PDA

View Full Version : ACC Bikeoi Delegation Member Report.



Will
23rd November 2009, 19:26
The Bikeoi, 17th November 2009.
Just a quick summary of the day as I saw it.
I met up with the Bikeoi on Tuesday morning at Papakowhai , roughly 18 k’s north of Wellington. I had overnighted with Jim Furneaux in Upper Hutt so I was early and there were only about ten riders there but over the next couple of hours boy did that change. The bikes parked along the road at first but pretty soon they were everywhere, on the grass, in reserved car parks, across the road, down by the motorway, on footpaths and still they came, a huge conglomeration of bikes and people, media and cops. At 11:15, a little early but that turned out to be a good thing, the ride in started, I was near the front and the behaviour was really good, we kept mainly to one lane and didn’t block cars trying to get through. The really neat thing was that it was a bit like the Cambridge Toy Run, all along the trip there were people waving and cheering us on, on overbridges and off ramps, giving us the thumbs-up.
I parked at the Cake Tin and walked up to Parliament (about a 5 minute walk), there’s a huge lawn beneath the main steps to the old parliament buildings, the “podium” was on the steps that lead up off the lawn. We were told about that time that the last of the bikes were just then leaving Papakowhai, it was huge!! Already there were a lot of people there but by the end of the day it was choked with people and even then Brent Hutchison had to ask that they bunch up because there were still about a thousand who couldn’t get in. It was an awesome sight.
I circulated, talking to people, a number of labour Mps came down and it was really nice, casually chatting about motorbikes and the ACC issue. I had a great chat with, Hon Damien O’Connor, who loves motorbikes and has three at home. He gave me some real insight into just how big this event was. We looked up at the old parliament building and there were people all over the steps, and he said that they were all the staff who had come out to see the event, it was the first time that he had ever seen that happen, I was told later that the gathering was the biggest ever on the grounds of parliament.
The speeches started even though there were still bikes parking at the Cake Tin and then myself and eleven others were taken upstairs to Nick Smith’s office. A large room with a big conference table, a lounge area to one side and a desk in the corner. Hon Nick Smith and Hon Steven Joyce (Minister of Transport) were there, a bunch of people in the lounge area who seemed to be taking notes and listening intently and a security guard who looked like he’d take your head off before he started a dialogue with you.
We introduced ourselves, there were twelve, Kari Loyd the delegation spokesperson assigned by Bronz, Bronz (Les Mason, Hanne, Lars and Finn Neilson), Ulysses (myself and Jim Furneaux), Lucy Haberfeild Wellington president of HOG, Cherie from WIMA, owner of Stewart from Red Baron, University Riders group ( a story of an epic journey on small bikes and a night sleeping under a tree in Bulls is worth the telling but not here), a rep from the Motor vehicle Trade Assn. (Bike Rep).
The Ministers listened to Les’s manifesto and then the discussion started. Dr Smith’s position is that the ACC has in it’s rules the ability to set various levies and so they aren’t breaking the No Fault foundation of ACC, we disagreed, there were a range of discussion points about alternative ways for ACC to increase it’s funding but to me that wasn’t the issue, we shouldn’t be talking increase because ACC are already making money, 1.1 billion last year, trouble is with fourteen people all trying to push their opinion it was really hard to argue any one point. The distributor’s person stated that this was already starting to affect sales, as did the Red Baron owner who also said that his father had been killed by a driver pulling out in front of him and any talk of bikes being at fault even when they are usually not really pisses him off.
We talked about the need for the ACC to focus on training and education, that there were huge savings to be had there, bigger than they will ever get from increased levies, that the ACC initiatives of a few years ago (Look out for Bikes and the mentoring training) were good but that the program had lost it’s way and needed to be resurrected, we offered to help, that there seemed to be a gap between ACC’s injury prevention arm and their policy makers and that this needed fixing. One crowning message was that we want a single levy rate for all privately owned passenger vehicles in NZ, that includes suv’s, cars, vans AND MOTORCYCLES. We argued the way that the statistics are being interpreted. Dr Smith tried to say that the bike accident rate was rising while ignoring that the number of bikes is increasing , we made them see that argument was flawed. Dr Smith and Steven Joyce appeared to be taking some of all of this on board.
I did as promised and personally delivered the 814 signature petition that we got on the day of the Auckland Ride-in at Manuakau, and also a printed copy of the National Committee submission to the ACC consultation.
Time was short and Dr Smith needed to get out to talk to the throngs of people so the meeting was cut short but with a promise that another meeting of our interest groups and the Ministers will be set up. They wanted to discuss it further. They were never going to back down and cancel all their plans that day but I believe that the protest has really impacted them and made them realise that we have a huge backing and actually are reasonable people who have some good points that need to be heard. That we are not just grumpy about paying more but instead want to work with ACC to reduce accidents. That we are also citizens who are concerned about the direction that ACC is headed. We could not have hoped for a better result.
We have to keep the pressure up though, this was the first salvo in a long battle and we have to remember that. There is now the deadline for submissions to the select committee 26th November, PLEASE EVERYONE, get on and get something in to them.
We have to hold Dr Smith to his word and have the follow-up meeting.
We have to get together with the other organisations fighting the changes to ACC, they have different issues but we are running parallel battles. ACCfutures, National Council of Women of NZ, Victim Support agencies and many others are all being hit by these changes.
We also have to be ready to go back and protest again if they don’t listen.
As well, I am going through a process of complaining to ACC, the Attorney General’s Office and the Ombudsmen about the speed of this process disadvantaging our ability to fight the issue properly and the ACC advert that went in the National papers attacking motorcyclists. Clearly propaganda and we are saying it was miss-use of public funds.
The Bikeoi was awesome, well done Bronz. We made them take notice!!
Howard Mansell
Secretary, The Ulysses Club of New Zealand Inc.
Ulysses #5281

Jantar
23rd November 2009, 19:42
Thanyou for a great report. Finding out what went on in that meeting is motivating in itself.

scissorhands
23rd November 2009, 19:44
Good work. The summation is a good reminder

pete376403
23rd November 2009, 20:16
In another thread it was mentioned that under ACC regulations they must "consult" with representatives of affected groups. There was concern that Smith & co would consider this meeting 'consultation with the affected group" and by having had that meeting, they would have met their legal obligations and could go ahead with proposed changes. Was this idea raised and was Smith made caware that this meeting was NOT to be considered "consultation" as it applies to these regulations?

Will
24th November 2009, 05:47
In another thread it was mentioned that under ACC regulations they must "consult" with representatives of affected groups. There was concern that Smith & co would consider this meeting 'consultation with the affected group" and by having had that meeting, they would have met their legal obligations and could go ahead with proposed changes. Was this idea raised and was Smith made caware that this meeting was NOT to be considered "consultation" as it applies to these regulations?

I don't recall that being raised. He did promise a second meeting but as you say that is a danger. All we can do is push on and keep asking for that meeting.

mashman
24th November 2009, 12:51
Cheers Will, i'll keep doing as much as i can!

Conquiztador
24th November 2009, 15:15
Sadly this reminds me much of what I do when I fire someone/make them redundant. Employment law requires that I hold a meeting with them. So I do. Still does not change the outcome.

rustic101
24th November 2009, 17:34
Many thanks

StoneY
24th November 2009, 17:56
Thanks Howard, brilliant report

Dr Smith was FORMALLY notified before this meeting by myself (I was 'the convener' LOL) that it was not a formal consultation but a delivery of a protest manifesto

That covered meeting one, meeting two may be interpreted differently
I have the confirming e-mail to that position

:2thumbsup

ZX12R Hoon
25th November 2009, 06:37
Thanks Howard, brilliant report

Dr Smith was FORMALLY notified before this meeting by myself (I was 'the convener' LOL) that it was not a formal consultation but a delivery of a protest manifesto

That covered meeting one, meeting two may be interpreted differently
I have the confirming e-mail to that position

:2thumbsup

Do we have an indication of when the next meeting will be?