Genestho
17th October 2009, 08:51
My organisation will be supporting cuts in entitlements to 2nd and subsequentialy convicted drink drivers.
At the moment the entitlements are lump sums, income and rehabilitation costs.
Deaths
Funeral costs of upto 5 grand, survivors grant/s will go to the estate of a dead drink driver and dependants, as does income 60% of the deceased of earnings upto 5 years, (in some circumstances beyond 5 years) plus 20% for dependants - until they leave home.
There will be ongoing claims, and I'm interested to know how many new claims there are.
Alcohol related deaths caused by a drink driver make up around 30% of ALL Motorvehicle fatal crashes according to 05-07 (re-published as '08 MOT stats.)
And 19% of serious injuries and a % of minor.
I'd suggest the expenditure is fairly high here.
From an ACC media Release....
Ministry of Transport statistics from 2004 – 2006 indicated that 31% of Auckland’s road fatalities and 24% of its serious injuries from road crashes involved alcohol. When matched to ACC’s figures for the amount spent on treating road injury claims during those years, those crashes are estimated to have cost nearly 45 million dollars.
“That’s a huge figure, and one that is largely preventable,” said ACC Injury Prevention Programme Manager Phil Wright. “It’s clear that in many cases people in Auckland, and in New Zealand in general, are still simply ignoring the drink-drive message, or gambling that it won’t be them that crashes or kills someone.
“Not including the loss of priceless life and the anguish road crashes cause, the total ACC spent for those years alone to cover medical treatment, compensation and rehabilitation services for new and old claims in Auckland alone, came to $44,597,000. That’s money spent simply because people weren’t paying attention to the drink drive messages.”
Again there is no actual information of the 30% and 19% - the amount of ACC claims going soley to drink drivers throughout NZ. Info Act Time.
The questions I will be asking. (As an example)
Will be in relation to new and existing claims per year from 05 going to deceased drink drivers estates. Total of drivers and $ total.
New and exisiting claims per year from 05 for seriously injured drink drivers. Total and $ Total
Same questions for the Minor Injuries
The cuts to entitlements have been proposed to any criminal action causing injury to themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note. I'm feeling wary for two reasons.
A) Be prepared that the debate for opening up ACC to competition and privatisation is coming - looking at what's been happening the last two days.
Whoever faces TV media could be asked to comment. You will represent NZ Earners and Motorists more than Motorcycling if you comment on this.
Do you want to get tied up in that argument. (I would think not)
B) The statisics argument is a slippery road to take. (Excuse the pun :bleh:)
We don't and will not have all the information to argue with. All you need is mis-enterpretation, and there'll be egg on faces.
16% vs 16 x is a good example already.
May I suggest we leave statistic talk to officials and MP's that support this cause, who have the info we don't.
Is it too sensible and inarguable to re-iterate the economic impact on families, multiple ownerships, businesses, clubs, devaluation of vehicles.
The impact of hundreds - if not thousands of unregistered bikes on the road, runners, and resulting fines being the alternative no-one would want.
And offer a researched proposal which works. There are three good ideas being presented on KB.
At the moment the entitlements are lump sums, income and rehabilitation costs.
Deaths
Funeral costs of upto 5 grand, survivors grant/s will go to the estate of a dead drink driver and dependants, as does income 60% of the deceased of earnings upto 5 years, (in some circumstances beyond 5 years) plus 20% for dependants - until they leave home.
There will be ongoing claims, and I'm interested to know how many new claims there are.
Alcohol related deaths caused by a drink driver make up around 30% of ALL Motorvehicle fatal crashes according to 05-07 (re-published as '08 MOT stats.)
And 19% of serious injuries and a % of minor.
I'd suggest the expenditure is fairly high here.
From an ACC media Release....
Ministry of Transport statistics from 2004 – 2006 indicated that 31% of Auckland’s road fatalities and 24% of its serious injuries from road crashes involved alcohol. When matched to ACC’s figures for the amount spent on treating road injury claims during those years, those crashes are estimated to have cost nearly 45 million dollars.
“That’s a huge figure, and one that is largely preventable,” said ACC Injury Prevention Programme Manager Phil Wright. “It’s clear that in many cases people in Auckland, and in New Zealand in general, are still simply ignoring the drink-drive message, or gambling that it won’t be them that crashes or kills someone.
“Not including the loss of priceless life and the anguish road crashes cause, the total ACC spent for those years alone to cover medical treatment, compensation and rehabilitation services for new and old claims in Auckland alone, came to $44,597,000. That’s money spent simply because people weren’t paying attention to the drink drive messages.”
Again there is no actual information of the 30% and 19% - the amount of ACC claims going soley to drink drivers throughout NZ. Info Act Time.
The questions I will be asking. (As an example)
Will be in relation to new and existing claims per year from 05 going to deceased drink drivers estates. Total of drivers and $ total.
New and exisiting claims per year from 05 for seriously injured drink drivers. Total and $ Total
Same questions for the Minor Injuries
The cuts to entitlements have been proposed to any criminal action causing injury to themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note. I'm feeling wary for two reasons.
A) Be prepared that the debate for opening up ACC to competition and privatisation is coming - looking at what's been happening the last two days.
Whoever faces TV media could be asked to comment. You will represent NZ Earners and Motorists more than Motorcycling if you comment on this.
Do you want to get tied up in that argument. (I would think not)
B) The statisics argument is a slippery road to take. (Excuse the pun :bleh:)
We don't and will not have all the information to argue with. All you need is mis-enterpretation, and there'll be egg on faces.
16% vs 16 x is a good example already.
May I suggest we leave statistic talk to officials and MP's that support this cause, who have the info we don't.
Is it too sensible and inarguable to re-iterate the economic impact on families, multiple ownerships, businesses, clubs, devaluation of vehicles.
The impact of hundreds - if not thousands of unregistered bikes on the road, runners, and resulting fines being the alternative no-one would want.
And offer a researched proposal which works. There are three good ideas being presented on KB.