paturoa
28th November 2009, 09:27
Wobblyas started a thread that has got bogged down a bit http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=113544 about Maori Party MP Rahui Katene's speech at the first reading of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill.
So it got me thinking and I've just sent her an email as follows:
Your speech at the first reading of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill is very interesting.
In your speech you quote the March 2008 report of Statistics New Zealand which revealed that Māori have significantly higher injury rates by occupation, with 155 injuries per 1000 fulltime-equivalent workers, compared with 111 for Pākehā. It is higher particularly in occupations such as agriculture, fisheries, manufacturing, and trades. There are also significantly more injuries in lower-paid occupations, where Māori are overrepresented.
The obvious point you are making is that this is not right, and I agree.
I wish to bring to your attention the proposed Motorcycles Levy changes, where there is increased segmentation, and unprecedented increases. Nick Smith, John Key and ACC state these are primarily driven by higher injury rates, claims rates and costs as motorcyclists are overrepresented compared to other road users.
Within this levy structure motorcyclists are separated out from other road users because of the alleged differences in accident rates, claims and costs.
Note that it is ACC's position is that this is appropriate, fair and reasonable, in their proposal documents, media statements and nationwide news paper advertisements.
So if indeed, we agree with the premise that Maori are dissproportionally impacted, as are motorcyclists, then the parallels are obvious, the conclusions are simply unpalatable.
This leads us to the absurd, where, if we are to accept ACC's position regarding segregration of Motorcyclists is appropriate, then their position should also be that Maori should pay higher levies than non-Maori.
Can you please let me know your position on the proposed Motorcycle levy increases.
I'm particularly interested in your views regarding segmentation of Motorcyclists.
I'll let you know what I get back.
I'm also about to send the same / tweaked to several other MPs.
So it got me thinking and I've just sent her an email as follows:
Your speech at the first reading of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Bill is very interesting.
In your speech you quote the March 2008 report of Statistics New Zealand which revealed that Māori have significantly higher injury rates by occupation, with 155 injuries per 1000 fulltime-equivalent workers, compared with 111 for Pākehā. It is higher particularly in occupations such as agriculture, fisheries, manufacturing, and trades. There are also significantly more injuries in lower-paid occupations, where Māori are overrepresented.
The obvious point you are making is that this is not right, and I agree.
I wish to bring to your attention the proposed Motorcycles Levy changes, where there is increased segmentation, and unprecedented increases. Nick Smith, John Key and ACC state these are primarily driven by higher injury rates, claims rates and costs as motorcyclists are overrepresented compared to other road users.
Within this levy structure motorcyclists are separated out from other road users because of the alleged differences in accident rates, claims and costs.
Note that it is ACC's position is that this is appropriate, fair and reasonable, in their proposal documents, media statements and nationwide news paper advertisements.
So if indeed, we agree with the premise that Maori are dissproportionally impacted, as are motorcyclists, then the parallels are obvious, the conclusions are simply unpalatable.
This leads us to the absurd, where, if we are to accept ACC's position regarding segregration of Motorcyclists is appropriate, then their position should also be that Maori should pay higher levies than non-Maori.
Can you please let me know your position on the proposed Motorcycle levy increases.
I'm particularly interested in your views regarding segmentation of Motorcyclists.
I'll let you know what I get back.
I'm also about to send the same / tweaked to several other MPs.