Ixion
5th November 2009, 22:01
The ACC Act says
Prevention of personal injury
(1) A primary function of the Corporation is to promote measures to reduce the incidence and severity of personal injury, including measures that—
(a) create supportive environments that reduce the incidence and severity of personal injury; and
(b) strengthen community action to prevent personal injury; and
(c) encourage the development of personal skills that prevent personal injury.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), such measures may include research, the provision of information or advice, the publication and dissemination of literature and information, campaigns, exhibitions, courses, and the promotion of safety management practices.
(3) The Corporation must undertake or fund such measures only if—
(a) satisfied that such measures are likely to result in a cost-effective reduction in actual or projected levy rates set under Part 6 or expenditure from the Non-Earners' Account under that Part; or
(4) The Corporation may, in its discretion, conduct, participate in, commission, or subsidise research into the reduction of the incidence and severity of accidents and other causes of personal injury that is directed at reducing the cost of compensation and rehabilitation provided under this Act.
So:
a primary function of Acc is to
Promote measures to reduce injuries
Create supportive environments
Including courses for the development of skills that reduce injury
Now one can very readily argue that if the ACC are claiming that our levies must go up because our injury rates are too high , then that clearly shows that the ACC is in fact in breach of one of its primary functions. It HASN'T been promoting measures to reduce injurys.
How much money has ACC spent on promoting supportive environments in motorcycling? Or funding courses (of any sort) ? Sweet FA. A little but absolutely tiny on their scale.
Think now. If the ACC had put in , say, $5,000,000 a year to fund rider training courses, track days,, safety campaigns , etc , how many injuries would have been prevented?
Such courses as there are , like RRRS and Frosty's track days run on the smell of an oily rag and only get by because volunteers give their time for free. Meanwhile ACC which is supposed to fund this stuff as a primary function is sitting on 12 BILLION dollars .
In short, if motor cycle injury rates are so bad, in a context where the ACC have done bugger all to prevent injuries (I know they have done a bit, but chicken feed ) then that shows :
ACC are not performing their primary function .
The name of the Act that gives them existence is "Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001".
Note. The word "insurance" does not appear. And the very first words are "injury prevention".They have decided to ignore their primary function , and pretend they are an insurance company. Even though the act specifically says they are not.
And now they complain that injury rates are too high !
Sort your shit out John Judge. The law says you should be working to reduce injury. You're trying to make us pay for the fact that you are not doing your job.
Prevention of personal injury
(1) A primary function of the Corporation is to promote measures to reduce the incidence and severity of personal injury, including measures that—
(a) create supportive environments that reduce the incidence and severity of personal injury; and
(b) strengthen community action to prevent personal injury; and
(c) encourage the development of personal skills that prevent personal injury.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), such measures may include research, the provision of information or advice, the publication and dissemination of literature and information, campaigns, exhibitions, courses, and the promotion of safety management practices.
(3) The Corporation must undertake or fund such measures only if—
(a) satisfied that such measures are likely to result in a cost-effective reduction in actual or projected levy rates set under Part 6 or expenditure from the Non-Earners' Account under that Part; or
(4) The Corporation may, in its discretion, conduct, participate in, commission, or subsidise research into the reduction of the incidence and severity of accidents and other causes of personal injury that is directed at reducing the cost of compensation and rehabilitation provided under this Act.
So:
a primary function of Acc is to
Promote measures to reduce injuries
Create supportive environments
Including courses for the development of skills that reduce injury
Now one can very readily argue that if the ACC are claiming that our levies must go up because our injury rates are too high , then that clearly shows that the ACC is in fact in breach of one of its primary functions. It HASN'T been promoting measures to reduce injurys.
How much money has ACC spent on promoting supportive environments in motorcycling? Or funding courses (of any sort) ? Sweet FA. A little but absolutely tiny on their scale.
Think now. If the ACC had put in , say, $5,000,000 a year to fund rider training courses, track days,, safety campaigns , etc , how many injuries would have been prevented?
Such courses as there are , like RRRS and Frosty's track days run on the smell of an oily rag and only get by because volunteers give their time for free. Meanwhile ACC which is supposed to fund this stuff as a primary function is sitting on 12 BILLION dollars .
In short, if motor cycle injury rates are so bad, in a context where the ACC have done bugger all to prevent injuries (I know they have done a bit, but chicken feed ) then that shows :
ACC are not performing their primary function .
The name of the Act that gives them existence is "Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001".
Note. The word "insurance" does not appear. And the very first words are "injury prevention".They have decided to ignore their primary function , and pretend they are an insurance company. Even though the act specifically says they are not.
And now they complain that injury rates are too high !
Sort your shit out John Judge. The law says you should be working to reduce injury. You're trying to make us pay for the fact that you are not doing your job.