dpex
19th November 2009, 18:45
The below is a letter I have sent to every politician.
I would appreciate your criticisms....please stay on topic.
Cheers Dpex.
Dear Sir/Madame,
ACC’s determination to increase road-user levies has clearly opened a can of worms which will not be easily shut.
The angst felt by bikers across the nation has in fact triggered a deeper level of angst felt by the disenfranchised whom, unlike bikers, and due to various reasons have no collective voice. Such folk are beginning to recognise the value of tagging onto the coat-tails of the biker protest. Thus you can reasonably expect the numbers of protestors to swell as our campaign against ACC ‘Targeted’ levies develops.
The grievances regarding ACC (earnings related) costs are as follows.
1. The method of levy has an inherent notion of fault due to the variations in levy as determined by industry-type, yet this method of determination fails to recognise the specific value each payer contributes to our society.
For example, a forestry worker pays a huge levy compared to a dunny cleaner, yet without each our society could not function. Yet the former is penalised via ACC while the latter is not.
Yet, the dunny-cleaner may be involved in an extreme sport, and thus become a significant risk, while the forestry worker may lead a dull and boring private life and thus presents no specific risk.
2. Beneficiaries of all types pay no ACC (direct) levy at all thus they are free-loading off the rest.
3. Unemployed children pay no ACC yet they are significant recipients of ACC largesse (as they should be).
4. Tourists pay no ACC yet are beneficiaries of the ACC system.
The point being made in the above is that ACC liability is not being evenly shared by the inevitable recipients.
Now allow me to bring your attention to extra ‘targeted’ levies. In fact there is but one and it is upon only all registered road-users, via registration and fuel tax. Yet pedestrians and cyclists are exempt from this extra tax.
This extra ‘targeted’ levy is demonstrably unfair, unreasonable, and undemocratic and one which is inflicted upon registered road-users for but one simple and very cynical reason; which is, you can because we are so easily identifiable.
It is this targeted tax which has drawn the ire of so many. Agreed, the ire is largely concentrated amongst bikers at the moment, but as our campaign builds all registered road-users will become aware that they are being unreasonably victimised.
You may be assured that the Wellington rally was merely a dress-rehearsal for things to come.
Initially, we decided to protest just the proposed increase in ACC levies. However, the mass of thinking and suggestions has revealed that we are no longer prepared to pay ‘any’ extra levy via registration or fuel tax.
Various of our number are arranging meetings with a range of other road-user groups and it is our intention to embroil them in our protest and against this demonstrably unfair tax.
The solution.
As noted above, some pay no ACC levy at all, while others pay through the nose. And, adding insult to injury, registered road-users are further penalised.
We respectfully recommend the following as a fitting solution.
1. That GST be raised by 2.5%. An amount which should put an extra $35 billion dollars into the coffers to cover all ACC claims into the future.
2. That the sum of that increase be used to pay all current and future ACC costs, and also a significant sum be used to pay for specific, physical and theoretical driver education programmes.
3. That all ACC levies from source income, and road-user charges (both via registration and fuel levy) be removed.
In this way the burden of ACC costs are spread across all persons who spend any amount regardless of the source of their spending power, and will, sooner or later draw on ACC for surcease; with the sole exception of unemployed children.
We believe we can live with them getting a free-ride for a short period of their lives.
And, further, all will have more to spend in our economy.
It is this change of focus of funding ACC which will become the focus of our protest.
I would appreciate your criticisms....please stay on topic.
Cheers Dpex.
Dear Sir/Madame,
ACC’s determination to increase road-user levies has clearly opened a can of worms which will not be easily shut.
The angst felt by bikers across the nation has in fact triggered a deeper level of angst felt by the disenfranchised whom, unlike bikers, and due to various reasons have no collective voice. Such folk are beginning to recognise the value of tagging onto the coat-tails of the biker protest. Thus you can reasonably expect the numbers of protestors to swell as our campaign against ACC ‘Targeted’ levies develops.
The grievances regarding ACC (earnings related) costs are as follows.
1. The method of levy has an inherent notion of fault due to the variations in levy as determined by industry-type, yet this method of determination fails to recognise the specific value each payer contributes to our society.
For example, a forestry worker pays a huge levy compared to a dunny cleaner, yet without each our society could not function. Yet the former is penalised via ACC while the latter is not.
Yet, the dunny-cleaner may be involved in an extreme sport, and thus become a significant risk, while the forestry worker may lead a dull and boring private life and thus presents no specific risk.
2. Beneficiaries of all types pay no ACC (direct) levy at all thus they are free-loading off the rest.
3. Unemployed children pay no ACC yet they are significant recipients of ACC largesse (as they should be).
4. Tourists pay no ACC yet are beneficiaries of the ACC system.
The point being made in the above is that ACC liability is not being evenly shared by the inevitable recipients.
Now allow me to bring your attention to extra ‘targeted’ levies. In fact there is but one and it is upon only all registered road-users, via registration and fuel tax. Yet pedestrians and cyclists are exempt from this extra tax.
This extra ‘targeted’ levy is demonstrably unfair, unreasonable, and undemocratic and one which is inflicted upon registered road-users for but one simple and very cynical reason; which is, you can because we are so easily identifiable.
It is this targeted tax which has drawn the ire of so many. Agreed, the ire is largely concentrated amongst bikers at the moment, but as our campaign builds all registered road-users will become aware that they are being unreasonably victimised.
You may be assured that the Wellington rally was merely a dress-rehearsal for things to come.
Initially, we decided to protest just the proposed increase in ACC levies. However, the mass of thinking and suggestions has revealed that we are no longer prepared to pay ‘any’ extra levy via registration or fuel tax.
Various of our number are arranging meetings with a range of other road-user groups and it is our intention to embroil them in our protest and against this demonstrably unfair tax.
The solution.
As noted above, some pay no ACC levy at all, while others pay through the nose. And, adding insult to injury, registered road-users are further penalised.
We respectfully recommend the following as a fitting solution.
1. That GST be raised by 2.5%. An amount which should put an extra $35 billion dollars into the coffers to cover all ACC claims into the future.
2. That the sum of that increase be used to pay all current and future ACC costs, and also a significant sum be used to pay for specific, physical and theoretical driver education programmes.
3. That all ACC levies from source income, and road-user charges (both via registration and fuel levy) be removed.
In this way the burden of ACC costs are spread across all persons who spend any amount regardless of the source of their spending power, and will, sooner or later draw on ACC for surcease; with the sole exception of unemployed children.
We believe we can live with them getting a free-ride for a short period of their lives.
And, further, all will have more to spend in our economy.
It is this change of focus of funding ACC which will become the focus of our protest.