Article on NZHerald about ACC funding by chairman of the Accident Compensation Corpor

[Eddieb]

John Judge, chairman of the Accident Compensation Corporation wites an article on why ACC needs to be fully funded.

Could this be considered Subliminal messaging?

While I've nothing against the article itself and there's no mention of any particular groups, I notice a picture of a group of parked motorcycles accompanies the article.

ACC's challenge is achieving the right balance
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10608070

[Bounce001]

Maybe they are getting nervous! All these ads in major papers and now an article by the funding chaiirman. Perhaps this is in response to all the asa complaints last week! I did note there was info below about making submissions to the Herald about the article - being prepared?

[Mully]

Bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit.

ACC must be shitting themselves. They thought the naughty smelly bikers would just roll over and take it, and the car drivers would all support that.

What a wanker.

[Waxxa]

Bikers need to get an article published in the Herald from our perspective on things...:angry:

[Pixie]

"won't somebody think of the children?"

[Ozzie]

"I welcome the public debate on whether we've got the balance right."

Time the public debate became that, a public debate?

So far, ACC is spending money, getting in the paper, and blah blah blah.

We (bikers, rape victims, and other targets of increased rates / reduced spending) don't have that option, how do we go about putting forward our side of the debate?

[Big Dave]

"won't somebody think of the children?"


Funnily enough, yesterday I did.

Co-pilot and me went for a walk around the Ponds at Western Springs.

There were numerous family groups out riding their bicycles on a nice Spring afternoon.

I wondered if they would be there after the levy precedents are set.

4 bikes - that could be $2,000 thanks.

[FastBikeGear]

Bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit.

ACC must be shitting themselves. They thought the naughty smelly bikers would just roll over and take it, and the car drivers would all support that.



Let me assure you the ACC are not shitting themselves. Our protest registers like a flea on their backs so far. They were anticipating our response.

Also notice in that article the Judge John Dread says that ultimately the decision lies with the minister.

This comment also reinforces very clearly that it is Nick Smith and John key we need to target not ACC.


"I welcome the public debate on whether we've got the balance right."

Time the public debate became that, a public debate?


Seems we are having the debate after the decision has been made to single bikers out first for insurance style risk/premiums. Make no mistake we are the thin edge of he wedge. Once thye have set the precedent with us you can bet it will be the cyclists next....and who will protest this?

[Big Dave]

And they have the benefit of seeing our responses in advance.

[MikeL]

Bikers need to get an article published in the Herald from our perspective on things...:angry:

Easier said than done. Getting published, I mean. Writing is easy. I've given up writing letters to the editor. The last couple were "edited" so severely that the whole sense and tone were changed.

They have their own agenda. If you're lucky and they have some blank space to fill they may publish something written from an opposite ideological perspective to their own, but don't expect it to emerge unscathed from the "editing" process...

[Str8 Jacket]

This comment also reinforces very clearly that it is Nick Smith and John key we need to target not ACC.

Exactly!! I note that there have been a few people not really listening to statements such as above. The ministers are the driving force behind all decisions made for Govt Depts.



And they have the benefit of seeing our responses in advance.

Tis true. I know for a fact that National's-right-hand men or press secretaries are registered to just about every forum that they need to be. They do have people watching KB....

[FastBikeGear]

Tis true. I know for a fact that National's-right-hand men or press secretaries are registered to just about every forum that they need to be. They do have people watching KB....

Report in the weekend stated that Govt deparments employ combined total of 312 media relations (spin doctors) personal at a cost of $7.1 million to the tax payer.

[Str8 Jacket]

Report in the weekend stated that Govt deparments employ combined total of 312 media relations (spin doctors) personal at a cost of $7.1 million to the tax payer.

True, however I am talking about the Prime Ministers 'right-hand-people' only in my post. Media relations or Communications is a bit different and always Departmental specific...

[NighthawkNZ]

Easier said than done. Getting published, I mean. Writing is easy. I've given up writing letters to the editor. The last couple were "edited" so severely that the whole sense and tone were changed.

They have their own agenda. If you're lucky and they have some blank space to fill they may publish something written from an opposite ideological perspective to their own, but don't expect it to emerge unscathed from the "editing" process...

Technically speaking they are not allowed to redit letters to the editor, they can fix spelling and grammer, but not change the what you said in the letter.

[riffer]

Technically speaking they are not allowed to redit letters to the editor, they can fix spelling and grammer, but not change the what you said in the letter.

You've obviously never worked for Fairfax.

[Jantar]

Technically speaking they are not allowed to redit letters to the editor, they can fix spelling and grammer, but not change the what you said in the letter.
Actually, they can. The are not supposed to change the intent of the letter, but can shorten it.

[NighthawkNZ]

Actually, they can. The are not supposed to change the intent of the letter, but can shorten it.

When I was working for the newspaper Inside Otago, letters to the editor were not allowed to be altered or shortened, nor could the context or intent of the letter be changed. We were only allowed to fix gramemr and spelling only. If it was to long then it would wait till the next issue. It becomes false reporting other wise...

If you shorten a letter then you can easily change the intent of the letter with out realising it and if it is from the public it shouldn't be altered to suit the paper.

[MattRSK]

'Right now the difference between how much we have and what we need is about $12.8 billion and it's growing, up around $9 billion in the past five years alone."

Sounds expensive. Who will pay for that?

[Dave Lobster]

Technically speaking they are not allowed to redit letters to the editor, they can fix spelling and grammer, but not change the what you said in the letter.

And what income does policing this bring in?

And.. what level of effort will go to it?

Little on both, I reckon.

[NighthawkNZ]

'Right now the difference between how much we have and what we need is about $12.8 billion and it's growing, up around $9 billion in the past five years alone."

Sounds expensive. Who will pay for that?

only because the want it to fully funded by 2014...

The first thing the seperated accounts work, traffic and recreational etc should not have ever happened, ACC

The 12.8 billion is only an estimate, which based on 3 other estimates, the cost of accidents, many many accidents, and inflation. The short fall is because they say to be fully funded they need 23billion dollars, at preset they have 11b

As we know MC accidents are on a down tread since 1987 and cost lest than cars per claim

The traffic account needs at present 650million to be fully funded
There have been many ideas floating around to help with the short fall... from levy on traffic infringements which could easily raise over 300 million or if it is a 100% levy the would be over $600million dolars. $5 levy on a 6 month Wof or $10 for a year is $50 million. $50 levy on on all petrol powered vehicles sold which is done when you change ownership. Plus fuel. plus and equal levy on all vehicles is more than enough to cover the traffic account.