PDA

View Full Version : How about we take a deep breath...



Katman
14th October 2009, 18:15
.......and relax just for the moment.

All this talk of splinter protest action is likely to work against us.

Up till now I have not been a strong supporter of BRONZ, but I believe that this is the time for them to take firm hold of any protest organisation.

I also believe that they are probably the only group within NZ who have the potential to do the job justice.

tomobedlam
14th October 2009, 18:26
.......and relax just for the moment.

All this talk of splinter protest action is likely to work against us.

Up till now I have not been a strong supporter of BRONZ, but I believe that this is the time for them to take firm hold of any protest organisation.

I also believe that they are probably the only group within NZ who have the potential to do the job justice.

agreed......

blackstars_10
14th October 2009, 18:29
Yep-definately needs to be one coodinated organise effort to be effective

+1

CookMySock
14th October 2009, 18:30
Perhaps, but sometimes a swift "kill" response works well.

Steve

mattian
14th October 2009, 18:31
ok..... so whos gonna be the first one to do a burn out on the steps of parliament?

nothingflash
14th October 2009, 18:32
good call mate. Might as well do it once and do it properly instead of a number of half arsed approaches (amongst a few good ones as well (before anyone slates me)).

Maha
14th October 2009, 18:33
Yip, a willy nilly protest to Wellington is all well n' good, but like I said before, it needs to be structured and organised, otherwise, hundreds of bikes will just turn up at the Beehive and then what? To have any impact at all, a protest needs a voice, and a slogan....:headbang:

Edit: I see a slogan thread is well underway.

Pussy
14th October 2009, 18:34
Perception is everything. We need to be seen to be a responsible "group".
Kneejerk crowd mentallity will work against motorcyclists

Ixion
14th October 2009, 18:35
I'm guessing that the motorcycle trade will not be happy about this. Could put some of them out of business, more or less overnight.

So, maybe we can work with them.

yungatart
14th October 2009, 18:36
.......and relax just for the moment.

All this talk of splinter protest action is likely to work against us.

Up till now I have not been a strong supporter of BRONZ, but I believe that this is the time for them to take firm hold of any protest organisation.

I also believe that they are probably the only group within NZ who have the potential to do the job justice.

For once, I totally agree with you, Katman!
Don't worry, it prolly won't happen again....

paturoa
14th October 2009, 18:37
Good call.

But as a "group" of individuals we also need to let ourselves vent a little to build a strong bond / common view for the next setps.

StoneY
14th October 2009, 18:44
Yes good call BUT, BRONZ never followed through on the cheesecutters, will they move in any sort of suitable time frame on this one?

No offense BRONZ peeps, just sayin it as its perceived in some parts

Indiana_Jones
14th October 2009, 18:44
The time of protest is upon us Doug!

*Molotov Cocktail through the PM's office*

-Indy

White trash
14th October 2009, 18:46
Perfect call again Katman. This is a huge opportunity for BRONZ to prove their worth.

To really make an impact, these protests will have to be very carefully orchistrated to avoid looking like a bunch of fucking clowns. It's very nice that there's in the space of two hours thirty thousand threads advertising "protest rides" and spammers already going through all the meetings and events threads linking to said protests, everyone wants to do something for the cause and that's nice.

But do it wrong, and you're fucked.

Ixion
14th October 2009, 18:53
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.

White trash
14th October 2009, 18:58
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.
Just started a thread asking the exact same question. Some good arguments coming forward but a bit more "rugby/soccer/netball cost more than us"

Ixion
14th October 2009, 19:04
Ok. I got one .

According to ACC :



In 2008/09 ACC paid more than $62 million for motorcycle riders but collected only $12.3 million in levies from them.


But, according to

there were 96952 motorcycles REGISTERED in 2008 , excluding those on exemption. According to my calculator , an annual ACC levy of $204 times 96952 = $19.8 million.

So, just how believeable are those figures.

The costs look overstated. The income certainly looks understated.

Mom
14th October 2009, 19:10
I'm guessing that the motorcycle trade will not be happy about this. Could put some of them out of business, more or less overnight.

So, maybe we can work with them.

This came up at a shop I was in today, job losses were talked about.

Ixion
14th October 2009, 19:12
Does anyone have names . I'm guessing Finn will probably have some on Wednesday.

Surely the trade will be looking at some sort of concerted action.

Winston001
14th October 2009, 19:26
An effective protest will need to be logical and ongoing. A gathering at Parliament looks exciting on TV but if there is no followup then the effect is lost.

monkeymcbean
14th October 2009, 19:35
Just started a thread asking the exact same question. Some good arguments coming forward but a bit more "rugby/soccer/netball cost more than us"

Ski industry must be a high cost to ACC as well!

blackstars_10
14th October 2009, 19:40
It quite an interesting issue really. It is important to present a good image of bikers to the public for success but... it seems that all the most famous/sucessfull protests consisted of a mass movement of people committing illegal actions-or actions considered unlawful to the regime in power at the time. Another key trend is that in the immediate time preceding these actions, they had to reap the consequences of their actions.

So hypothetically speaking, if all (read a large majority of) bikers took off their plates and rode in protest, in the short term they would have to pay the fines but..perhaps in hindsight, it would be an very effective measure. It is all about how the action is perceived and what changes these actions make.

Protest always loses its romantic appeal when a sacrifice is require, and a sacrifice is always required for a succesful protest

oldrider
14th October 2009, 19:54
.......and relax just for the moment.

All this talk of splinter protest action is likely to work against us.

Up till now I have not been a strong supporter of BRONZ, but I believe that this is the time for them to take firm hold of any protest organisation.

I also believe that they are probably the only group within NZ who have the potential to do the job justice.

Probably your most inspiring post on KB Katman! Couldn't agree more! :clap:

The Union adage: "United we stand, divided we fall" springs to mind in order to repel this attack on our very existence!

xgnr
14th October 2009, 19:56
Did I miss something but havnt our rego's only just been increased?

Hitcher
14th October 2009, 20:01
Turning back the tide on this one will take sophistication and cunning. It's not just Wellington-based policy analysts who will require convincing (indeed they are already a lost cause). It's the hearts and minds of the general public of New Zealand who will need to be won over by the reasonableness of the motorcyclists' cause.

Well constructed argument and slick PR is needed, not a bunch of rowdy oiks on bikes riding round in large groups intimidating little old ladies in in Honda Jazzs and scaring babies in strollers.

If the motorcycle levy isn't to increase, motorcyclists will need to be offering an alternative to fill the funding gap at ACC.

Politicians have a problem: ACC costs a lot to run and they have to find ways of funding it. They're not going to dismantle or privatise ACC. That is a given. They will be reluctant to further increase the excise component of the levy derived from pump sales of motor spirits because that is inflationary. In the current economic climate where people's wage packets aren't increasing, they will be very reluctant to increase the wages and salaries levy.

So what's a creative solution that ticks all the right political boxes but doesn't see motorcyclists forced off the roads? Protest rides? I think not.

MadDuck
14th October 2009, 20:03
not a bunch of rowdy oiks on bikes riding round in large groups intimidating little old ladies in in Honda Jazzs and scaring babies in strollers.

But what fun it would be.

grusomhat
14th October 2009, 20:05
People will tire of posting in that other thread and then someone a bit more organised will go ahead. People just need to understandably vent their frustrations and anger which can be seen by the 15 pages or so. It is a real mess in there though, but fortunately there are some good ideas. As I said though, once people have vented they can then go back through and pullout anything useful.

Pussy
14th October 2009, 20:06
Turning back the tide on this one will take sophistication and cunning. It's not just Wellington-based policy analysts who will require convincing (indeed they are already a lost cause). It's the hearts and minds of the general public of New Zealand who will need to be won over by the reasonableness of the motorcyclists' cause.

Well constructed argument and slick PR is needed, not a bunch of rowdy oiks on bikes riding round in large groups intimidating little old ladies in in Honda Jazzs and scaring babies in strollers.

If the motorcycle levy isn't to increase, motorcyclists will need to be offering an alternative to fill the funding gap at ACC.

Politicians have a problem: ACC costs a lot to run and they have to find ways of funding it. They're not going to dismantle or privatise ACC. That is a given. They will be reluctant to further increase the excise component of the levy derived from pump sales of motor spirits because that is inflationary. In the current economic climate where people's wage packets aren't increasing, they will be very reluctant to increase the wages and salaries levy.

So what's a creative solution that ticks all the right political boxes but doesn't see motorcyclists forced off the roads? Protest rides? I think not.

Right on the money there, Brett.
As I mentioned... perception is everything.
And we could ALL do ourselves a favour by embracing a bit more personal responsibility. Some of the "skills" I have seen displayed on public roads are not doing us any favours

Paul in NZ
14th October 2009, 20:07
Maybe a part of this is coming up with an alternative plan that...

a. Acknowledges and addresses the growing accident cost
b. Provides a means for responsible riders to escape excessive taxation (encouraging good habits)
c. Address the imbalance by increase the take and reduce the cost.

I do wonder how recreational skiers totally fund their costs, rugby players etc

I could accept a higher fee but I cannot accept that as an owner of 3 clasic bikes that are really only used on high days and holidays I should pay 3 lots when I'm the only rider in the house...

Genestho
14th October 2009, 20:07
Turning back the tide on this one will take sophistication and cunning. It's not just Wellington-based policy analysts who will require convincing (indeed they are already a lost cause). It's the hearts and minds of the general public of New Zealand who will need to be won over by the reasonableness of the motorcyclists' cause.

Well constructed argument and slick PR is needed, not a bunch of rowdy oiks on bikes riding round in large groups intimidating little old ladies in in Honda Jazzs and scaring babies in strollers.

If the motorcycle levy isn't to increase, motorcyclists will need to be offering an alternative to fill the funding gap at ACC.

Politicians have a problem: ACC costs a lot to run and they have to find ways of funding it. They're not going to dismantle or privatise ACC. That is a given. They will be reluctant to further increase the excise component of the levy derived from pump sales of motor spirits because that is inflationary. In the current economic climate where people's wage packets aren't increasing, they will be very reluctant to increase the wages and salaries levy.

So what's a creative solution that ticks all the right political boxes but doesn't see motorcyclists forced off the roads? Protest rides? I think not.
Totally Hitcher
It's all looking a bit hysterical, people need to chill out. Be logical.
Take a breath. I don't think a protest works well, although you can sell it to media as an awareness ride, remove the words protest, for a start. I got some other ideas too...but I can't make it to the meeting.
Ixion is asking for a logical argument. Stop reading and watching media, and read the proposals provided for a start.

Katman
14th October 2009, 20:09
I think it's time that every responsible motorcyclist speaks out about the idiocy that infests the likes of the Coro Loop and the Akaroa GP.

Until we do so loudly and publicly, we're seen as a whole to be tacitly supporting such antics.

tri boy
14th October 2009, 20:11
Motorcycling is more a pass time like boating, horse riding, kayacking. Find a good PR team to throw the pitch that all passtimes that have injurious claims with ACC should be targeted.
I still don't understand the difference between breaking your back on a motorcycle as opposed to falling from a horse, scrum injury, diving from the high board.
It's just easier because of a rego plate to collect the funds.
Register boats, horses, guns, kayaks-the general public will revolt, and the govt backdown.

AD345
14th October 2009, 20:13
*snip*

So what's a creative solution that ticks all the right political boxes but doesn't see motorcyclists forced off the roads? Protest rides? I think not.

Stop trying to fund the entire future claims liability in 4 years would be a good start.

Making incremental adjustments to the range of ACC levies to cover the gap in 10 (or more) years based on 3 yearly reviews of all incomes (including investment returns) would be another helpful action. This stops knee-jerk actions like this and allows for reduced impositions on the stakeholders in the event of improved returns (in other words - without a mechanism like this, there's nothing to stop the govt. holding onto the cash even when they no longer "need" it)

A less palatable option would be to introduce a similar system to diesel Road User Charges. This would at least have the benefit of reducing the impact on those who own more than 1 bike. I shudder to think of the 'administration overheads" the bureaucrats could think up though.

That took 10 minutes to think up.

sinfull
14th October 2009, 20:14
Turning back the tide on this one will take sophistication and cunning. It's not just Wellington-based policy analysts who will require convincing (indeed they are already a lost cause). It's the hearts and minds of the general public of New Zealand who will need to be won over by the reasonableness of the motorcyclists' cause.

Well constructed argument and slick PR is needed, not a bunch of rowdy oiks on bikes riding round in large groups intimidating little old ladies in in Honda Jazzs and scaring babies in strollers.

If the motorcycle levy isn't to increase, motorcyclists will need to be offering an alternative to fill the funding gap at ACC.

Politicians have a problem: ACC costs a lot to run and they have to find ways of funding it. They're not going to dismantle or privatise ACC. That is a given. They will be reluctant to further increase the excise component of the levy derived from pump sales of motor spirits because that is inflationary. In the current economic climate where people's wage packets aren't increasing, they will be very reluctant to increase the wages and salaries levy.

So what's a creative solution that ticks all the right political boxes but doesn't see motorcyclists forced off the roads? Protest rides? I think not.
Your making the prospect of my trying my new slingshot out seem pretty sad here Hitch !!!


I like the figures that Ixion just brought out in an earlier post !!! A publicity campaign could work for us if we could obtain some proof that they are exagerating the figures !!!

JohnR
14th October 2009, 20:16
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.

My job requires me to fill out many ACC forms. ACC forms ask for details of "accidents". However they do not specifically require details of the type of vehicle involved. The only way that this information can be gathered is by analyzing the summary, usually written by the "victim" or friend/family. If the word motorcycle/bike appears then the analyst probably looks no further and selects "Motorcycle Crash". However there are, further down the form a box for "Sport", e.g. motorcross, there is also a very small tick box for 'Did this involve a moving vehicle on a road, driveway or beach' or similar.

I suspect that many off road/farm bike injuries are recorded as motorcycle crashes because the information is not specific enough.

Fluffy Cat
14th October 2009, 20:18
From memory in the uk early 1990s it was 60% to 40% thats 60% car drivers at fault in recorded accidents. Think its similar here but this hehe is a no fault system. Its us that are getting injured (not our fault).
Sounds like we are buggered....
Mahnn this sucks:mad:.

Genestho
14th October 2009, 20:22
Official Information Act 1982 No 156 (as at 01 July 2009), Public Act



12 Requests(1) Any person, being—

(a) a New Zealand citizen; or

(b) a permanent resident of New Zealand; or

(c) a person who is in New Zealand; or

(d) a body corporate which is incorporated in New Zealand; or

(e) a body corporate which is incorporated outside New Zealand but which has a place of business in New Zealand,—

may request a department or Minister of the Crown or organisation to make available to him or it any specified official information.

(1A) Notwithstanding subsection (1), a request made, on or after the date of commencement of this subsection, by or on behalf of a natural person for access to any personal information which is about that person shall be deemed to be a request made pursuant to subclause (1)(b) of principle 6 of the Privacy Act 1993, and shall be dealt with accordingly, and nothing in this Part or in Part 5 shall apply in relation to any such request.

(2) The official information requested shall be specified with due particularity in the request.

(3) If the person making the request asks that his request be treated as urgent, he shall give his reasons for seeking the information urgently.

I wonder if we (or BRONZ) can use this to gain the figures? I recon first you have to break it down so you can see what ya dealing with.

blackstars_10
14th October 2009, 20:23
Find a good PR team to throw the pitch that all passtimes that have injurious claims with ACC should be targeted.


Unfortunately, I don't think that this approach will ever work. The nature of motorcyclists is that they are easy targets-
-association with gangs (rightly or wrongly)
-riders who think the street is a track
-cost of accidents
-general bad riding
-and the perception that they are only a passtime

If they weren't seen as a just a passtime or luxury item but rather a necessity, I can't help but feel that this would not have happened. Indeed, for many of us they are our means of transport. Part of the issue is that they are not legitimised as a means of everyday transport that gets people to work etc. This means that by targeting motorcycles, the government doesn't anticipate to see any negative economic repercussions, effects that would be seen if the same increase happened to cars.

As such, I don't ever see us 'convincing' the government to reexamine ACC by arguing its case. In reality, the figure they are concerned with is the cost of the motorycle related accidents.

That is where social action of some sort needs to come in

slimjim
14th October 2009, 20:25
I think it's time that every responsible motorcyclist speaks out about the idiocy that infests the likes of the Coro Loop and the Akaroa GP.

well that will help...:rolleyes:
and Bronz.. yea right thought you were ex one of them ..
wonder what the hog club,ulysses club,rat club,and hell yes even the 1% are going to do ,cause it affects them ..

Hitcher
14th October 2009, 20:30
Come on guys. This no time bitch and moan about old grievances. Despite what we may think about various motorcyclist organisations, we're all in this together.

We need to find creative solutions that stand a good chance of being favorably considered by our elected leaders. I don't care who it is who comes up with the good ideas, I just want to hear good ideas.

cs363
14th October 2009, 20:33
As much as it will (no doubt) upset some on here, Katman is right that a small minority have certainly damaged the reputation and public perception of motorcycling. Whether it is motorcycle gangs or those that think they are MotoGP riders or stunters on the road (there's a time and a place for everything, but unfortunately most of these tossers like to masturbate with an audience, appreciative or not...).
In today's increasingly PC and safety conscious world, the smart motorcyclist who wants to blow the cobwebs out will pick his road and occasion carefully and still be considerate of other road users - yes, it can be done with just a little (not so) common sense.
Though arguing among ourselves right now isn't going to help the immediate problem given that there is only a relatively short time to make submissions. (by November 10th)
Apparently the actual changes whatever form they take won't be decided until around February next year and will be enacted around July.

But, back to the matter in hand - unless someone can suggest another body that is capable of organising a concerted national protest (I certainly don't know of one) then BRONZ is our best hope. This will certainly be a defining moment in history for them I feel.
I could be wrong, but I don't think most motorcyclists would be able to come up with a strong argument against a rise in the ACC levy given all the arguments for it - the real issue for most, reading between the lines, is that it should be a fair rise rather than the short sighted blanket approach suggested in the proposal. Even worse is the grossly unfair penalty owners of several bikes face (and many of us are in that boat), why should we pay multiple levies for vehicles that we are incapable of using simultaneously?
Someone suggested that the levies be somehow linked to your licence, for instance if you have a car and bike licence you pay two appropriate levies and so on, food for thought?
I still think the best thing we can all do right now is make a submission, email your MP cc'ing Nick Smith & John key and join BRONZ (even if it's only for this year) and present a united front.

Pussy
14th October 2009, 20:40
And we need to make sure that we DON'T come across like some rabid crowd from the French Revolution

mansell
14th October 2009, 20:41
I still think the best thing we can all do right now is make a submission, email your MP cc'ing Nick Smith & John key and join BRONZ (even if it's only for this year) and present a united front.[/QUOTE]

Let us know how and I believe the majority of people who subscribe to this site would make a submission. Maybe if we all scream loud enough and long enough the government might hear us

Hitcher
14th October 2009, 20:45
Unless everybody on this site who plans to make a submission makes a DIFFERENT submission, they will be largely ineffective.

Submission processes are about gathering ideas, particularly ideas or considerations/impacts that the developers of the proposal may not have thought of. Submissions are not a numbers game. 3,000 submissions that all say the same thing will be treated as one submission.

Genestho
14th October 2009, 20:50
Unless everybody on this site who plans to make a submission makes a DIFFERENT submission, they will be largely ineffective.

Submission processes are about gathering ideas, particularly ideas or considerations/impacts that the developers of the proposal may not have thought of. Submissions are not a numbers game. 3,000 submissions that all say the same thing will be treated as one submission.

Wonder if there should be a sticky addressing that? I'm seeing alot of copy this and send carryon?

No good. You must use your own words, and read the proposals (at LEAST) before you write your submission, if you have a rebuttal, back it with a fact (if you can).

monkeymcbean
14th October 2009, 20:51
For one, i would want to see from ACC a breakdown of accident figures, one between road bikes and off road bikes. I don't see why i should pay for another branch of the motorbike sport industry who don't pay extra for ACC levies on bike registration.
I'm not sure if any of the off road contingent of KB bikers are posting here, on this hotly debated subject.... I bet they are keeping 'mum'!.

SO OFF ROAD MOTOR BIKES SHOULD PAY A REGISTRATION TYPE FEE, or they pay part cost for their accidents caused by a off road motorbike if it is too hard to get registration out of them, there, that will contribute to the so call financial hole they seem to be complaining of which I think is alot of polictical bullshit anyway, next they will be having complusory health insurance, owned by.... i bet friends of the politicans.

Dakar
14th October 2009, 20:51
does anyone think this might be a scare tactic, threaten us with a $750 fee and settle on a $400 or $500 registration fee, we might feel relieved and shut up????

They also mentioned a discount for careful riders i.e no accident history, anyone know how much this would be?

kin sucks tho!

cs363
14th October 2009, 20:51
I still think the best thing we can all do right now is make a submission, email your MP cc'ing Nick Smith & John key and join BRONZ (even if it's only for this year) and present a united front.

Let us know how and I believe the majority of people who subscribe to this site would make a submission. Maybe if we all scream loud enough and long enough the government might hear us[/QUOTE]

Email address for Nick Smith and John Key are: nick.smith@national.org.nz & john.key@national.org.nz you'll find your local MP's email address on the respective parties websites (just Google the party name)
Details for submissions are on the attached document which outlines all the proposals as well.

BRONZ's website is: http://www.bronz.org.nz/ and there is a downloadable form on their for membership ($20 per year)

Ixion
14th October 2009, 20:52
..
-and the perception that they are only a passtime

If they weren't seen as a just a passtime or luxury item but rather a necessity, I can't help but feel that this would not have happened. ..

That may be so in some areas, but I don't think it is true in Auckland. Here the small scooters (mopeds) are ubqiuitous, and clearly not pastime toys.

And they are hit even worse , percentage wise than big bikes.

Does anyone have a contact at Magnetos. I'd be interested to hear what the scrotahs think about it.


As much as it will (no doubt) upset some on here, Katman is right that a small minority have certainly damaged the reputation and public perception of motorcycling. Whether it is motorcycle gangs or those that think they are MotoGP riders or stunters on the road (there's a time and a place for everything, but unfortunately most of these tossers like to masturbate with an audience, appreciative or not...).
..

I don't really think it's all that relevant.

I don't have any sense of animosity from ACC. To them it's purely bean counting. The Government is demanding lower costs and higher revenue. They believe (probably rightly) that we cost them money. So, like any business they want to increase their prices so as to make a profit. If they were making money out of us I think they'd be happy to leave us alone. It's just a dollar issue.

The AA is another matter. They appear to be motivatred by sheer malice.

I've been fielding a lot of calls, texts and emails from non bikers. Without exception they're of the "far out just saw the acc increases on the news. That's rude". (That's an actual txt from a non biker).

So I think we have a lot of public support. Provided we don't alienate it. Simply because people see the increase as excessive.

Ixion
14th October 2009, 20:54
Unless everybody on this site who plans to make a submission makes a DIFFERENT submission, they will be largely ineffective.

Submission processes are about gathering ideas, particularly ideas or considerations/impacts that the developers of the proposal may not have thought of. Submissions are not a numbers game. 3,000 submissions that all say the same thing will be treated as one submission.

However, 3000 letters of complaint (better than emails) WILL frighten politicians. Who are less interested in the content than in the fact that lots of people , with votes, are upset.

Dakar
14th October 2009, 20:54
For one, i would want to see from ACC a breakdown of accident figures, one between road bikes and off road bikes. I don't see why i should pay for another branch of the motorbike sport industry who don't pay extra for ACC levies on bike registration.
I'm not sure if any of the off road contingent of KB bikers are posting here, on this hotly debated subject.... I bet they are keeping 'mum'!.

i thought we were one big happy family mate :grouphug:

Hitcher
14th October 2009, 20:57
However, 3000 letters of complaint (better than emails) WILL frighten politicians. Who are less interested in the content than in the fact that lots of people , with votes, are upset.

Agreed. A vastly better tactic for a cutter and paster than making formal submissions.

A letter writing campaign aimed at MPs who ride motorcycles could also be worth a crack...

Katman
14th October 2009, 20:58
I don't really think it's all that relevant.



It's relevance lies in the fact that we stand to gain far more public support if we're seen to be (a) taking a more responsible approach to our riding and (b) condemning those motorcyclists who don't.

Does an organisation like BRONZ have the right to request an independant study into all motorcycle related ACC claims to see what percentage pertain to road bikes?

MadDuck
14th October 2009, 20:58
A letter writing campaign aimed at MPs who ride motorcycles could also be worth a crack...

So do you (or anyone) have a list of MPs that do ride?

cs363
14th October 2009, 20:59
Agreed. A vastly better tactic for a cutter and paster than making formal submissions.

A letter writing campaign aimed at MPs who ride motorcycles could also be worth a crack...

Perhaps a sticky is in order with all relevant contact details, instructions on how to structure the letters and so on, so that pertinent details don't get buried within all these posts?

Hitcher
14th October 2009, 21:02
Rick Barker rides
Phil Goff rode Rick's Eleventyone to the Labour Party AGM
That new Green MP who nobody has ever heard of (who is allegedly a KBer) may ride
Annette King's husband rides
Ditto for Ruth Dyson


There are probably others...

monkeymcbean
14th October 2009, 21:07
i thought we were one big happy family mate :grouphug:

Ha ha, good, we are, we are, we just ALL have to step up and contribute to the ACC funds hole, I't woud then be such a happy joy joy family, we would all be man kissing each other and sharing each others toys. love love....opps am i getting carried away here!:lol:

MadDuck
14th October 2009, 21:09
Rick Barker rides
Phil Goff rode Rick's Eleventyone to the Labour Party AGM
That new Green MP who nobody has ever heard of (who is allegedly a KBer) may ride
Annette King's husband rides
Ditto for Ruth Dyson


There are probably others...

Thanks. I will start penning so as to speak.

There are now so many threads all the relevant information is getting swamped.

cs363
14th October 2009, 21:11
Thanks. I will start penning so as to speak.

There are now so many threads all the relevant information is getting swamped.

Likewise, and hopefully one of the mods will see my suggestion for a sticky so that all the relevant info is easy to find. This is important! :)

Dakar
14th October 2009, 21:13
Ha ha, good, we are, we are, we just ALL have to step up and contribute to the ACC funds hole, I't woud then be such a happy joy joy family, we would all be man kissing each other and sharing each others toys. love love....opps am i getting carried away here!:lol:

most off roaders ride on the road too, well most of the happy happy love love types anyway!
imagine charging us two Registration fees! road and off road.....now thats another story for anyone who has more than one bike, i used to own 3 and the reg nearly killed me back then

MadDuck
14th October 2009, 21:16
Likewise, and hopefully one of the mods will see my suggestion for a sticky so that all the relevant info is easy to find. This is important! :)

It would take a brave Mod that has a crap load of time to try and sift through all this and make a relevant sticky.....

cs363
14th October 2009, 21:19
It would take a brave Mod that has a crap load of time to try and sift through all this and make a relevant sticky.....

Maybe just the basics? Contact details for submissions/MP's etc, BRONZ website and so on....but I hear what you're saying... :rolleyes:

Ixion
14th October 2009, 21:19
..

Does an organisation like BRONZ have the right to request an independant study into all motorcycle related ACC claims to see what percentage pertain to road bikes?

We can request. But I doubt we can demand.

Qkchk
14th October 2009, 21:21
It would take a brave Mod that has a crap load of time to try and sift through all this and make a relevant sticky.....
Really need someone to take the reigns as its gonna get hard to decipher fact from crap.

Genestho
14th October 2009, 21:22
Really need someone to take the reigns as its gonna get hard to decipher fact from crap.
Mom's started a resource thread, gotta stop people from talking crap in there though.

monkeymcbean
14th October 2009, 21:24
most off roaders ride on the road too, well most of the happy happy love love types anyway!
imagine charging us two Registration fees! road and off road.....now thats another story for anyone who has more than one bike, i used to own 3 and the reg nearly killed me back then

So okay i agree if you have a road bike as well, your going to cop the new price hike, and those that have more than one, its going to be huge even thoug they can only ride one bike at a time!

So those who only have a off road unregistered bike, as you do not have to register it...right. I have friends who only ride off road and they seem for ever injured through there riding, do you not think this is not fair that it is motorcycle riding activity which caused the injury and that they should not contribute more to ACC fee?

I know they pay a bit in registration fees for a race, but not everyone races.

monkeymcbean
14th October 2009, 21:25
most off roaders ride on the road too, well most of the happy happy love love types anyway!
imagine charging us two Registration fees! road and off road.....now thats another story for anyone who has more than one bike, i used to own 3 and the reg nearly killed me back then

So okay i agree if you have a road bike as well, your going to cop the new price hike, and those that have more than one, its going to be huge even though they can only ride one bike at a time!

So those who only have a off road unregistered bike, as you do not have to register it...right. I have friends who only ride off road and they seem for ever injured through there riding, do you not think this is not fair that it is motorcycle riding activity which caused the injury and that they should not contribute more to ACC fee?

I know they pay a bit in registration fees for a race, but not everyone races.

cs363
14th October 2009, 21:26
So okay i agree if you have a road bike as well, your going to cop the new price hike, and those that have more than one, its going to be huge even thoug they can only ride one bike at a time!

So those who only have a off road unregistered bike, as you do not have to register it...right. I have friends who only ride off road and they seem for ever injured through there riding, do you not think this is not fair that it is motorcycle riding activity which caused the injury and that they should not contribute more to ACC fee?

I know they pay a bit in registration fees for a race, but not everyone races.

There's a submission right there..... :yes:

scumdog
14th October 2009, 21:27
I think it's time that every responsible motorcyclist speaks out about the idiocy that infests the likes of the Coro Loop and the Akaroa GP.

Until we do so loudly and publicly, we're seen as a whole to be tacitly supporting such antics.

True.

I just hope no politician ever reads KB and spots the posts on: doing a runner, doing monos, bins due to stupidity, kicking mirrors off cars, never bothering with regs. & wofs, slicks on the street, excessive speed etc.
Otherwise they will think motorbike riders are mostly less than responsible.:oi-grr:

southernmike
14th October 2009, 21:27
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.
Use ACC's argument that ACC is a "no fault" system (except if you own a motorcycle it seems!)

MadDuck
14th October 2009, 21:29
I just hope no politician ever reads KB and spots the posts on: doing a runner, doing monos, bins due to stupidity, kicking mirrors off cars, never bothering with regs. & wofs, slicks on the street, excessive speed etc.
Otherwise they will think motorbike riders are mostly less than responsible.:oi-grr:

Hmmmm....and NO politician has EVER broken the law or bent the rules. And of course we would NEVER consider a politician to be less than responsible now would we?

scumdog
14th October 2009, 21:34
Hmmmm....and NO politician has EVER broken the law or bent the rules. And of course we would NEVER consider a politician to be less than responsible now would we?

That doesn't mmatter to them.
What does matter is they could use the info I posted to point out how we are now getting what we deserve for being so irresponsible.

Sadly WT has some valid points on his thread.

Genestho
14th October 2009, 21:35
Use ACC's argument that ACC is a "no fault" system (except if you own a motorcycle it seems!)

:clap:
Bloody good argument as well, that sucker.

MarkH
14th October 2009, 22:59
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.

How about this:

If they don't put up the levies for bikes then car drivers are subsidizing bike riders - But since car drivers are responsible for at least SOME of the bike claims then that is not entirely unfair.

So ACC doesn't have enough money coming in - they want to increase the bill to bikers because they pay out heaps each year for biking accidents.
But they pay out more each year for sporting injuries and they aren't going after people that play sports, why not?
They also pay out more for DIY injuries, but there isn't a huge levy on ladders & circular saw, why not?

Why are we to be the ones to pay up?

One thing about the car drivers covering the shortfall for motorcyclists - apart from the accidents that the car drivers cause, some of the money collected from car drivers is actually from motorcyclists themselves - plenty of bikers also own cars!

Also the gross unfairness of this proposed levy increase is incredible - someone buys a Vespa PX-150 and they pay the same levy as a squid on a GSXR-600 or R6 - WTF? An experienced rider that has held a bike license for 40+ years without a single claim is getting charged how much for registering his 1200cc tourer?

Not everyone with a bike is a rich bugger riding a flash luxury toy. Plenty of riders are students or super annuitants. Someone riding an SV650 is not necessarily a high speed racer. I could buy a 750cc bike in good running condition for less than $2K from trademe - over $800 to reg it for a year is just bloody ridiculous!

Take a look at these 2 emoticons :buggerd: guess which one is ACC and which one is the motorcyclist!

talbertnz
15th October 2009, 07:30
How about this:

If they don't put up the levies for bikes then car drivers are subsidizing bike riders - But since car drivers are responsible for at least SOME of the bike claims then that is not entirely unfair.

So ACC doesn't have enough money coming in - they want to increase the bill to bikers because they pay out heaps each year for biking accidents.
But they pay out more each year for sporting injuries and they aren't going after people that play sports, why not?
They also pay out more for DIY injuries, but there isn't a huge levy on ladders & circular saw, why not?

Why are we to be the ones to pay up?

One thing about the car drivers covering the shortfall for motorcyclists - apart from the accidents that the car drivers cause, some of the money collected from car drivers is actually from motorcyclists themselves - plenty of bikers also own cars!

Also the gross unfairness of this proposed levy increase is incredible - someone buys a Vespa PX-150 and they pay the same levy as a squid on a GSXR-600 or R6 - WTF? An experienced rider that has held a bike license for 40+ years without a single claim is getting charged how much for registering his 1200cc tourer?

Not everyone with a bike is a rich bugger riding a flash luxury toy. Plenty of riders are students or super annuitants. Someone riding an SV650 is not necessarily a high speed racer. I could buy a 750cc bike in good running condition for less than $2K from trademe - over $800 to reg it for a year is just bloody ridiculous!

Take a look at these 2 emoticons :buggerd: guess which one is ACC and which one is the motorcyclist!

Thats what I wanted to post pretty much as well totally agree with you!
I had a sports accident and was of work for a 2 months. never payd any xtra acc for that but got the income compensation.
ALso a 250 cc single 4stroke chopper thingamy vs 250cc aprilia rs250 with 70 odd hp what do you think of that?

If we want to get anywhere with a protest we need the FACTS!!!
Anyone got time to call ACC today??

Okey Dokey
15th October 2009, 08:12
Perception is everything. We need to be seen to be a responsible "group".
Kneejerk crowd mentallity will work against motorcyclists

That is exactly what I think, too. I hope bikers in the boonies like me will be able to strike a blow and protest- I've alraedy sent my letters to Key, Smith and local MP this morning. Next up ACC. Oh, and voted on stuff poll, too.

Rhubarb
15th October 2009, 08:36
.......and relax just for the moment.

BRONZ, but I believe that this is the time for them to take firm hold of any protest organisation.

I also believe that they are probably the only group within NZ who have the potential to do the job justice.

I agree.

A few bikes here and there won't have an impact.

Hundreds of bikes in each city or town at the same time on the same day will get some media attention. It needs to be a National Bronz event.

A form letter that all bikers need just put their name to and a massive mail protest to the minister will also get some attention.

What then?

The Stranger
15th October 2009, 08:45
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.

As I posted elsewhere -

I'll try.
For a start we are the only group outside of industry that is singled out for special treatment. ACC was no fault. Sure many of us have used ACC, as has many a rugby player, are they lining up to pay? So lets have some consistency here, it's user pays or it's no fault.

If I smoke I pay huge tax to the govt. Not sure of the figures, but that was a move taken over many years toward user pays. Fair enough we say, if I kill myself with smoke then why shouldn't I pay for my health care, it's my choice after all.

In our case frequently enough someone else kills us - and we pay. It's inequitable. The cagers should be subsidising us for their share of the carnage.

So if it's no fault then make it no fault, if it is a fault system then make it so, leave the costs on the cagers to cover their 50% (round figures).


Another issue stems from the way ACC is set up.
If I go and rip down a mountain side on a bicycle and head butt a tree, that's not a problem. Why should it be? After all we have a no fault system and the govt sees this as all dandy because I was partaking in a recreational activity.

I don't go flying down mountains on bicycles for recreation, but i do ride a motorcycle for recreation. Much - if not most of my motorcycle riding is for recreation. If I bin it on a recreational ride, well guess what. That is very bad, evil infact. Now how does this differ to the bicyclist? None, why aren't I funded from the recreational fund? Just because i choose the road for my recreation I am discriminated against.

Motorcyclsts are unique in using the road for recreation (OK not entirely, but none others use it to anywhere near the same degree) Why isn't our recreation funded from the recreation fund as well as the MV fund? That's where a huge portion of the cost properly lies.

It's like lumping the costs of recreational rugby in with the professional rugby players and expecting the professional guys to cover the recreational ones. It's bullshit.


Yet another issue is this. I have 2 bikes and a car. I only ever ride one or drive the car. Now ok, if we are going to have consumer pays, make it consumer pays across the board AND user pays once. Again, it is inequitable to have some users paying once and some paying 3 times - that's not user pays, it's user pays and pays and pays. Will I get triple the benefit if I have a claim?


Make no mistake this is a dire situation. I have mentioned on here a couple of times in the past that ACC's stated position is that motorcycles should be taxed off the road. Like cigarettes we are being singled out and this is just a first salvo, if they get this in the next few years we will be hit again and again.

R6_kid
15th October 2009, 09:07
Remove ACC cover for minor/superficial injuries - such as those one would sustain through not wearing appropriate safety gear. This would mean that those taking the right precautions don't end up forking out for those who wear no safety gear other than the required helmet.

How many scooter riders do you see only wearing a helmet? They are lumped in with all other motorcyclists in the statistics.

Separate ACC charge for MX bikes. Why should their injury stats be lumped in with ours (if they are)???

For across the board - make the ACC payment a subsidy, so that XX% of costs are covered from a slush fund, and then the remaining cost is user pays via interest free loan - just like with student loans.

Revise the breakdown of 'bracketing' so that it makes more sense - the <125,126-600,601+ makes no sense at all.

Changing the ACC levy to an RUC based system where you pay for distance on the road, not time registered. Alternatively, ACC levy/registration per driver per year - that way drivers with a history of dangerous/careless/drunk/accidents etc can be charged accordingly, thus targeting the individuals - not the groups. This removes the problem of one person paying for multiple vehicles which they cannot use at the same time.

Creating a more in-depth and comprehensive licensing structure so as to compensate for the skills required to ride larger motorcycles, and also introducing a scooter-specific licence. On top of this they could campaign to raise awareness about the need to wear proper protective gear and to get proper training.

What about higher ACC for powerful cars? Drunk drivers?

At the end of the day we have to swallow the pill and realise that we do cost more, there is no way around this fact. It's not right for other people to be covering our cost. It'd also be advisable for all the people who keep moaning on about 'it's the car drivers fault' to shut up and get a reality check.

The Stranger
15th October 2009, 09:19
For across the board - make the ACC payment a subsidy, so that XX% of costs are covered from a slush fund, and then the remaining cost is user pays via interest free loan - just like with student loans.


A cop pulls a U turn in front of you and you wind up with a loan as a result. Hardly equitable, so you need to have the ability to aportion blame, which is one of the reasons ACC was set up in the first place.

Katman
15th October 2009, 09:20
In our case frequently enough someone else kills us - and we pay. It's inequitable. The cagers should be subsidising us for their share of the carnage.

So if it's no fault then make it no fault, if it is a fault system then make it so, leave the costs on the cagers to cover their 50% (round figures).




And this is why I believe that one of the first steps should be that BRONZ request full disclosure of motorcycle related accidents be made available for independent study.

We need to be sure on our facts and figures - because you can rest assured that we will be bombarded with their facts and figures.

We will need to be able to answer (if 50% of motorcycle accidents do not even involve another vehicle) - why are so many motorcyclists seemingly falling off of their own accord?

It is imperative that we recognise our own faults because ACC will take great pleasure in pointing them out to us.

monkeymcbean
15th October 2009, 09:31
And this is why I believe that one of the first steps should be that BRONZ request full disclosure of motorcycle related accidents be made available for independent study.

We need to be sure on our facts and figures - because you can rest assured that we will be bombarded with their facts and figures.

We will need to be able to answer (if 50% of motorcycle accidents do not even involve another vehicle) - why are so many motorcyclists falling off seemingly of their own accord?

It is imperative that we recognise our own faults because ACC will take great pleasure in pointing them out to us.

I would also like the breakdown, which i reckon ACC will not be able to show, between off road motorbike accidents and on road motorbike accidents, one group pays acc leivy, while one does not directly in registratin fees!

MarkH
15th October 2009, 09:38
In our case frequently enough someone else kills us - and we pay. It's inequitable. The cagers should be subsidising us for their share of the carnage.

I agree soooo much it hurts!

To illustrate:
My friend of about 30 years was riding his Honda CX500 a couple of decades ago and was hit by a drunk driver - he spent MONTHS in hospital and lost his right leg just below the knee. Unable to do his previous job and not having the skills or abilities for jobs he could do he ended up on ACC for a few YEARS. At the time my friend owned a bike & a car - 2 ACC levies. The drunk driver was convicted and fined HUNDREDS of dollars, while my friend received many tens of thousands of dollars in costs from ACC.

Now that drunk driver would be paying maybe $250 per year in rego. My friend would like to get back into biking and if he did then his choice would be a 2nd hand 650cc scooter - he lives in a small town in the Waikato so would ride mainly longer distances and wants similar performance to his old CX500. So my friend could find himself paying maybe $850 in rego on a scooter and $250 rego on a car. Person that caused an accident which cost ACC a HUGE amount of money pays maybe $180 per year in ACC levies on his vehicle, victim of the accident pays maybe $930 per year in ACC levies. Fair? I think not!

Clockwork
15th October 2009, 09:48
How about this:

If they don't put up the levies for bikes then car drivers are subsidizing bike riders - But since car drivers are responsible for at least SOME of the bike claims then that is not entirely unfair.

So ACC doesn't have enough money coming in - they want to increase the bill to bikers because they pay out heaps each year for biking accidents.
But they pay out more each year for sporting injuries and they aren't going after people that play sports, why not?
They also pay out more for DIY injuries, but there isn't a huge levy on ladders & circular saw, why not?

Why are we to be the ones to pay up?

One thing about the car drivers covering the shortfall for motorcyclists - apart from the accidents that the car drivers cause, some of the money collected from car drivers is actually from motorcyclists themselves - plenty of bikers also own cars!

Also the gross unfairness of this proposed levy increase is incredible - someone buys a Vespa PX-150 and they pay the same levy as a squid on a GSXR-600 or R6 - WTF? An experienced rider that has held a bike license for 40+ years without a single claim is getting charged how much for registering his 1200cc tourer?

Not everyone with a bike is a rich bugger riding a flash luxury toy. Plenty of riders are students or super annuitants. Someone riding an SV650 is not necessarily a high speed racer. I could buy a 750cc bike in good running condition for less than $2K from trademe - over $800 to reg it for a year is just bloody ridiculous!

Take a look at these 2 emoticons :buggerd: guess which one is ACC and which one is the motorcyclist!


I would also like to see some justifcation of costs against the new engine CC' categories that they've dreamed up. My gut says that while the headline accidents may tend to involve large road bikes on open roads I suspect many claims come from smaller, round town journies in which case it wont really matter what size of bike you're riding. I'd also expect that when a rider spills on the open road the extent of their injuries will relate to what they hit after impact, not what they are riding on.

If cars do contribute to more than 50% of accidents it's only reasonable that they also cross subside the cost of our care and you wont find too many bike riders that dont own and register a car also!

As far as protest is concerned, I feel we should try to avoid action that will piss off other road users. Perhaps we could remove our number plates as protest? what's the penalty for that? where woud they post any tickets without being able to identify the bike? Would the Police attempt to stop every bike they see to issue the ticket, or would they need to give up and get on with other duties?

Devil
15th October 2009, 09:49
We will need to be able to answer (if 50% of motorcycle accidents do not even involve another vehicle) - why are so many motorcyclists seemingly falling off of their own accord?
The need for education and training aside...

What I think is also relevant here is how that compares to cars when it comes to single vehicle accidents. I think that will show that we aren't really the odd ones out here...

Katman
15th October 2009, 09:56
What I think is also relevant here is how that compares to cars when it comes to single vehicle accidents. I think that will show that we aren't really the odd ones out here...

Unfortunately, I think it may be the other way round.

What percentage of car accidents are single vehicle as opposed to car versus car?

vifferman
15th October 2009, 10:22
As someone pointed out in another thread, it's only $2/day for the proposed ACC - cheaper'n other countries' compulsory insurance, and much less than I currently pay for medical insurance, yet with much better coverage.

MarkH
15th October 2009, 10:35
If cars do contribute to more than 50% of accidents it's only reasonable that they also cross subside the cost of our care

Why if more than 50%? Even if car drivers are only to blame for 20% of the motorcycle costs to ACC they should still subsidise the cost of motorcycle claims. Car drivers do more damage to motorcycle riders than vice versa - so some degree of subsidising is definitely fair!

modboy
15th October 2009, 10:48
I'm still looking for cogent arguments about why we shouldn't have to pay what ACC claim we cost .

Protests work a lot better if we can offer some valid reasons why the increases are unfair or unjustified.

Not seen any so far.

It is the blatant inconsistency.

How much does it cost to pull idiots off mountains who go up there unprepared, get lost or are out of their depth? Do they ever have to pay?

No one seems to be considering the CAUSE of many motorcycle accidents. The motorcyclist gets hit twice, once in the pocket and also by the dumb cager who was too busy eating a pie, or fiddling with the stereo, or txt'ing to see the biker.

So, the "oh sorry, I didn't see you..." cager is being subsidised for his incompetence and inattention - whilst we pay and suffer.

This is just another cynical example of how car drivers take precedent over everyone else on the road. In a time when we should be encouraging cars to get off the road - our stupid Government, goes against trends in throughout the rest of the world and encourages people to get into their SUVs thereby further fucking the environment...

They are arseholes - I'm totally resigned to the fact that all our moaning won't change a thing. I blame the fucktards that voted this bunch of fuckwits in in the first place.

John Key - we are going to stop the flow of people leaving this country by making it financially more attractive to live and work here - yea right. Provided you are a fat rich SUV driving stock exchange broker - everyone else can get fucked.

Katman
15th October 2009, 11:03
I'm totally resigned to the fact that all our moaning won't change a thing.

I agree.

That's why this whole process needs to be addressed and undertaken with intelligence, logic and maturity. Foaming at the mouth will achieve nothing.

Genestho
15th October 2009, 11:26
I agree.

That's why this whole process needs to be addressed and undertaken with intelligence, logic and maturity. Foaming at the mouth will achieve nothing.
Absolutely. You can't argue with logic. Particularly if you have facts.
A mob of Motorcyclists protesting without plates giving the finger will achieve zero. And no long term gain.
It only fuels public perception.

I believe you can change things, if this is a co-ordinated effort - with all parties in the right way, emails to MP's and media from the public as is being done.
Submissions (remember in your own words) if you're up for it.
BRONZ, MNZ, Clubs, Bike Dealerships and Motorcycling public CAN change this. (Apparently Federated Famers are peeved too!)
You need to look like a bunch of good law abiding clever bastards - utilising information wisely - with alot of support.

DidJit
15th October 2009, 11:45
You need to look like a bunch of good law abiding clever bastards - utilising information wisely - with alot of support.

Hear hear. :clap:

The Stranger
15th October 2009, 12:29
And this is why I believe that one of the first steps should be that BRONZ request full disclosure of motorcycle related accidents be made available for independent study.

We need to be sure on our facts and figures - because you can rest assured that we will be bombarded with their facts and figures.

We will need to be able to answer (if 50% of motorcycle accidents do not even involve another vehicle) - why are so many motorcyclists seemingly falling off of their own accord?

It is imperative that we recognise our own faults because ACC will take great pleasure in pointing them out to us.

This information has been requested in the past. They are NOT forthcoming. It could be requested under the official information act but indicative costs were around 10k.

Katman
15th October 2009, 12:49
This information has been requested in the past. They are NOT forthcoming. It could be requested under the official information act but indicative costs were around 10k.

Looks like we'd better work on recruiting 500 more BRONZ members.

:eek:

PuppetMaster
15th October 2009, 12:55
I agree.
A few bikes here and there won't have an impact.
Hundreds of bikes in each city or town at the same time on the same day will get some media attention. It needs to be a National Bronz event.
A form letter that all bikers need just put their name to and a massive mail protest to the minister will also get some attention.
What then?


Basically you will be ignored and whatever changes/charges etc the Govt wanted to implement will go ahead. a bit like the recent referendum.

Im afraid the normal apathetic postering, quiet protests and some hand written letters are not going to change jack. We either get hard or we lose.

Genestho
15th October 2009, 13:02
Er no - poor comparison, the recent referendum was never going to change anything.
It was poorly worded, and stuffed from the start.
The cost of that could've gone to starship hospital where abused dying children spend their last hours.

And I know for a fact if you do things the right way, persist, you can get stuff done.

Horse
15th October 2009, 13:26
As someone pointed out in another thread, it's only $2/day for the proposed ACC - cheaper'n other countries' compulsory insurance, and much less than I currently pay for medical insurance, yet with much better coverage.

If I play rugby[1], but don't ride a motorbike, it's $2/day less than that. for the same great coverage....

[1] Replace "rugby" with cycling/horse riding/netball/walking for the same effect.

cs363
15th October 2009, 14:35
Looks like we'd better work on recruiting 500 more BRONZ members.

:eek:

I've added five today including myself.... :)

Katman
15th October 2009, 14:50
Membership form filled out and just waiting for Her-with-the-Chequebook.

GOONR
15th October 2009, 15:33
What I really don't like is the way that this is being portrayed in the media. Everywhere that I look it is saying.... "In 2008/09 ACC paid more than $62 million for accidents caused by motorcycles. It collected $12.3m in levies from motorcyclists in the same period."

I bet accident's "caused" by motorcycles is no where near that amount but this is what Jo Public is seeing / reading.

Anyone know how I can join BRONZ without a cheque book, can I pay via the internet? I can't check at the moment, BRONZ www is blocked from work :(

cs363
15th October 2009, 15:41
What I really don't like is the way that this is being portrayed in the media. Everywhere that I look it is saying.... "In 2008/09 ACC paid more than $62 million for accidents caused by motorcycles. It collected $12.3m in levies from motorcyclists in the same period."

I bet accident's "caused" by motorcycles is no where near that amount but this is what Jo Public is seeing / reading.

Anyone know how I can join BRONZ without a cheque book, can I pay via the internet? I can't check at the moment, BRONZ www is blocked from work :(

Here's a membership form, you can pay via bill payment with internet banking.

The Stranger
15th October 2009, 16:55
I agree soooo much it hurts!



You'll get used to it - everyone else has.

MyGSXF
15th October 2009, 17:03
I find this price hike appalling!! :mad:

Its been very poorly thought out & by the sounds is trying to be 'hurried through' voting, so that they won't actually have to come up with any REAL cold hard facts of what is really going on!

It is the ambulance waiting at the bottom of the cliff.. but the fence at the top of the cliff.. is no where in sight... :oi-grr:

IMHO.. The G'vmnt needs to look at bringing in compulsive rider training! Having been a helper at several BHS tests.. it is bloody scary in the least, to see what the level of skill that some people have (or rather.. don't have!!) .. actually is! but hey, if they pass the test criteria.. that's it.. they get a certificate! <_<

The licensing process needs to be stepped up, & definitely the level of skill needs to be stepped up! People should have to do some rider training & learn the proper techniques for braking/emergency braking.. slow speed control.. 'conscious' counter-steering.. proper road riding lines.. cornering etc.. BEFORE they are given a licence & let loose on the road!

Having been a part of regular rider training courses for the past 4 years (as a participant AND a helper).. I believe that all riders should have to do a compulsory say, 5 yearly refresher course. And especially people who have had a gap away from riding (been doing that family scene) etc & get back on bikes 25 years later! As reported, the highest bracket is middle aged men returning to riding, that are having a lot of the crashes! I've heard it & seen it so many times now!! Many of them have very poor skills.. & are blissfully unaware of that fact :slap:

I think there should be incentives for riders to get reduced fees. as an example.. produce an 'advanced rider training course certificate' every 5 years & get cheaper rego.. or something to that effect.

I reckon that car drivers who are found to be 'in the wrong' should be the ones penalized with extra rego fees.

All the off road/quad/farm bike crashes need to be dealt with separately from road bike statistics & costs.. As do scooters! :bash: It's disgraceful that they only need a car licence to ride one & they aren't even required to have a WOF.. ffs!!! :stupid: but they are classed under motorcycle accidents in the stats! :oi-grr:

I am also aware that there are a number of f@#&wits on bikes out there too.. that give the rest of us a bad name! again maybe rider training could sort them out.. ie: no certificate produced = not eligible to get a reg! get caught.. lose the bike for 6 months! :bye:

My thoughts anyway....

PrincessBandit
15th October 2009, 17:08
I've added five today including myself.... :)


Membership form filled out and just waiting for Her-with-the-Chequebook.

I just paid for our family via fast cheque interbeb wanking ooops, i mean interweb banking.

Taking the forms along to the meeting next wed night.

rogson
15th October 2009, 17:36
Come on guys. This no time bitch and moan about old grievances. Despite what we may think about various motorcyclist organisations, we're all in this together.

We need to find creative solutions that stand a good chance of being favorably considered by our elected leaders. I don't care who it is who comes up with the good ideas, I just want to hear good ideas.

Given our limited numbers/minority status we aren't going to get anywhere complaining that motorcyclists are being treated unfairly. We need to make/promote proposals that will make the system fair.

How about this, a two tier ACC levy: A basic levy to cover emergency/medical expenses and a second tier to cover income and life style support expenses. The first tier would be compulsory but the second tier would be optional. This approach could/should apply to all of (non-work related?) ACC.

I don't have the statistics but I imagine a big portion (the majority?) of ACC costs goes to income/life style support while the injured party is recuperating off-work or is supported indefinitely becauise he/she can't go back to work. Make the indivdual make this choice before he/she undertakes the "risky activity".

Paul in NZ
15th October 2009, 17:39
Well, I guess the one thing we can all agree on, this sucks big time.

Someone wanted to know why shouldn’t motorcyclists pay for their own cover? That’s a fair question because it’s a no brainer that when your average motorcyclist does have an accident, its usually an expensive one. So on the face of it, it seems a reasonable argument that motorcyclists as a sector of society should pay their way and not expect to be cross subsidised by others, or is it?

Personally, this proposal greatly disturbs me on several levels. On a personal level, it is going to make running 2 or 3 classic motorcycles unaffordable for me and since I was looking forward to being one of those crusty old blokes pottering about in his shed with a few old bikes for company, you could say I’m disappointed. That retirement dream is looking unlikely now, there is no way you could justify the registration costs on a fixed income.

ACC is supposed to be a ‘no fault’ insurance scheme covering all New Zealanders. If you accept that employee ACC contributions have been risk associated for years, perhaps it is reasonable to move this risk profiling over to your transport of choice. Or is it? The fairness, unfairness of this really depends upon how finely you slice the loaf and understanding that increasing employee levies for companies that have a poor safety record is an incentive for those companies to improve safety and thus lower costs. Without giving the motorcyclist a equal opportunity to reduce costs by having a good safety record, the comparison does not hold up. Similarly, its patently absurd to think that a 50 (cough) something bloke on a 40 year old triumph 650 making something like 40bhp is a higher risk than a 19 year old on a new 600cc GSXR producing 140bhp. Grouping all motorcyclists together discourages responsible users and effectively it becomes a ban.

What the government has proposed has really grated with me. Not raising the fee but the way its been sold. Divide and conquer and FUD have been valid strategies for many years. The first thing I heard this morning was on Mike Hosking’s breakfast radio, ‘about time, I’ve seen them weaving in and out of traffic’ and ‘I was amazed the car drivers are subsidising motorcyclist at $70 a year’…. Erm – hang on… Not one mentioned on the show that car registrations are also going up. Surely if motorists are subsidising bikers then the car levy should now go down? Instead, they had identified the ‘bad’ group pushed forwards to take the blame and were happy with that.

So lets slice the loaf a little thinner. I have not had an accident for decades and to my knowledge I have never ever made a single claim on ACC related to motorcycling. I know people that have written off several new motorcycles, people that race motorcycles (un registered) and have had massive amounts of ACC funds spent repairing them and people that ride dirt bikes (again, high injury no rego) – why should I contribute to pay for these people through my insurance and acc levies? That’s not fair! Since we are going down this street, what about professional rugby players, indeed all rugby players – I don’t play rugby, I hardly watch it and it would have zero impact on my life if rugby ceased to exist, why should I contribute to it in an involuntary fashion? Skiers, snowboarders, soccer players, squash? Nope – sorry, not interested in sports starting with S and I don’t cycle, ride a horse, operate a power boat, sky dive, hang glide or play hockey, please remove all of those from my list as well.

Suddenly, this is getting silly and dare I say it, unreasonable so lets leave sports out of it and get back to transport.

If I get hit by a 4WD then it will do me more damage than a car so they should pay more, bloody 4WD’s, probably cars heavier than mine pose a risk (and potential extra expense) so lets ping them too… Ooops, getting silly again.

Given ACC’s founding principles, penalising a whole sector without providing a mechanism for responsible users to prove their ability to ride safely is unfair! That’s really what I object to…

cs363
15th October 2009, 17:50
<SNIP>

On that note, this makes VERY interesting reading: http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/acc-injury-statistics-2008/20-sport-claims/IS0800367

Check out the figures for rugby, netball, rugby league, snow skiing (and boarding), touch rugby and above all, seeing as it's a direct comparison being road users(unpaid for though, mind you) cyclists! :gob:

Then tell me we're not being shafted! :mad:

cs363
15th October 2009, 17:52
And we need to make sure that we DON'T come across like some rabid crowd from the French Revolution

Not disagreeing regarding the public face of the protest, but the 'rabble' in the French Revolution did get quite a good result, at least compared to the incumbent authorities at the time.... :cool:

Manxman
15th October 2009, 18:35
On that note, this makes VERY interesting reading: http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/acc-injury-statistics-2008/20-sport-claims/IS0800367

Check out the figures for rugby, netball, rugby league, snow skiing (and boarding), touch rugby and above all, seeing as it's a direct comparison being road users(unpaid for though, mind you) cyclists! :gob:

Then tell me we're not being shafted! :mad:

If I'm not mistaken, and after a quick once-over of these figures, it appears that there has been exponential growth in most of these categories since 2005.

In order to determine how to fix the ACC 'problem', I'd be looking more closely at the reasons for this.

My punt, is that there are two principle drivers behind the growth:

1)Is there a culture of:

a) "the state owes me something",

b) "I'm entitled to something from the state", or

c) "everyone else is scoring off the state, so why shouldn't I?"

I've deliberately made these essentially the same reasons, because I think that - essentially - could be the reason for the growth (there will always be a core of genuine, legitimate claims - I'm talking about the recent growth).

I see this in my work, where there is almost an mindset of epidemic proportions around 'entitlement' to stuff. Consequence of a Labour government perhaps?

2) My theory also proposes that there is a growing culture of referrals within the medical brethren. Is it that fewer are willing to make hard (or maybe not so hard) calls, therefore pass the buck and problem to another 'specialist', who doesn't want to make the hard call, etc....bingo, your costs grow on a vertical path.

Why can't ACC raise the criteria for qualifying for it, or reduce the 'soft claims' (not paying for dicks who injure themselves when committing as crime is a no-brainer, but surely there must be more?), or break the referral cycle?

I also note that the cost of cycling injuries has increased more than 3-fold since 2004, but motorcycling only 2.5-fold. Feck, even netball (a non-contact sport - allegedly, unless you're Australian) costs $10.6m - $3.4m more than us. Friggin dangerous sport that.

cs363
15th October 2009, 18:40
If I'm not mistaken, and after a quick once-over of these figures, it appears that there has been exponential growth in most of these categories since 2005.

In order to determine how to fix the ACC 'problem', I'd be looking more closely at the reasons for this.

My punt, is that there are two principle drivers behind the growth:

1)Is there a culture of:

a) "the state owes me something",

b) "I'm entitled to something from the state", or

c) "everyone else is scoring off the state, so why shouldn't I?"

I've deliberately made these essentially the same reasons, because I think that - essentially - could be the reason for the growth (there will always be a core of genuine, legitimate claims - I'm talking about the recent growth).

I see this in my work, where there is almost an mindset of epidemic proportions around 'entitlement' to stuff. Consequence of a Labour government perhaps?

2) My theory also proposes that there is a growing culture of referrals within the medical brethren. Is it that fewer are willing to make hard (or maybe not so hard) calls, therefore pass the buck and problem to another 'specialist', who doesn't want to make the hard call, etc....bingo, your costs grow on a vertical path.

Why can't ACC raise the criteria for qualifying for it, or reduce the 'soft claims' (not paying for dicks who injure themselves when committing as crime is a no-brainer, but surely there must be more?), or break the referral cycle?

I also note that the cost of cycling injuries has increased more than 3-fold since 2004, but motorcycling only 2.5-fold. Feck, even netball (a non-contact sport - allegedly, unless you're Australian) costs $10.6m - $3.4m more than us. Friggin dangerous sport that.

Yes, I would tend to agree with your views above. Those statistics also show the way ACC and the Minister are guilty of twisting the facts for their own ends.

Ms Piggy
15th October 2009, 19:54
Perception is everything. We need to be seen to be a responsible "group".
Kneejerk crowd mentallity will work against motorcyclists

Definitely.

Qkchk
15th October 2009, 19:59
We really need to stop keyboard warrior tactics and co-ordinate a mass protest similar to the truckies one earlier this year. We need support from other clubs - BRONZ, Ulysses, WIMA, HOG etc

Numbers speak in volumes. Idle banter sucks bandwidth.

Katman
15th October 2009, 20:03
We really need to stop keyboard warrior tactics and co-ordinate a mass protest similar to the truckies one earlier this year. We need support from other clubs - BRONZ, Ulysses, WIMA, HOG etc

Numbers speak in volumes. Idle banter sucks bandwidth.

How about we wait and see what BRONZ have to suggest?

Angusdog
15th October 2009, 20:05
We really need to stop keyboard warrior tactics and co-ordinate a mass protest similar to the truckies one earlier this year. We need support from other clubs - BRONZ, Ulysses, WIMA, HOG etc

Numbers speak in volumes. Idle banter sucks bandwidth.

Can't be bothered reading all the dialogue about this, but count me in. A unified, rational voice from all concerned parties (BRONZ, bike industry, riders and so on) counts for a lot. I really want to be part of a protest ride to parliament - that's how these things are done, isn't it?

I'll keep an eye out for when you need me ;)

Elysium
15th October 2009, 20:19
We really need to stop keyboard warrior tactics and co-ordinate a mass protest similar to the truckies one earlier this year. We need support from other clubs - BRONZ, Ulysses, WIMA, HOG etc

Numbers speak in volumes. Idle banter sucks bandwidth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YawagQ6lLrA&feature=related

Qkchk
15th October 2009, 20:19
How about we wait and see what BRONZ have to suggest?

Agreed. Let's hope it doesn't have to get to the protest stage......... but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Katman
15th October 2009, 20:26
Agreed. Let's hope it doesn't have to get to the protest stage......... but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I'm quite happy to protest.

I'm quite happy to partake in an act of civil disobedience.

I'm also quite happy to sit back for the moment and let BRONZ formulate the action they feel will best serve our purpose.

Pussy
15th October 2009, 20:29
I'm quite happy to protest.

I'm quite happy to partake in an act of civil disobedience.

I'm also quite happy to sit back for the moment and let BRONZ formulate the action they feel will best serve our purpose.

With you there, Katman.
This initial "wwwaaaahhh" fest won't achieve anything.
A carefully thought out, intelligent rebuttal probably will

Genestho
15th October 2009, 20:59
With you there, Katman.
This intial "wwwaaaahhh" fest won't achieve anything.
A carefully thought out, intelligent rebuttal probably will
Yea, there's a million reposts.

I too feel confident that BRONZ has it sorted, there's a game plan afoot.

The sleekist non-emotive plans take time, and there is until 10th November till submissions close. That's the time space right there. :yes:

No point rushing in like a mob outta control, hiss, roar, fart, cough, splutter. Done.

Build a good argument, plan, and allies - which doesn't take too much time. It's all there to piece together.

Chillax :cool: Breathe In/Breathe Out :)

cs363
15th October 2009, 21:06
Yea, there's a million reposts.

I too feel confident that BRONZ has it sorted, there's a game plan afoot.

The sleekist non-emotive plans take time, and there is until 10th November till submissions close. That's the time space right there. :yes:

No point rushing in like a mob outta control, hiss, roar, fart, cough, splutter. Done.

Build a good argument, plan, and allies - which doesn't take too much time. It's all there to piece together.

Chillax :cool: Breathe In/Breathe Out :)

And in the meantime, spend a measly $20 and join up to BRONZ, so you can be a part of an organised nationwide plan of action.

membership form here: http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=146914&d=1255578085

Dakar
16th October 2009, 17:54
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email and to thank you for your comments. All correspondence received is documented and your feedback is appreciated.


One suggestion we often make to our callers in relation to levy issues is that one way to be heard is to visit your local MP. The levies and policies that you mention are set down by the government, and ACC are required to act under the currrent legislation.



We have also been advised of the following address/es for submissions by the public:



All submissions must be in writing and can be emailed, posted or faxed by 5pm, 10 November 2009. Submissions can be sent to:

· email: consultation@acc.co.nz

· fax: 04 918 4395

· writing to: Levy Consultation, ACC, PO Box 242, Wellington 6140.



Kind regards

ACC Reception

doc
16th October 2009, 18:14
Unfortunately if the achives of KB are a reflection of motorcyclists in general. I think this is a fizzer. Statistically we are still paying less than our costs to the purse. Our reaction is another kneejerk action. What happened to our cheesecutter emotions.

However if we were galvanised, by the proposals of this new proposal, and maybe if we were all part of BRONZ there might be some strength in our actions. Otherwise its just more keyboard hype. :(

Katman
16th October 2009, 18:17
However if we were galvanised, by the proposals of this new proposal, and maybe if we were all part of BRONZ there might be some strength in our actions. Otherwise its just more keyboard hype. :(

Well, every single person who has been through my workshop doors in the last couple of days has had the 'Lets get behind BRONZ' lecture.

We can but hope.

FJRider
16th October 2009, 18:33
If the threat of a potential change of goverment if these ACC policys are implemented is not enough .....

Or is the other National party policys enough to compromise the cost increases .... ???

Those that never saw the increases coming .... weren't paying attention.

Those that voted them in ..... well done.

FJRider
16th October 2009, 18:41
Well, every single person who has been through my workshop doors in the last couple of days has had the 'Lets get behind BRONZ' lecture.



And every Biker I've spoken to, wants to win Lotto.
Actually buying a ticket may help their chances.


Digging into the wallet and paying the BRONZ subs's would be a start.