadn't been past my bedtime already when the meeting finished, I would've taken Katman in tow and started introducing him to people. The reaction is always golden.

Thats a shame. Im actually quite keen to meet some of the people on here.


As I said spineless.

And well Idleidolidyll is fairly pissed off with the results of last nights meeting. A lone voice who got shot down, majority to one. He did make a valid point though. And I do think we need to organise something along those lines.

[Big Dave]

agree !!! I edited that bit out went I spammed people :oi-grr:

As we all did. And I have threatened him. They are however empty threats.

EG If I was chairing the meeting it would be like a Gospel revival with tambourines and a bass drum - shambles. Outlawtorn was big on flaming torches.

I might add than Ms Klingon did a job too.


Spread that release around to any contacts team - It's with KR, BRM and MTN already.

Any photos send to Mr Outlawtorn for the BRONZ site

[DidJit]

You guys are reacting to the levy increase, not the crux of the problem which is NZ Motorcyclists are being evicted from the no fault Accident Compensation scheme and not provided with any alternative except "paying their own way" via compulsory contributions to to scheme that wants them to fund their own way.


And well Idleidolidyll is fairly pissed off with the results of last nights meeting. A lone voice who got shot down, majority to one. He did make a valid point though. And I do think we need to organise something along those lines.

I agree. To put it mildly, I am very put out with what this government is trying to do to its employers i.e. us, the people. Today's announcement (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10604802), while expected, is the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

I do not want to play nice with a government who rides roughshod over its own people.

[HenryDorsetCase]

The Press release from last night's meeting:

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com

it got good coverage this morning on what little of the radio I heard.

[R-Soul]

lets all wear hi vis, make all vehicles cars truck drive round on high beam during the day. Paint all cars hivis yellow or orange just so every one can see every one ???




yes a pt

No mate just us - were the ones getting injured the most remember? Apparently cars have no problem seeing big rigs...

And no, putting a high vis vest on does not make the rider a better rider, butit may make a car see you a fraction of a second sooner, to give you an extra 30 cms to get through....

:girlfight:

[R-Soul]

However ...( in David Attenborough voice) the lesser spotted Police Motorcycle in its striking array of blue , red and yellow catches the motorists eye and fear of the flashing blue and red dominates for a few moments until the motorist passes the danger.....

Good Attenborough voice!! :2thumbsup

[shrub]

And no, putting a high vis vest on does not make the rider a better rider, butit may make a car see you a fraction of a second sooner, to give you an extra 30 cms to get through....

:girlfight:

Actually international research shows that high vis vests have limited benefit. Car drivers don't see us because they're not looking for us.

[swbarnett]

[The ACC divisions] should actually be between sober and drunken road users, or between responsible and speeding road users.
In a no-fault scheme there should be NO divisions. It should matter not what I do. As far as ACC is concerned any individual should be a faceless number with no hint of who they are. This is the only way to maintain true equality and fairness.

I'll say it again as it seems to be falling on deaf ears - the ONLY fair way to fund ACC is through income tax.

[short-circuit]

I'll say it again as it seems to be falling on deaf ears - the ONLY fair way to fund ACC is through income tax.

Absolutely, like national health insurance in the U.K - everyone pays a small amount whether they are a beneficiary or a CEO.

It ain't gonna happen though - the agenda of this bunch of bastards always has and always will be privatisation.....New Zealanders wanted a "change" - well here it is

[jrandom]

I laffed when it was called upon by one irate gentleman that we should take "militant" action.

Heh. That was idleidolidyll, dude.

I should note that he got the single loudest and most supportive response to any point made at the meeting, too.

A star-studded evening, eh?

Perhaps Les should've stipulated that anyone who was famous on the internet had to introduce themselves by their online handle when they stood up.

And yeah, that RNZ chick was really oozing negative vibes. I didn't realise what she was all about until nearly at the end. I actually spent most of the meeting rudely standing right in front of her because I assumed that the made-up girl with no motorcycle gear must've been some sort of hired help who'd stuck around to watch.

:pinch:

[short-circuit]

Idleidolidyll is right that action needs to be drastic and maximally disruptive, but James Deuce is also right in suggesting that kiwis don't have the spine to do what it takes

[jrandom]

Idleidolidyll is right that action needs to be drastic and maximally disruptive, but James Deuce is also right in suggesting that kiwis don't have the spine to do what it takes

Well, I dunno about you, but I fuckin well do.

Let's just get on with planning the action to be took, eh? I suspect that the number of spines that come out of the woodwork will be a pleasant surprise.

[AD345]

When do we burn something?

[short-circuit]

Well, I dunno about you, but I fuckin well do.

Let's just get on with planning the action to be took, eh? I suspect that the number of spines that come out of the woodwork will be a pleasant surprise.

I'm all for taking over the Harbour Bridge this weekend all weekend long but everyone else seems to want to just :Playnice:

[NighthawkNZ]

When do we burn something?

Do burn outs in front of parliment when they are sitting and smoke em out...

[MadDuck]

When do we burn something?

Soooo you want the chicky bikers to burn their bras on the bridge :whistle:

That will get some attention!

[AD345]

Let's seriously up the ante...

Big protest ride to the hive, public burning of our rego labels and everyone turn up just wearing a helmet and no other protective gear just jeans/shorts and t-shirts

They think we're risky? We'll show 'em what bloody risk is

[AD345]

Soooo you want the chicky bikers to burn their bras on the bridge :whistle:

That will get some attention!

Well being biker chicks the question now becomes:

"do they take them off first?"

[Katman]

I'm all for taking over the Harbour Bridge this weekend all weekend long

Which lane are you going to be in?

:whistle:

[short-circuit]

Which lane are you going to be in?

:whistle:

Well I'd be approaching from the Auckland side. Should I bring tent?

[Mom]

Idleidolidyll is right that action needs to be drastic and maximally disruptive, but James Deuce is also right in suggesting that kiwis don't have the spine to do what it takes

Where were you last night? I didn't see you.


Which lane are you going to be in?

:whistle:

Now, now, that is naughty. You made a huge effort to be there last night, imagine joining the riders as they filter through towards Wellington :yes:

[short-circuit]

Where were you last night? I didn't see you.

At the back with the troublemakers. Ang was in her red leather jacket - she stood out like a sore thumb

[Mom]

At the back with the troublemakers. Ang was in her red leather jacket - she stood out like a sore thumb

You should have come said hello :yes:

[MadDuck]

Where were you last night? I didn't see you.

He was standing next to "Dave"......

[short-circuit]

You should have come said hello :yes:

I saw you briefly moving swifting towards the toilets - didn't look like you wanted to be held up.

[AD345]

There needs to be a way for fellow KB'rs to recognise each other.......


.....like a special wave or something.








:calm::calm:



I recognised Mom and Maha and BD and Ixion of course, surely it must have been GIJoe at the C&B in Ellerslie afterwards (those red camos are a kind of trademark right?). Careful sleuthing enables me to figure out which was likely to have been Klingon but I'm gutted not to have been able to pick out the Katman, thinking back now though I might have a vague idea and that would lead me to guess who PB was as well

[Brian d marge]

Next BRONZ (Auckland) meeting is

.

Well what a handsome devil ( and well spoken , its was quite refreshing , well done ,,clear concise and articulate

Stephen

[inorganic]

listen stupid... prefacing your rants with ' listen stupid ' does not mean you are right .. ok... I presume you would prefer if the oil companies competed... or the supermarkerts? ... what is different about accident insurance?

[Katman]

but I'm gutted not to have been able to pick out the Katman,

Don't let it keep you awake at night.

[AD345]

Don't let it keep you awake at night.

Good point

But current and former "real" Katana owners should still have a secret ninja hand sign I reckon

[Katman]

But current and former "real" Katana owners should still have a secret ninja hand sign I reckon

Yes, but if we showed the rest we'd have to kill them all.

[Leyton]

Just had seen close up. Well done BRONZ! :), ACC could not return a fair argument, and the point at the hole in the figures was a good one :) Well played.

[ldcroberts]

I read through the stats (link earlier in this thread), its quite interesting. There are big clumps of accident categories that show up. A lot of bike accidents are drivers going off the left of the road on a right hand turn on a vehicle more powerful they are used to, going off at left hand turns is about 2/3rds as likely. Next is cars turning at intersections across motorcycles coming the other way - or vehicles coming out of side roads into path of bike. Then bikes stopping at orange lights and the car behind charging into them. Most of these accidents are in broad daylight.

So the moral of the story is be careful when you ride a new bigger bike, don't stop for orange lights if there's a car behind you, look behind you when approaching intersections and side roads and slow down as much as possible and be alert.

Remember, at an intersection, a car is only looking at the traffic lights, they won't see cars/trucks/bikes etc - safest to slow down well before them and slowly too so the car behind you has to slow down too.

The intersections with Red arrows that go blank meaning it's OK to turn right should probably be outlawed as too many accidents happen there.

[la 102]

on television tonight, it was good to see the man from BRONZ shut down the sad sack faced noob from ACC .
nicely done.:2thumbsup

[Motu]

It was a pretty good turn out...I hope BRONZ got plenty of new members.But as one guy pointout out - 30 years ago......

We filled the Auckland Town Hall,had Queen St totally covered in bikes.We had some leaflets printed up for our part and went around handing them out.A lot of riders turned up 30 years ago....and we didn't have the internet then...just very good communication in our motorcycling scene.

[jeffs]

Well being biker chicks the question now becomes:

"do they take them off first?"

Look if you do decide to burn your bra while wearing it, just remember to not be on your bike at the time, or under the ACC claims process this would be classified as a bike related claim. And your protest would be come a statistic to use against others. :)

[jeffs]

How about a new car bumper sticker

" Why ride a 50cc when you can drive a 5000cc, Keep New Zealand Mucky & Brown"
"Brought to you by the ACC, leaders in pollution related health claims, since 2009"

[jeffs]

From the close up interview, this is one of many questions I still cant get my head around.

Perhaps this question could be asked of Price water house the ACC auditors.

If there are 106,000 registered bikes and it cost ACC $62,545,000 in claims why do they think the true ACC charge they are saving us from should be $3000.

What have I got wrong.

62,545,000 / 106,000 = $590

The 106,000 does not include the 30,393 mopeds/scooters under 50cc or the sum would be

62,545,000 / 136,393 = $458

[NighthawkNZ]

If there are 106,000 registered bikes and it cost ACC $62,545,000 in claims why do they think the true ACC charge they are saving us from should be $3000.

What have I got wrong.
62,545,000 / 106,000 = $590
The 106,000 does not include the 30,393 mopeds/scooters under 50cc or the sum would be

62,545,000 / 136,393 = $458

thats the point of the arguement... but it also assumes all bike are registered for the full year
130,213 (current fleet including mopeds) x 3700 (was the quote) = $481,788,100 (just under a .5 of billion. The total number of claims is only 1.7b)

total claims combined for the car and motorcycle is only 270million

[Mom]

I saw you briefly moving swifting towards the toilets - didn't look like you wanted to be held up.

Yeah, well I took the chairmans advice and went "wees" while the meeting was happening, bloody woolworths bladders and all that :D

[motorcyclesonline.net]

The head honsho from the ACC on Close Up tonight was not convincing

[motorcyclesonline.net]

Bloody accountants



From the close up interview, this is one of many questions I still cant get my head around.

Perhaps this question could be asked of Price water house the ACC auditors.

If there are 106,000 registered bikes and it cost ACC $62,545,000 in claims why do they think the true ACC charge they are saving us from should be $3000.

What have I got wrong.

62,545,000 / 106,000 = $590

The 106,000 does not include the 30,393 mopeds/scooters under 50cc or the sum would be

62,545,000 / 136,393 = $458

[outlawtorn]

Good turnout last night, good to see heaps of people there and lots of familiar faces!

Thanks to all the guys and gals that made the effort! :2thumbsup :first:

[Attis]

Hi,
Just some stats ...

2007 - 2008
Active claims - cost - cost/claim (rounded)

Cars: 8,529 - 208,343,000 - $24,400
Motorcycles: 3,174 - 62,545,000 - $19,700

-------

Cycles: 807 - 15,543,000 - 19,200
Pedestrian: 1,376 - 28,472,000 - 20,600
OTHER: 155 - 2,367,000 - 15,200
UNKNOWN: 379 - 11,046,000 - 29,000 (whatta?!)

Does anybody know what "other" and "unknown" mean/cover?

Source: http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/acc-injury-statistics-2008/2-all-entitlement-claims/IS0800020

[Phurrball]

(Snippity)
And yeah, that RNZ chick was really oozing negative vibes. I didn't realise what she was all about until nearly at the end. I actually spent most of the meeting rudely standing right in front of her because I assumed that the made-up girl with no motorcycle gear must've been some sort of hired help who'd stuck around to watch.

:pinch:

I spotted the RNZ mic' pretty early on. It's a pretty disappointing report from Laura Davis I have to say - I expected better from RNZ National.

Selected soundbites supporting an editorial focus on disruption with Ulysses apparently a 'lone voice' for peaceful protest.

(III's rousing call to 'militantly disrupt in an unpeaceable manner' being the only comment from the floor in being reproduced in full prior to short interviews from Les [BRONZ] and Bob [Ulysses] )

Can't say that was what I took from it at all...more at general high dissatisfaction and numerous ideas as to how to proceed...sigh...

Here's the MP3 report to download/stream. (http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/mnr/mnr-20091022-0750-Bikers_plan_protest_rally_over_hike_in_ACC_fees-048.mp3)

Might have to email Morning Report and communicate my disappointment since I'm a regular listener...

[Ixion]

It was a pretty good turn out...I hope BRONZ got plenty of new members.But as one guy pointout out - 30 years ago......

We filled the Auckland Town Hall,had Queen St totally covered in bikes.We had some leaflets printed up for our part and went around handing them out.A lot of riders turned up 30 years ago....and we didn't have the internet then...just very good communication in our motorcycling scene.

What year was that ? I was there but I can't remember what year it was

[Motu]

What year was that ? I was there but I can't remember what year it was

Eeeeee,with no official records in the house,I've been trying to pinpoint it with events in our lives...I reckon it must have been 1979....so 30 years is spot on.Some of the guys I was sitting with last night remembered it too.It was a really charged event,we were really hyped up about it - the first time motorcycle riders of every ilk banded together with a common cause.It was to do with rego costs....but don't know what the outcome was,did we succeed or not?...?

[jeffs]

thats the point of the arguement...

Sorry I was being sarcastic, by asking the question :)

But if IXON ever does get the ACC figures I hope he shares. As we all want a look at them.

He might want to check the year on them, because it still could be the 1998 report the Smith it quoting from. ( that was sarcasm also ).

[Ixion]

Eeeeee,with no official records in the house,I've been trying to pinpoint it with events in our lives...I reckon it must have been 1979....so 30 years is spot on.Some of the guys I was sitting with last night remembered it too.It was a really charged event,we were really hyped up about it - the first time motorcycle riders of every ilk banded together with a common cause.It was to do with rego costs....but don't know what the outcome was,did we succeed or not?...?

From memory, yes.

1979 ; 1993 ; 2009 . Remarkable, seems every 15 years or so hthe ACC go doo-lalley about bikes. Is it something to do with planetary influences of womething?

[swbarnett]

When do we burn something?
How about we get 10s of thousands of registration labels and burn them in one big pile on the steps of parliament?

[Mystic13]

There needs to be a way for fellow KB'rs to recognise each other.......

I recognised Mom and Maha and BD and Ixion of course, surely it must have been GIJoe at the C&B in Ellerslie afterwards (those red camos are a kind of trademark right?). Careful sleuthing enables me to figure out which was likely to have been Klingon but I'm gutted not to have been able to pick out the Katman, thinking back now though I might have a vague idea and that would lead me to guess who PB was as well

Lol, Yep I got Ixion, Klingon, Gi Joe, Danae, PirateJafa, didn't realise the rest of you were there.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Don't let it keep you awake at night.

I saw you...Kept me awake laughing till 4:00 am

[Thani-B]

Lol, Yep I got Ixion, Klingon, Gi Joe, Danae, PirateJafa, didn't realise the rest of you were there.

I was sitting beside PirateJafa.. I would think that the majority of people that showed up would be KB'ers right? Although I did see a few that I know, who arent.

[Danae]

I would have liked to stick (user)names to faces. I was at the front. Saw (but did not meet) Mom, Maha and Big Dave; met Klingon(nice to meet you, great work) and Mystic

[Brian d marge]

listen stupid... prefacing your rants with ' listen stupid ' does not mean you are right .. ok... I presume you would prefer if the oil companies competed... or the supermarkerts? ... what is different about accident insurance?

No listen stupids means that Redneck slack Jawed New Zealand morons , with barely the ability to string together a sentence, with at least ONE preposition
have ruined motorcycling , as we know it , in one of the best places for it

You did nothing ,( and possibly wont )

This ACC thing has been coming at you since 1993 ,,

now I know I am right because the current situation has PROVED i am, right

Check my post history

What NZ needs is to get rid of the white under educated ,she'll be right intelligentsia , Your good self, and replace them with boat people

people who know what its like to lose everything and will fight dam hard not to lose it

I might change listen stupids ,,,to you frigged morons

I wouldn't be surprised if ( ACC) this goes through ... I just wouldn't .... I wouldn't be pissed off ,
just resigned and hopeful that the younger generation might change the status quo

I m alright , I earn more money than I can shit and 750 isn't a problem for me
it is for others , and thats why I work hard to stop people ( such as your self , from bolloxing up godzone with a sheer lack of understanding

now hurry up and pass on or go to Australia , so that people worthy of such a nice place can do a better job

Stephen

[short-circuit]

No listen stupids means that Redneck slack Jawed New Zealand morons , with barely the ability to string together a sentence, with at least ONE preposition
have ruined motorcycling , as we know it , in one of the best places for it

You did nothing ,( and possibly wont )

This ACC thing has been coming at you since 1993 ,,

now I know I am right because the current situation has PROVED i am, right

Check my post history

What NZ needs is to get rid of the white under educated ,she'll be right intelligentsia , Your good self, and replace them with boat people

people who know what its like to lose everything and will fight dam hard not to lose it

I might change listen stupids ,,,to you frigged morons

I wouldn't be surprised if ( ACC) this goes through ... I just wouldn't .... I wouldn't be pissed off ,
just resigned and hopeful that the younger generation might change the status quo

I m alright , I earn more money than I can shit and 750 isn't a problem for me
it is for others , and thats why I work hard to stop people ( such as your self , from bolloxing up godzone with a sheer lack of understanding

now hurry up and pass on or go to Australia , so that people worthy of such a nice place can do a better job

Stephen

Too true - the right wingers on here have become right whingers

[Skyryder]

just not too sure what thread to post this on. This one jumped out.

ACC Changes to Rule out Competition?


Labour's announcement that it will promote an immediate law change after the election to reduce the pressure on ACC levy rates, raises some serious questions about the future funding and status of ACC.
Having completed the laborious transition to a fully funded scheme, news that cuts to the motor vehicle and employers' levy comes as a surprise and seem to throw into doubt Government's commitment to the fully funded model.
Among the other spectres raised by the proposed changes is the possibility that the Government is trying to make privatisation or ACC competition a less palatable option.

This is from Russell McVeigh Public Public Law News

http://www.russellmcveagh.com/_docs/PublicLawNews-31Oct08_171.htm#InConsultation


It seems pointless to speculate on the effects of Labours ACC policy now but if they had have been elected Labour’s ACC policy would have been a reduction of levies.

R McV. See this in a negative light. But if they had have been elected you would have had a reduction in ACC levies not an increase. Or even half an increase as Smith is now speculating on

Skyryder

[kwaka_crasher]

I reckon it differs from contract to contract.

The Insurance Law Reform Act 1977 (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1977/0014/latest/DLM442536.html) states:

Mis-statements in other contracts of insurance

(1) A contract of insurance shall not be avoided by reason only of any statement made in any proposal or other document on the faith of which the contract was entered into, reinstated, or renewed by the insurer unless the statement—

(a) Was substantially incorrect; and

(b) Was material.
(http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1977/0014/latest/DLM442550.html)
and there can be no contracting out. (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1977/0014/latest/DLM442563.html)

See materiality defined (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1977/0014/latest/DLM442551.html#DLM442551).

In short, you are covered as the fact you have not paid for a vehicle licence is arguably immaterial and they cannot deny cover on this basis regardless of the contract (see no contracting out). Of course they'll try, but don't they always, anyway?

[jeffs]

Ixion have ACC provided you with their figures yet?
I for one would also like to see them . Has the CEO of ACC for filled his promise made on National TV ?

[jeffs]

I was reading back through this thread and had a thought. I hope the CEO of ACC was not using the same calculations I used when I posted this.

ACC cost by vehicle type.
Cost of claim / number of registered vehicle
car $208,343,000 / 206084 = $1010
bike $62,545,000 / 17248 = $3636

My figures were WRONG ( as I said in my next post ). I had only read the line in the LTSA report that said newly registered bikes. Instead of the total registered bikes of 106,000.

This could could be why he was spouting the real cost as $3000 per bike.

Or perhaps they do not know, so are reading Kiwibiker.co.nz to find out their numbers, and there is no report, but he never read my post retracting my figures.

:)

[I GS 1]

Ixion have ACC provided you with their figures yet?
I for one would also like to see them . Has the CEO of ACC for filled his promise made on National TV ?
If we look at what ACC are doing with providing the figures (requested under official information act) for another of their target groups (sensitive claims), we will find that they will faff around/provide un-analysable groupings etc. and only come up with the figures we need after the closing date for submissions.

(If the rehabilitation of motorcyclists is so much more costly, you would have thought that they would have been backing us in the past in trying to get the use of those cheese cutter barriers on roads banned)

[MSTRS]

(If the rehabilitation of motorcyclists is so much more costly, you would have thought that they would have been backing us in the past in trying to get the use of those cheese cutter barriers on roads banned)

Statistically, 1 death (no matter how horrific and abhorrent) is not proof that cheesecutters pose the threat of costs that would over-ride their use.
Bikers perceive them in light of personal threat - no one else does.

[scumdog]

Statistically, 1 death (no matter how horrific and abhorrent) is not proof that cheesecutters pose the threat of costs that would over-ride their use.
Bikers perceive them in light of personal threat - no one else does.

I've said that many times, there are way more dangers out there than cheese-cutters - like ACC for example.....

[R-Soul]

From the close up interview, this is one of many questions I still cant get my head around.

Perhaps this question could be asked of Price water house the ACC auditors.

If there are 106,000 registered bikes and it cost ACC $62,545,000 in claims why do they think the true ACC charge they are saving us from should be $3000.

What have I got wrong.

62,545,000 / 106,000 = $590

The 106,000 does not include the 30,393 mopeds/scooters under 50cc or the sum would be

62,545,000 / 136,393 = $458

Thats the point of the ACC payment collection scheme- they are not just pulling n enough each year to pay for that years claims, they want to pull in enougheach year to pay for all the future claims for the accidents from that year. So they want a huge chunk of cash on top of teh actual payments, so that the cash can earn interest, and pay for all future payouts for those accidents. That way all current bikers pay for all current accidents and their future claims.

However, this apparently (from what I have read) can still be done by assembling the required lump sum of cash over a longer time. Labour wanted to push the deadline for assembling the cash to 2019, instead of the current deadline of 2012. This would have allowed a reduction of ACC levies. National don't want to push the deadline back, but prefer to make out that ACC is in crisis. That way they can privatise it.

[MSTRS]

I was reading back through this thread and had a thought. I hope the CEO of ACC was not using the same calculations I used when I posted this.

ACC cost by vehicle type.
Cost of claim / number of registered vehicle
car $208,343,000 / 206084 = $1010
bike $62,545,000 / 17248 = $3636

My figures were WRONG ( as I said in my next post ). I had only read the line in the LTSA report that said newly registered bikes. Instead of the total registered bikes of 106,000.

This could could be why he was spouting the real cost as $3000 per bike.

Or perhaps they do not know, so are reading Kiwibiker.co.nz to find out their numbers, and there is no report, but he never read my post retracting my figures.

:)Sorry, but the $62M is also wrong. It is just the total of all claims still being paid out. Over half of it has been covered by levies paid in previous years.


I've said that many times, there are way more dangers out there than cheese-cutters - like ACC for example.....
They can both cost us an arm and a leg.

[R-Soul]

In a no-fault scheme there should be NO divisions. It should matter not what I do. As far as ACC is concerned any individual should be a faceless number with no hint of who they are. This is the only way to maintain true equality and fairness.

I'll say it again as it seems to be falling on deaf ears - the ONLY fair way to fund ACC is through income tax.

The fact is that we HAVE being paying more than others, and now they want more. the fact that we have accepted the additional payemnts in the past is damning to us, and turning around now and insisting on "equality" is going to look dumb. Even though it is fair. :argh:

We should just insist that if we pay additional money, then we want the rugby players, netball players and cyclists to pay their way too. We will see how much balls the government has if they are faced with making the rugby players cough... thats a surefire loss at the next election! :bash:

[swbarnett]

The fact is that we HAVE being paying more than others, and now they want more. the fact that we have accepted the additional payemnts in the past is damning to us, and turning around now and insisting on "equality" is going to look dumb. Even though it is fair. :argh:
Yes, we have accepted the slap in the face in the past. What they're trying to do now is more like a full-blown punch in the face with knuckle dusters attached.

If someone threathens you with a feather are you really going to worry about it? We all have our own threshold where we say enough is enough. The fact that we didn't speak up earlier in no way weakens our current position. Ignoring a wrong does not make it right.

[jeffs]

So who is pushing ACC's buttons ? The Bloody AA, and I am a paying member. BUT NOT FOR LONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.aa.co.nz/about/issues/road-safety/Pages/Motorcyclists-and-motorists.aspx
===============================================
"A higher and fairer ACC levy for motorcyclists

The AA is opposed to the continuing cross-subsidisation of motorcycle/moped injuries by other vehicle owners.

Motorcyclists should pay a higher ACC levy that is closer to the actual amount of injury compensation they claim each year. Currently around 80 percent of the cost of motorcycle/moped injuries is funded by motorists and owners of other vehicles. More than 40 percent of motorbike crashes are single vehicle, and the costs for these should be fully covered by motorcyclists.

Did you know?

Motorcycles make up 2% of the vehicles on New Zealand roads, but:

* are seven times more likely to be injured than other road users
* account for 17% of road-related injury costs to ACC "
================================================== ====


Funny considering Even The ACC admit that in-attention of cars is one of the 2 main reasons for bike crashes.

http://www.acc.co.nz/preventing-injuries/on-the-road/PI00052

"While one of the top two causes of those crashes is the motorcyclist losing control, the other cause is a motorist simply not seeing the rider."


I Never realised how much the AA hated bikers until I read their web site.

[Ixion]

NO!

those who are AA members - DO NOT RESIGN

I just joined up. Why? Cos it's a hell of a lot easier to capture a foirtress from inside than by escalade.

AA have stabbed Kiwi motorcyclists in the back. We need to take them down.

But we can best do that from the inside. By being members. members get to vote! AA meetings are sparsely attended. A solid bloc of biker voters could do a great deal .

Don't get out! Get even!

[jeffs]

Axion had your read their website before this ? This was news to me, what an absolute bunch of shits. ( And I don't normally swear )

[jeffs]

From the AA UK site.

http://www.theaa.com/insurance/news/born-again-motorbikers.html

" Simon Douglas, director of AA Insurance, says: "Tragically, 80% of all motorcycle accidents are the fault of road users other than the motor cyclist. For car and commercial vehicle drivers it's very easy to miss seeing an approaching motorbike, especially in congested areas."

So the UK arm of the AA will admit that the car drivers cause most of the bike accidents.

But the Bloody NZ AA say.

"Who gives a crap. If a car hits a bike, make the bike pay. The car wouldn't have hit the bike, if it was not on the road, and we the AA will lobby the government to make it happen."

The total hypocrisy of New Zealand AA.

[Ixion]

Axion had your read their website before this ? This was news to me, what an absolute bunch of shits. ( And I don't normally swear )

About the last three years they've had their knife into bikers. It's some personal vendetta of Mike (?) Noon . He just hates bikes. But it's gotten MUCH more rancid the last six months.

[jeffs]

And I have 2 cars and a Bike, and have been an AA member for over 15 years. Stab me in the back AA !!! I wonder how many bikers are AA members ? Working from the inside of AA or outside, this make me feel more betrayed than the ACC charges.

[jeffs]

Isn't the AA an insurance company. If I hit an other car, don't I loose my no claims, not the car I hit. When did an insurance company start lobbying to have the victim pay all the costs.

[Ixion]

Yes. I actually feel more bitter about the AA than the ACC or the government. For the ACC, it's just a bean counting exercise. We cost them money they want us to pay more. I can understand that , I don't agree it's fair , but I can see where they are coming from.

The government just see us as an untidy loose end. We aren't rulkers, yet we refuse to be ruled. I don't think Mr Key has any personal animosity, he just sees us as irrelevant to the National vision. He'd happily send us to the gas chanmbers, but without any actual hatred.

But the AA, they are motivated by nothing but sheer malice and malevolence. They don't want bikers off they road because we cost money, like ACC , Or because we don't fit neatly into the rulers and ruled equation ,like the National party. They simply want us off the road because they hate us.

[Ixion]

Isn't the AA an insurance company. If I hit an other car, don't I loose my no claims, not the car I hit. When did an insurance company start lobbying to have the victim pay all the costs.

Nope . AA insurance have a permanent guaranteed no claims bonus. Even if you kill a dozen motorcyclists a year, you get to keep your no claims bonus. Go figure.

[jeffs]

I'm going to bed to dream up ways of hurting the AA, because I have been funding the crap they are advocating and it p***es me off.

Yes I get the ACC, like lots of others my question to them is not why? but why so much ?

Yes I get the government deflecting other issues by playing the ACC card ( that's politics )

But MY BIKE IS INSURED WITH THE AA, and that just totally pi..... me off.

[jeffs]

One last question to you Axion, did you get the REAL numbers for total accidents caused by car on bike, or are ACC and MOT still playing dumb. I know there have been lots of people saying 60%, but do you have hard printed numbers, not biker guesses. I have searched but not found a report that breaks these figures out in NZ.

[jeffs]

The best I can find is the CAS report, but this does not show car/bike.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Motor%20vehicle%20crashes%202008_Section%204%20Mot orcycle%20casualties%20and%20crashes.pdf

[Ixion]

CAS data is seriously defective. It totally relies on the cop at the accident scene punctiliously filling in very complicated forms. The cop has more important things to do, and too much paperwork already. He does not fill them in properly. Garbage in, garbage out.

[Brian d marge]

So who is pushing ACC's buttons ? The Bloody AA, and I am a paying member. BUT NOT FOR LONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!


I Never realised how much the AA hated bikers until I read their web site.



+1 and my credit card and my wife to

Stephen

Should be made a sticky

[peasea]

NO!

those who are AA members - DO NOT RESIGN

I just joined up. Why? Cos it's a hell of a lot easier to capture a foirtress from inside than by escalade.

AA have stabbed Kiwi motorcyclists in the back. We need to take them down.

But we can best do that from the inside. By being members. members get to vote! AA meetings are sparsely attended. A solid bloc of biker voters could do a great deal .

Don't get out! Get even!

Have to agree, much better tactic. The AA needs to pull it's head in.

[GOONR]

Isn't the AA an insurance company. If I hit an other car, don't I loose my no claims, not the car I hit. When did an insurance company start lobbying to have the victim pay all the costs.

AA Insurance is totally separate from the AA. It's run by a different company, they just have rights to use the name.

[klingon]

NO!

those who are AA members - DO NOT RESIGN

I just joined up. Why? Cos it's a hell of a lot easier to capture a foirtress from inside than by escalade.

AA have stabbed Kiwi motorcyclists in the back. We need to take them down.

But we can best do that from the inside. By being members. members get to vote! AA meetings are sparsely attended. A solid bloc of biker voters could do a great deal .

Don't get out! Get even!

OK now we need to decide on our response.
I would suggest we begin a new thread (ha ha ha that's always the first step!! :bash:) about the AA's role in all this, and bring together all the posts on the subject.

Then we should assign people to keep an eye on the AA, read their website, find out when and where the meetings are, and rally the troops to act.

Attend all AA meetings and speak up
Write letters to the AA and to Directions Magazine
Think about getting bike-friendly people on the board of the AA (when is the next AGM?)
Prepare simple printed material laying out the role of the AA in the levy rises.
Whatever other stuff we can think of!

[NighthawkNZ]

We need to get ASH behind us... <_<

Since riding is probably healthier, too. Since it's almost impossible to smoke while riding, motorcyclists are less likely to suffer the ills of tobacco-related diseases while riding. And since smoking reduces the flow of oxygen to the brain, which makes smokers less alert, non-smoking motorcyclists are probably smarter than smoking drivers... :bleh::dodge:


:lol:

[MSTRS]

:girlfight::nono::finger:
:whistle:

[NighthawkNZ]

:girlfight::nono::finger:
:whistle:


Its ok I use to manage it when I use to smoke... but I didn't smoke any where near as much :D

[jeffs]

Here are some photos from the visit to the Green Party HQ and Johns Keys constituency office 29/10/2009.

[raster]

Sorry, the reveal I attempted on those photos didn't work, could you cast the spell of reveal on them for me!!!:wacko:

[jeffs]

Kiwibiker won't let me post the same picture twice so you can find them on "Who's up for a flash protest ride this week?" The thread for the ride. Sorry about that :)

[phred]

But MY BIKE IS INSURED WITH THE AA, and that just totally pi..... me off.

I have paid AA levy and insurance for cars and house for years and they wouldn't insure my bike because I was on a learner license at the time. So I said what happens when the cage hits me? What happens when the nasty person steals it? They said tough shit go away. What a crap organisation. We should all visit their CEO and expose his agenda to the public scrutiny.

[idleidolidyll]

I noted that the BRONZ Prez stepped up his public speaking yesterday. It was obvious that he'd seen some comments on his public speaking and to gove credit; he did a lot better this time.

I still reckon he's the wrong front man/woman though. He just doesn't project the passion required or grab the publics attention.

I'm not slamming him BTW: he probably does a fine job as el presidente. However, it has to be acknowledged that public speaking is so bloody important that only the best speakers should be given that job.
Mr Pres, do the right thing; find a speaker with the skills to grab attention. Your job is to give them the facts and to guide them on what your members demand. Their job is to grab the attention of the media and the public.

There were a couple of reasonably good speakers in Manukau yesterday but they still didn't manage to get the crowd behind them (beside the fact that they were there to protest).

Phil Goff showed how it is done; he spoke clearly and grabbed
attention, but in Auckland we still don't have a passionate person able to project that passion and get crowds behind them.

[Big Dave]

Les is in the job now because nobody else stepped forward at the time.

He/We would welcome a suitable champion should one step forward.

[idleidolidyll]

NO!

those who are AA members - DO NOT RESIGN

I just joined up. Why? Cos it's a hell of a lot easier to capture a foirtress from inside than by escalade.

AA have stabbed Kiwi motorcyclists in the back. We need to take them down.

But we can best do that from the inside. By being members. members get to vote! AA meetings are sparsely attended. A solid bloc of biker voters could do a great deal .

Don't get out! Get even!


EXACTLY! Direct action.

Many moons ago I was at the helm of BEARs in Chch. The Canterbury Car Club had adbised us that they were gonna hike up track hire substantially. The track is owned by the Chch CC but leased to the Car Club who let it out to others.

We planned to do just as you have suggested and had over $30k in the bank to spend. In the end, just the threat of us taking over the car club did the job.

Don't piss around with silent protests; people like this only pay attention to action

[idleidolidyll]

Les is in the job now because nobody else stepped forward at the time.

He/We would welcome a suitable champion should one step forward.

That's often the case.
My comments stand though.

I'd offer my services but I dunno that I'm any better. It's an observation not a personal attack.

Didn't realise you were BRONZ Dave. I've always seen them but never counted them as very effective.

Road standards have deteriorated over the last 15 years to the point where riders fall off on unswept roads and WE get ACC price rises because of it yet can't sue the bastards who don't clean up after themselves.

Trucks are limited to 90kph to seperate them from other vehicles in a bid to make roads safer: motorcycles however, even though much safer if they keep passing cars and riding the gaps, get busted for staying alive.

How has BRONZ lessened these abuses of our lives and rights as taxpayers?

Les has my email address, I work in Onehunga, just 5 mins from that hall they held the mtg at. If anyone there is interested in a sit down and thinks I have anything to offer, I'm happy to talk.

[DVS 69]

I heard that theres a protect ride going to beehive on the 17th of this month .......... Is this true ?? Im keen as to get the day off and head down etc.

[Ixion]

Sure is. High noon at parliament steps.

[caseye]

I heard that theres a protect ride going to beehive on the 17th of this month .......... Is this true ?? Im keen as to get the day off and head down etc.

Oi!go tell all your mates who don't read the papers or these threads, the more the merrier or in this case the better it is for our cause.
On ya mate.

[Mom]

I heard that theres a protect ride going to beehive on the 17th of this month .......... Is this true ?? Im keen as to get the day off and head down etc.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=111306

Here are the details of what is happening

[klingon]

I heard that theres a protect ride going to beehive on the 17th of this month .......... Is this true ?? Im keen as to get the day off and head down etc.

Interesting.

SpankMe sent out an email to all members of KB announcing the BRONZ meeting where the date was decided. But I am hearing from more and more people who are members of KB but have never heard of the event (or are just catching up with it now through different channels)

Unfortunately the original email that went out had some naughty words :shutup: in it, and was blocked by a LOT of companies (especially really big and/or really sensitive ones - like govt departments)

Perhaps it is time to request another email to be sent ou to all KB members with the final date & details - aonly this time more carefully composed for the purpose so it is more likely to get through?

Just thinking aloud...

[GOONR]

Interesting.
SpankMe sent out an email to all members of KB announcing the BRONZ meeting where the date was decided. But I am hearing from more and more people who are members of KB but have never heard of the event (or are just catching up with it now through different channels)
Unfortunately the original email that went out had some naughty words :shutup: in it, and was blocked by a LOT of companies (especially really big and/or really sensitive ones - like govt departments)
Perhaps it is time to request another email to be sent ou to all KB members with the final date & details aonly this time more carefully composed for the purpose so it is more likely to get through?
Just thinking aloud...
I didn't get the email, checked my settings to make sure I receive emails fromsite admin's all good there. I use gmail, checked my spam folder but nope, no email.

[Ronin]

Interesting.

SpankMe sent out an email to all members of KB announcing the BRONZ meeting where the date was decided. But I am hearing from more and more people who are members of KB but have never heard of the event (or are just catching up with it now through different channels)

Unfortunately the original email that went out had some naughty words :shutup: in it, and was blocked by a LOT of companies (especially really big and/or really sensitive ones - like govt departments)

Perhaps it is time to request another email to be sent ou to all KB members with the final date & details - aonly this time more carefully composed for the purpose so it is more likely to get through?

Just thinking aloud...

Don't users need to have receive emails from administrators ticked to get them?

[pete376403]

Yes, and I do have that option selected, and no I haven't recieved the e-mail

[temaori]

I may be too late for my contribution, but I would like to share my thoughts:

- First of all, ACC are trying to extort money from us riders, there's no doubt about it, so we need an intelligent and coherent argument to build our case around. We also need to engage with the public to help them see our plight. They will support us if they see the facts.

May I suggest we construct our defense on the idea of the impact that these ACC levies will have on us, and the environment. The crux of my idea is this, these levies will raise the price of riding to such an extent that we will have to go back to riding in cages, and that will increase traffic congestion and our carbon emissions.

For this to work, we will need the research to back up my conclusions, and I would suggest we contact the Green Party and regional transport authorities such as ARTA to join in in our lobbying. Motorcycle companies could help us as well.

If we can show that the whole entire country benefits from us choosing to ride instead of flossing in cages, I'm sure we'll be able to successfully lobby ACC to stop their protection ring.

If theres anyone with connections, research skills and facts to back up this argument, we're gonna need ya.

[James Deuce]

I may be too late for my contribution, but I would like to share my thoughts:

- First of all, ACC are trying to extort money from us riders, there's no doubt about it, so we need an intelligent and coherent argument to build our case around. We also need to engage with the public to help them see our plight. They will support us if they see the facts.

May I suggest we construct our defense on the idea of the impact that these ACC levies will have on us, and the environment. The crux of my idea is this, these levies will raise the price of riding to such an extent that we will have to go back to riding in cages, and that will increase traffic congestion and our carbon emissions.

For this to work, we will need the research to back up my conclusions, and I would suggest we contact the Green Party and regional transport authorities such as ARTA to join in in our lobbying. Motorcycle companies could help us as well.

If we can show that the whole entire country benefits from us choosing to ride instead of flossing in cages, I'm sure we'll be able to successfully lobby ACC to stop their protection ring.

If theres anyone with connections, research skills and facts to back up this argument, we're gonna need ya.

Good thoughts, but -

You need to have a good read of a few of the threads to get a handle on the Terms of Reference BRONZ and the Govt are operating under.

I wouldn't push the Green argument as most bikes aren't particularly fuel efficient, especially compared to a 2 litre or smaller engined passenger car of the last four or five years, and any turbo-diesel under that capacity will make everything including your Keeway look like Dodge Ram running nitro-methane and water injection.

[kwaka_crasher]

SpankMe sent out an email to all members of KB announcing the BRONZ meeting where the date was decided. But I am hearing from more and more people who are members of KB but have never heard of the event (or are just catching up with it now through different channels).

I never got it either. I'm with Xtra and it's not in the SPAM folder on webmail. I have "Receive Email from Administrators" enabled in options.

[Genestho]

Don't take this the wrong way?
But.... maybe these emails could refrain from the C word in future?

It's not really a necessary word, the email could've been forwarded alot further, you may find that word restricted the email from inboxes.

I'm not precious - just assuming you're attempting to reach anyone and everyone?

My two cents :)

[klingon]

Don't take this the wrong way?
But.... maybe these emails could refrain from the C word in future?

It's not really a necessary word, the email could've been forwarded alot further, you may find that word restricted the email from inboxes.

I'm not precious - just assuming you're attempting to reach anyone and everyone?

My two cents :)

Yes. I think (hope) that this message has been received loud and clear. It's exactly why the email didn't get to a lot of people, and apparently in some systems the sender may now be blocked by the server due to sending unsolicited offensive emails.

To be fair to those involved, I think what happened was Ixion wrote the message as an 'internal' KB thing (where we're kind of used to that kind of language) then a helpful admin picked it up and mailed it out - perhaps without reading the full content first.

However it happened, I think it is important to be aware of the problems associated with it and make sure it doesn't happen again. :yes:

[jistdowit]

Here is the answer I got from Jim Anderton to my email to him, some moot points!!!

Dear Peter,

Thank you for your message regarding the proposal to increase the ACC
levy payable by owners of motor bikes, in some cases by several hundred
per cent.

I am opposed to this for two principal reasons:

The first is that it is not necessary. The ACC fund is not in a
financial crisis as the current National led government claims. The
scheme as originally constituted was a 'pay as you go' scheme i.e. the
levies received in any one year meet the requirements for payments in
that year. In fact the recent history of the scheme has been that the
income more than meets the payment requirements. The same applies to,
for example, national superannuation. In that case the identification
of the effect of the 'baby boom' generation coming to retirement and
creating a demand 'bulge' on the commitment to pay universal pensions at
a reasonable level can be anticipated and planned for ( the so-called
'Cullen' fund). If the ACC funding was in crisis this could be handled
in the same way, but it is not in crisis and no amount of insisting that
it is on the part of the present Minister can make it so.

The problem arises because the current government insists that all of
the future financial obligations of the fund must be funded in the
present. That would make sense if the ACC was an insurance scheme -
which it is not and was never intended to be. It makes even more sense
if the government has a hidden agenda - which looks increasingly likely
- to privatise the ACC or farm parts of it out to insurance companies.
In those circumstances, a fully funded scheme in which the fund has been
paid for by taxpayers would look a very attractive proposition to a
private insurer, but it is one to which I am entirely opposed.

The second reason is that the ACC scheme was never intended to be a user
pays scheme in which those who allegedly incur specific costs must, as a
group, also meet those costs in full. The scheme is intended to draw
upon the overall resources of the community to ensure that those who
suffer an accident do not find themselves disadvantaged because they
cannot afford treatment or rehabilitation, or meet the expenses
associated with a lengthy court case. I note that Sir Owen Woodhouse,
whose report led to the setting up of the scheme in 1973 has very
recently said precisely that. Saying that motor cyclists must pay much
more than presently because they are 'responsible' for their accidents
not only breaches the principal behind the scheme, it also re-introduces
the notion of fault into the scheme when it was set up in the first
place to avoid it.

Please be assured that I will be opposing the proposed increased levy
and that we in the Progressive Party are committed to restoring the
scheme to its original basis when we return to government.

Warm regards,

Jim Anderton
MP for Wigram
Progressive Party Leader

[idleidolidyll]

I have personal health insurance - in theory i should be able to pay the meager reg fee and provide my receipt for my personal health insurance for my rego.
I noticed this is not an option - so my alternative is to "take the bike off the road" according to LTSA, and forge a fake rego for it.
SCAN, EDIT, PRINT, LAMINATE - all for less than $500

I have pvt insurance too but I'm still happy to pay a fair ACC levy as a tax from income.

My bet is that a better society is a more equal one and we all benefit from the relative peace that comes from a happy society

[idleidolidyll]

All the other major non national parties are saying that national is making this whole ACC deficit up and I believe them

damn!
You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

[idleidolidyll]

You need highly visible, positive action that does not piss off a car driver with a 1 tone weapon, wanting to get even for delaying their morning run by an hour. It need to be one that has a cost to the law makers, and puts no one in danger. It needs to be one that reduces the chance of some dumb ass
rider crashing through stupid riding on the event, proving the ACC's point.

I suggest we start by very slow riding in close circles around the bus depots, in such a way as it makes it impossible for buses to
get out. Hit the commuter, but not the one driving the car. This will have several effects. It show the people that we don't want to be in
our cars adding to the congestion. Getting us off our bikes, wont make us move to public transport. If you hold up the cars, people
may move to public transport, which is exactly one of their plans. Given the latest bus problems, such a thing would get good news cover

come on get real !!

some excellent ideas, i've just purloined them to offer here: http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=112498

i'll reference you of course, plagiarism is a sin

[RiderInBlack]

Here is the answer I got from Jim Anderton to my email to him, some moot points!!!

Dear Peter,

I am opposed to this for two principal reasons:

The first is that it is not necessary. The ACC fund is not in a
financial crisis as the current National led government claims........
The problem arises because the current government insists that all of
the future financial obligations of the fund must be funded in the
present. That would make sense if the ACC was an insurance scheme -
which it is not and was never intended to be. It makes even more sense
if the government has a hidden agenda......to privatise the ACC or farm parts of it out to insurance companies.... a fully funded scheme...would look a very attractive proposition to a private insurer, but it is one to which I am entirely opposed.

The second reason is that the ACC scheme was never intended to be a user pays scheme in which those who allegedly incur specific costs must, as a group, also meet those costs in full......... Saying that motor cyclists must pay much more than presently because they are 'responsible' for their accidents not only breaches the principal behind the scheme, it also re-introduces the notion of fault into the scheme when it was set up in the first place to avoid it.

Jim Anderton
MP for Wigram
Progressive Party LeaderExactly. So how to we effectively stop them at their dirty little game? That is the real question.