SEND LAWYERS. The Nickster may HAVE to consult with us

[Ixion]

Hitherto I thought that the ACC levies were set as regulations , solely under ministerial discretion, and the only consultation available was under S331 of the Act


Consultation requirements for regulations relating to levy setting

(1) The Minister may not recommend the making of regulations under this Act prescribing the rates of levies unless the Minister has first received and considered a recommendation from the Corporation made in accordance with the provisions of this section.

(2) The Corporation must consult levy payers before recommending to the Minister that such regulations be made, and that obligation to consult is satisfied if—
(a) the Corporation publicly notifies its intention to recommend to the Minister that such regulations be made by publishing in the Gazette, and in a daily newspaper circulating in each of the cities of Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin, a notice—
(i) stating that the Corporation is proposing to recommend that such regulations be made; and
(ii) [Repealed]
(iii) explaining the Corporation's proposal to recommend the making of the proposed regulations, or stating where a copy of that explanation may be obtained; and
(iv) stating where copies of the Corporation's policy on fully funding outstanding claims liabilities may be obtained; and
(v) stating where copies of any actuarial valuation on which levies are based may be obtained; and
(vi) inviting members of the public to make written submissions on the proposed regulations; and
(vii) stating the last date on which the Corporation will receive written submissions on the proposed regulations (which date must be not less than 28 days after the date of the publication of the notice in the Gazette); and
(b) the Corporation considers all submissions on the proposed regulations that are received by the Corporation not later than the date stated under paragraph (a)(vii).


(4) The Corporation must, after recommending to the Minister the making of regulations under this Act prescribing the rates of levies, publish in the Gazette, and in a daily newspaper circulating in each of the cities of Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin, a notice—
(a) stating that such a recommendation has been made; and
(b) stating where copies of the recommendation, and any information that accompanied the recommendation, may be obtained.

(5) Nothing in this section obliges the Minister to accept the Corporation's recommendation or prevents the Minister recommending that the regulations prescribe rates of levies different from the rates recommended by the Corporation.

(6) The consultation procedure contained in subsection (2) constitutes a code that sets out all the obligations of the Corporation in relation to consultation over the process of recommending to the Minister that regulations be made.


Meaningless of course, since ACC historically totally ignores all submissions.

And, that view is correct as regards the setting of levies.

BUT - this time round the ACC do not merely want to up the levies - they want to introduce new classifications. And THAT it appears may be a horse of a different colour.

because S 330 says



Consultation requirements for regulations relating to classifications, risk rating, or treatment injury

The Minister may not make any recommendation in respect of regulations made under section 329(f) or (g) or (l) or (m), or in relation to the Treatment Injury Account, without first consulting such persons or organisations as the Minister considers appropriate having regard to the subject-matter of the proposed regulations.


Sect 329(l) is us


establishing a system for differential levies, for the purposes of the Motor Vehicle Account, for categories referred to in section 216 (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2001/0049/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM102824#DLM102824):



OK, it says "as the Minister considers appropriate" . But it would, I submit be almost impossible to persuade a court that the the Minister could reasonably promulgate regulations that apply specifically and ONLY to motorcycles, without consulting ANY motorcycle organisations.

So I think he HAS to formally consult us. As a SEPARATE thing to the ACC consultation thing.

And it means we must explicitly state that any meeting with the Minister on the 17th is NOT a meeting for consultation under S330.

I bet that's why the bastard agreed to meet us!

[avgas]

I bet that's why the bastard agreed to meet us!
Yep - to put in the words of US attorneys.... signed sealed and served.
Shame really cos if we had known then what we had known now we could have just avoided the prick and nothing would have happened.

Shame its an ACT too - if it was a principle we could have weaselled round it

[Ozzie]

Faark my head hurts.

I believe you, I think, do we have a legal bean in amongst us that can look into this, or confirm Les' take on it?

I would consider that BRONZ would be the only such formal group yes?

If so, the BIKEIO is not a BRONZ representation is it?

[Mully]

Excellent.

Good plan Les. Make sure we scream it far and wide that the 17th is not a "consultation"

Do we have any lawyers here? Check amongst the Harley riders.... :shutup:

[Ixion]

Ulysses is relevant. Maybe others.

Basically any legal entity that can reasonably claim to represent motorcyclists.

The BIKEOI is a BRONZ representation. But that is irrelevant. A protest ride cannot be considered consultation.

[Bald Eagle]

Absolutely brilliant strategy.

Make him talk to us.

Our disciples need to be crystal clear on the fact that this is not a consultation.

[StoneY]

Far as I am concerned Ulysses represents Ulysses not NZ Motorcyclists (whatever Peter Mac wants to believe)

BRONZ is well known as a NZ motorcyclists voice

Good point regarding it NOT being a consultation on the BIKEOI, we must make that perfectly clear to all who go up to see Nicky in his office

If he wants to 'consult' set up a time and place but dont ruin our protest

[Mully]

Ulysses is relevant. Maybe others.

HOG
RAT

Mongrel Mob
Black Power

[Ixion]

Yep - to put in the words of US attorneys.... signed sealed and served.
Shame really cos if we had known then what we had known now we could have just avoided the prick and nothing would have happened.

Shame its an ACT too - if it was a principle we could have weaselled round it

no, no. Nothing HAS happened.

We don't need to weasel round anything. He's the one that has to weasel

The Act more or less says that he must consult us (unless he can find some other significant group of motorcyclists that are representative - I'll alert Howard ).

I strongly suspect someone alerted him to this - so he thinks "Oh well, I'll agree to a 10 minute meeting with these troublemakers on the 17th, then claim that was 'sonsultation" ".

But - we know now - BEFORE the meeting. And we will formally say "this meeting does not constitute consultation within the terms of S330. We are very happy to consult with the Minister , but that must be in a more formal setting , proper agenda etc. Shall we set up an inital appointment?"

And, this demolishes the stock response from MPs "Send in a submission to ACC"

If anyone says that to you reply "Yes. I have. but, the Act requires that the Minister consult with us. Sect 330 you know. Quite different matter to S331 , as of course you know".:Punk:

[Str8 Jacket]

What about race clubs like VMCC, BEARS etc?

[firefighter]

Ulysses is relevant. Maybe others.

Basically any legal entity that can reasonably claim to represent motorcyclists

Hardly. Ulysses does'nt represent anyone under 60 and not on a cruiser.

I'm 26 with a Naked bike. I cannot join Ulysses.

Surely BRONZ is the only fair organisation for this? Is there another organisation in NZ that does'nt discriminate or supports all groups?

Personally, I feel BRONZ is probably the only neutral organisation, and therefore the only organisation which should be representing NZ motorcyclists.

[Ixion]

There is no specific definition. Just "appropriate".

the Mongrel Mob would probably not be considered appropriate by a court , on account of them being criminals and stuff.

The Minister may consult one overarching representative group if there is one : or a range of groups representing different aspects of the affected parties. So he might consult Ulyssess, and SMC old and young. But he cannot claim to be ignorant of BRONZ. And he cannot say that BRONZ is inappropriate.

And anyway, both Ulysses (more or less) and SMC and TOMCC and almost everyone else I can thinkof, are all opposed to the levies.

The point is he MUST consult.

Hitherto I thought that there was no statutory requirement for the Minister to consult. Only ACC . I was wrong. The inclusion of the split by cc brings in S 330. They may regret that idea.

[Cajun]

Hardly. Ulysses does'nt represent anyone under 60 and not on a cruiser.


The tauranga president owns a hayabusa he has been presdient for 4+ years, and owned a busa that whole time.

[k2w3]

What is the definition of 'consult' in this context, though?

[k2w3]

Ulysses' own website says "over 40", which means I just squeek in. Fuck. No offence.

[riffer]

The point is he MUST consult.

Hitherto I thought that there was no statutory requirement for the Minister to consult. Only ACC . I was wrong. The inclusion of the split by cc brings in S 330. They may regret that idea.


Not trying to rain on your parade, but what's to stop them changing this law?

Who's run a fine-toothed comb over the latest amendments to check this hasn't already been done?

[Ixion]

Nothing to stop them changing the law. But law changes take time. A lot of time. And require Select Committee submissions - even worse from his point of view.

I'll check the latest amendment Bill, but that won't help him anyway, the levies have to be set under this Act.

[ManDownUnder]

Notify Phil Goff, in wiriting, confirming that the meeting on the 17th in no way constitutes consultation. Put that stake in the ground ASAP

[Ixion]

Checked the Amendment Bill

Only provision relating to SS330-1 is irrelevant




Sections 330 and 331 of principal Act do not apply to making of regulations for Work Account in 2010–11 tax year



Sections 330 and 331 of the principal Act do not apply to the making of regulations in relation to the Work Account for the 2010–11 tax year.





S 216 is amended, in a way that doesn't directly affect us (but does add weight to the suggestion that they want to include other groups in this exercise). But S 329 still refers to S216 , and S 330 still references S329 directly. So, no change.

[Ixion]

Notify Phil Goff, in wiriting, confirming that the meeting on the 17th in no way constitutes consultation. Put that stake in the ground ASAP


yep. we're on to it.

[ManDownUnder]

What's to stop the Minister consulting with Insurance Professionals in respect of accidnet and claim figures? Why would he have to speak to anyone that rides at all?

[Str8 Jacket]

Why would he have to speak to anyone that rides at all?

BINGO! <plus ten>

[Mully]

WARNING:

Be aware that Nick Smith may try to meet with the AA as a representative body.

Can BRONZ register their interest as a relevant body??

[Ixion]

He could try it. Consult with 'appropriate' He could try arguing that the Police were appropriate also.
But there is much case law about such things. And now that labour are on the case boots and all he wouldn't dare try anything like that.

That's like the far fetched excuses soemtimes seen here from folk who ahve been pulled up by the police. Ministers are bound by the law, just liek anyone else. he can't put his own farfetched interpretation on it.

The Act is fairly clear. Consult with approriate persons or groups. To pass a regulation ONLY affecting motorcyclists without deeming them 'appropriate' to consult with would never stand up in court. or Parliament.

of course, the PRACTICAL effect could be nil. He could "consult" with us, then say "I consulted with them. they didn't have anything worthwhile to say so I ignored them".

But , that might be fine if this was not so high profile. With labour running out the big guns, he'd just make himself look like fool.

I reckon teh labour party can smell blood!

[Mully]

Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the songs of angry men
It is the music of a people who will not be slaves again......

I get this tune in my head every time I read this forum.

[firefighter]

The tauranga president owns a hayabusa he has been presdient for 4+ years, and owned a busa that whole time.

I was taking the piss. But thanks for that.

[Jantar]

And then there is a motorcycle organistation with "Members: 17,417, Active Members: 5,158" I should think that they would have to be consulted as well.

[Mully]

And then there is a motorcycle organistation with "Members: 17,417, Active Members: 5,158" I should think that they would have to be consulted as well.

Ahh, but it's Not A Democracy (tm)

Send your $20 to Les.....

[Ixion]

Not a legal entity, though. Although that doesn't necessarily preclude it.

[Eddieb]

WARNING:

Be aware that Nick Smith may try to meet with the AA as a representative body.

Can BRONZ register their interest as a relevant body??


Would it be that as the AA is the AUTOMOBILE Association they would not qualify as a representative organisation?

My view is that Automobile applies to 4 wheeled vehicles, besides which the AA has never done anything that I am aware of to assit motorcyclists in NZ. I'm happy to be corrected though.

[StoneY]

Would it be that as the AA is the AUTOMOBILE Association they would not qualify as a representative organisation?

My view is that Automobile applies to 4 wheeled vehicles, besides which the AA has never done anything that I am aware of to assit motorcyclists in NZ. I'm happy to be corrected though.

Your correct, and I have pulled all AA memberships and 6 insurances they held on me and mine

They support the levys and want em raked even higher

[Mully]

Would it be that as the AA is the AUTOMOBILE Association they would not qualify as a representative organisation?

My view is that Automobile applies to 4 wheeled vehicles, besides which the AA has never done anything that I am aware of to assit motorcyclists in NZ. I'm happy to be corrected though.

I'm not sure it would matter to Smithy - he might use their anti-motorcycle agenda to his own ends.

He might say that they were the only national body which would get close to being representative.

Although, as Ixion points out, that would have difficulty standing up to scrutiny. From Labour or the courts.

[Skyryder]

Yes you are defiantly going to need some legal advice on this one. You may well find that any meeting with the Minister in regards to biker concerns with ACC levies is indeed a ‘consultation.’ I don’t believe that any one party can define a meeting as not a consultation.

However if both parties agree that the meeting is not a consultation then I for one would be happy for it to proceed.

However I would be very hesitant in going into any meeting with Smith with out proof that he has agreed that your meeting is not such as is defined in the act

Skyryder


PS Good find IX

[Mully]

We also need to be careful who meets Smithy too.

Law Question: If BRONZ make their official spokesperson someone who wont be there, can Smith-a-rama claim to have "consulted" with BRONZ following the meeting"

[Ixion]

I've emailed David Parker. He may not know but the Labour party more lawyers and procedural experts than we could ever afford.

[Pedrostt500]

This thread headiing needs this to go with it,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5puAN1PGQw

Off topic I know but enjoy.

[StoneY]

We also need to be careful who meets Smithy too.

Law Question: If BRONZ make their official spokesperson someone who wont be there, can Smith-a-rama claim to have "consulted" with BRONZ following the meeting"

This is under discussion

Current plan is 4 from BRONZ 1 each from Ulysses, WIMA and HOG, Kari, and one bike shop owner (non speaking as such just to ensure Industry are showing support) and 3 others yet to be sorted

I am no use in Nicks office, I am gonna 'rabble rouse' out the front

:laugh:

Anyone know of any PA systems in Welly region we can hijack?

[yungatart]

This is under discussion

Current plan is 4 from BRONZ 1 each from Ulysses, WIMA and HOG, Kari, and one bike shop owner (non speaking as such just to ensure Industry are showing support) and 3 others yet to be sorted

I am no use in Nicks office, I am gonna 'rabble rouse' out the front

:laugh:

Anyone know of any PA systems in Welly region we can hijack?

Try Riffer...he has a band, I think....

[StoneY]

Madmal PMd me and I called him at work, he is in a band they have a PA
All band members have bikes...sound like a good bet

:niceone: