PDA

View Full Version : Labour response to this mornings ACC add



StoneY
5th November 2009, 15:17
Direct from the Labour ACC spokes to me, you got it here on KB even before the Press knew it

Labour have gone WAY onside here, they want the BIKER vote end of story


5 November 2009 Media Statement
Taxpayers can’t afford to pay for ACC’s political propaganda


Taxpayer money is being scandalously wasted on newspaper ads that don't tell the real story about the reasons behind huge ACC fee rises, Labour’s ACC spokesperson David Parker says.
“The large display ads in major dailies today claims ‘motorcyclists weren’t paying enough’. The National Government should apologise for implying paying more is a matter of principle.
“ACC’s statement shows scandalous indifference to the cost of living. It’s arrogant and out of touch. Even if ACC thought fees had to rise, suggesting that motorcyclists don’t pay ‘enough’ shows the Government's agenda is to punish motorcycle owners. It shows the Government is wildly out of touch with the reality of stretched family budgets.
David Parker is calling on the Government to disclose the cost of the propaganda.
“ACC is paying out large sums of levy-payers’ money to promote an unpopular political decision which the Government is ostensibly still consulting the public on.
“The Government made the decision to change the way motorcycle levies are set and ACC is now trying to help sell it, instead of keeping to ACC’s founding principles.
“Wasting money on newspaper ads shows the National Government has its priorities wrong. It is developing a bad habit of using taxpayers’ money for its own advertising and propaganda.
“ACC and its minister have been claiming that the fee rise for motorcyclists is not decided yet, and it is going through a consultation. But these ads show it’s all a sham consultation and the outcome is already decided.
David Parker says the claims in the advertisement are political and misrepresent the purpose of the ACC scheme - and drew up a list of alternative answers to the fake ‘questions’ in the ad.
Straight answers to ACC’s proposed motorcycle levies
Why are motorcyclists being singled out?
What other groups will be unfairly targeted next? Cyclists? Drivers of older cars? Pedestrians? Older people who fall over in their homes more often than young people? Children playing sports?
All of these groups have accidents. Why is the Government targeting one section of the public - motorcyclists - and who is next?


Why are motorcyclists being asked to pay more?
Because the National Government is abandoning the idea of a no-fault accident compensation scheme to set it up for privatisation, which will benefit big foreign owned insurance companies.
If motorcyclists weren’t paying enough, who’s been covering their costs?
In a social insurance scheme, we all pay a share of the costs of accidents, so that we are all covered. If ACC introduces user pays for groups it claims face higher risks, then next on the list will be elderly New Zealanders who hurt themselves in falls, and people playing sport.
ACC has $12 billion in reserves. Last year New Zealanders paid in a billion dollars more than ACC paid out in claims. ACC is not broke!
But motorcyclists say the crashes aren’t their fault.
But that’s not the point. ACC wants to punish motorcyclists for their lifestyle. That’s why it says ‘motorcyclists weren’t paying enough.’
How much more at risk are motorcyclists?
Motorcyclists are at very high risk of continued steep fee rises because the consultation is a sham. The Government’s already made up its mind.
How do the proposed ACC levies compare to the cost of insuring the actual bike?
That’s got nothing to do with it. Car owners don’t pay more in ACC for insuring more expensive cars. The cost of insuring the bike is about as relevant as the cost of buying a new exhaust system for it. The issue is not about the bike - it is about the fairness of a social insurance scheme. By the way, if private insurance companies charge $750 to insure a bike worth $15,000, and the Government plans to charge the same amount to cover an injury worth potentially millions, how much more do you think you will pay in levies when private insurers get their hands on the scheme? Privatisation will see New Zealanders left paying more for less to pay the bills of lawyers and foreign-owned corporates and to cover much higher administration costs
Do the figures include off-road motorcycle claims?
Assuming the ACC is right, not yet. But as soon as the government can work out a way to hurt this group too, they will.
Why do motorcyclists pay over and over again if they own more than one bike?
There is reason for imposing a levy for each bike, but there is no reason for charging exorbitant levies which will force owners of several bikes to head to their bank managers. ACC’s real motive is to punish motorcyclists for their lifestyle.
How to make a submission
Not much point really. The National Government has already made up its mind. If you want to change the policy, go to ACCworks.org.nz and help Labour stop National’s ACC rip-off.

Regards Hon David Parker

Devil
5th November 2009, 15:42
Wow :Punk:

Molly
5th November 2009, 15:50
Well said.

Why is it so f'kin' hard to get politicians to give a straight anwer to a straight question? Who did sanction the use of our money for ads promoting one position over another? How f'kin' dare they!

I wonder if we'll win this one? It'd be great to rub the bastards' noses in the shit.

Oooo. I'm all angry again me...

dogsnbikes
5th November 2009, 15:54
Bling!! nice one

Ixion
5th November 2009, 15:57
I reckon labour can smell blood.

McJim
5th November 2009, 15:59
Labour have gone WAY onside here, they want the BIKER vote end of story


And who can blame them. Here is a real opportunity to grab what is probably as much as 250,000 voters right from under National's nose and many who were previously National voters.

Own goal by National on this one..

Squiggles
5th November 2009, 16:01
I reckon labour can smell blood.

Question time was wednesday eh?

MattRSK
5th November 2009, 16:03
meh, fuck labour.

Kiwi Graham
5th November 2009, 16:03
Nice to see we have some heavy weight support. Awesome letter Mr Parker.

zahria
5th November 2009, 16:07
Thats the first time I have seen sense from a politician!
Way to go Mr Parker.
I'll vote for you after this.:done:

Deano
5th November 2009, 16:09
meh, fuck labour.

They would probably be trying the same thing. They're all as bad as each other really.

StoneY
5th November 2009, 16:31
meh, fuck labour.



Nah mate fuck YOU

Hes on OUR side and I dont care WHAT party supports us, its SUPPORT

MattRSK
5th November 2009, 16:31
They would probably be trying the same thing. They're all as bad as each other really.

If you are the opposition you must oppose all policy even if you agree with it.

MattRSK
5th November 2009, 16:32
Nah mate fuck YOU

Hes on OUR side and I dont care WHAT party supports us, its SUPPORT

Sure he is, or is he just hijacking your issue?

nothingflash
5th November 2009, 16:33
Nah mate fuck YOU

Hes on OUR side and I dont care WHAT party supports us, its SUPPORT

Bling bling...

Ixion
5th November 2009, 16:33
No they don't . F'instance Labour supported National on the boy racer crushing bill

And National supported Labour on the smacking bill (PLEASE don't let's get started on that again - it was just one cross party bill that came to mmind)

Ozzie
5th November 2009, 16:37
Sure he is, or is he just hijacking your issue?
Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by each other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

MattRSK
5th November 2009, 16:38
Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by either other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

Good point.

Ixion
5th November 2009, 16:41
My enemies enemies are my friends. Temporarily. Sure Labour are only supporting us because they see us as a stick to beat National with. And will cast us aside when we are no longer of use to them.

But, in the meantime, they're fighting our fight. So, we support them.

Moreover, the fact that labour are pitching so hard shows that they think Lthey can hurt National on this.

Ozzie
5th November 2009, 16:42
Fuck, Bring it, I want to hurt National!

Motu
5th November 2009, 16:44
They would probably be trying the same thing. They're all as bad as each other really.

No denying they are as bad as each other,but Labour has never tried to privatise ACC,they reinstated it when National last privatised ACC.Privatising ACC was a National pre election policy - they dropped the issue very quickly when they found voters didn't approve.

StoneY
5th November 2009, 16:46
Sure he is, or is he just hijacking your issue?

Well I know the MOTIVATION may not be as pure as the breeze passing though the space between your ears, but it is moot

This gives me hope that we can win this, and Davids intentions, whatever the motivation, are clearly in OUR favour

Happens I have met David a number of times when I worked in Govt as a Union delegate just before the Nats won last year

So, what IS his motivation?
Definitely based on getting a nail into the Nats for sure, but MAYBE he likes the fact his mates have bikes he can take for a hoon once every few months....you know?
And if ACC get their way, they may not have bikes anymore due to kids that need to eat

MPs can actually be human beings, and as far as motivations, I have dealt with a LOT of MP's, Labour and Green MPs tend to have more of a social conscience than Nats that's for fuckin sure

Deano
5th November 2009, 16:47
Labour would be trying to put up the levies based on ACC's recommendation was my point, not the privatisation issue.

StoneY
5th November 2009, 16:48
Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by either other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

Post of the thread bro triple bling to you :laugh:

MattRSK
5th November 2009, 16:55
Well I know the MOTIVATION may not be as pure as the breeze passing though the space between your ears, but it is moot


Cool story bro....... Just stating an opinion didn't mean to piss you off.

Deano
5th November 2009, 16:59
Just stating an opinion didn't mean to piss you off.

How dare you !! :nono:

Mcycle
5th November 2009, 17:18
ACC’s Press Ad’s of 5 November are a sign of desperation by ACC, and an attempt to ‘divide and rule’ by posing more spurious arguments.

My recommendation is to not be tempted into responding to the often irrelevant points raised in this advertisement.

Stick to the simple winning arguments so clearly detailed on the web site; www.bikersagainstacc.org.nz.

If anyone does respond, do it by letters to the Editor, to all papers up and down the country and simply pick out key points eg

“In it’s 5 November advertisement ACC say that Motorcyclists aren’t being singles out, yet in 2008 there were 1,475 motorcycle accidents and 50 deaths, and motorcyclists paid approximately $12.3 million in levies. At the same period there were 1,170 bicycle accidents and 36 deaths. Cyclists paid no ACC levies.

In targeting motorcyclists ACC is ignoring the key fact that ACC was established to draw upon the overall resources of the community to ensure that ALL those who suffer an accident do not find themselves disadvantaged because they cannot afford treatment or rehabilitation, or meet the expenses associated with a lengthy court case. Saying that motor cyclists must pay much more than presently because they are ‘responsible’ for their accidents not only breaches the principal behind the scheme, it also re-introduces the notion of fault into the scheme when it was set up in the first place to avoid it.”

Keep up the good work folks, we are winning!!

Mudfart
5th November 2009, 17:20
the politicians shud go to any A and E on a Thurs, Fri, or Sat night and look at all the drunk idiots wasting tax payer money. I wonder if they wud put up the price of alcohol? NO. Why? Because NZers spend 12.5 million dollars on alcohol per week! So I imagine that the breweries have some very strong political sway. Maybe we cud start a church, Ill claim tithings and request gifts, and give all the money to all our registrations, insurances etc.... and maybe if we paid enough we wud automatically be entitled to political sway. AHHHH the beauty of being free, existing under a corruption free society of democracy. Me fikken grandad took two italian bullets for what?

R6_kid
5th November 2009, 17:46
I particularly like this line:

How much more at risk are motorcyclists?
Motorcyclists are at very high risk of continued steep fee rises because the consultation is a sham. The Government’s already made up its mind.

86GSXR
5th November 2009, 18:04
Direct from the Labour ACC spokes to me, you got it here on KB even before the Press knew it

Labour have gone WAY onside here, they want the BIKER vote end of story

Brilliant thread, here's hoping eh!