ACC agenda

[cowpatz]

Well as NZr's, bikers or not, a stake was driven into the ground today that changed our ACC system from a no fault scheme into just another ordinary insurance scheme. A scheme based on risk and liability and and recently packaged as such. Despite making a Billion bucks and giving the government a $700 million dividend (and why?????) the system is broke and needs to be trimmed for sale. Utter bullshit and BRONZ and Ulysses sold us short. I think I might just pack up my tees shirts and flags and banners and just mail them off to BRONZ. I feel ripped off for having joined. I thought we were in this for the long haul. I guess budding politicians are everywhere. We all knew this was the "planned" outcome and as nice little patsy apathetic kiwis ...yep it happened. We have a long way to go before we mature as a nation.

[Ixion]

Uh, dude, you seem confused.

Think about it.

Mr Judge says "OK, if ACC is going to run as an insurance company, bikers have to pay $3700. As a first installment , the minimum is $750". And, repeated that even after all the submissions.

Today the Minister came back and said "Shit, sorry John, the country just won't stand for your increases. I have to cut back on them , or my government is toast"

I'd say that todays result is exactly the reverse of turning it into another insurance scheme. It's an admission that , right now anyway, they can't swing that. Of course, that's the game plan and they'll keep trying. But round one, it hasn't worked.


Today's increases mean that the ACC demands for full funding are not a starter. Read the Minister's admission



These levy increases are sufficient to stop any further deterioration in ACC’s overall finances but will be insufficient for ACC to close the gap between its assets and liabilities by 2019"



That's Nick Smith's own admission. He couldn't swing the minimum that ACC demanded.

Todays increases were a gesture. They're not enough to give ACC what it needs if it is to be sold. He saved some face with the $30 for injury prevention thing. But the blunt reality is that ACC CANNOT be sold off to insurance companies UNLESS he can find a way to put up levies more than he has today. Or, alternatively, cut entitlements even more.

And my guess is that entitlement cuts is the way he'll go now. He's admitted that the public won't stand for higher levies - and that perception is in no small measure down to us - no-one else was publicly opposing levy increases. So , the option it will be - can't put up levies, cut costs , ie entitlements.

And THAT is the long haul that we need to be in for. The next ACC Amendment Bill next year

[cowpatz]

Not confused at all Les.
The ACC investments and the Super fund are actually what are fiscally supporting the Government at the moment...a broke scheme doesn't shell out a $700 million dividend.
What is being engineered here is a change to the foundations of the scheme, from a no fault compensation scheme to an outright insurance scheme.
By accepting the increase we are effectively saying that risk modeling is OK....and it is for an insurance scheme but not a no fault scheme. A scheme whereby we forgave the right to litigate. It is just what they wanted....divide and rule...cause an uproar by suggesting an outrageous levy and then backing off to half and have us say look what we achieved. Meanwhile the more important damage is done. The horse has bolted.
BRONZ and Ulysses have played right into the politicians hands. ACC where never going to get the increases suggested. It was overinflated and based on bullshit data that even my primary school son could see thru. What has been achieved, and is much more important to ACC, is the publicly sanctioned ability to levy based on perceived risk or cost recovery.
Now that we have bent over and taken half a handle bar up the arse the focus will be "Whose next?" The very thing we were campaigning against.
We Lions have stood up and.... squeaked.

[FastBikeGear]

Not confused at all Les.
The ACC investments and the Super fund are actually what are fiscally supporting the Government at the moment...a broke scheme doesn't shell out a $700 million dividend.

Was the $700 million a dividend or their company tax?

[cowpatz]

A dividend as I read it.
This was one of the articles:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/3090911/Letter-The-fair-go-spirit-of-ACC

[RentaTriumph]

Well as NZr's, bikers or not, a stake was driven into the ground today that changed our ACC system from a no fault scheme into just another ordinary insurance scheme. A scheme based on risk and liability and and recently packaged as such. Despite making a Billion bucks and giving the government a $700 million dividend (and why?????) the system is broke and needs to be trimmed for sale. Utter bullshit and BRONZ and Ulysses sold us short. I think I might just pack up my tees shirts and flags and banners and just mail them off to BRONZ. I feel ripped off for having joined. I thought we were in this for the long haul. I guess budding politicians are everywhere. We all knew this was the "planned" outcome and as nice little patsy apathetic kiwis ...yep it happened. We have a long way to go before we mature as a nation.

Exactly right. Couldn't have said it better cowpatz. For "Bikers" representatives to now say Bikers can live with the increases is a crock of shit.

[centaurus]

Uh, dude, you seem confused.

Think about it.

Mr Judge says "OK, if ACC is going to run as an insurance company, bikers have to pay $3700. As a first installment , the minimum is $750". And, repeated that even after all the submissions.

.....

Todays increases were a gesture. They're not enough to give ACC what it needs if it is to be sold. He saved some face with the $30 for injury prevention thing. But the blunt reality is that ACC CANNOT be sold off to insurance companies UNLESS he can find a way to put up levies more than he has today. Or, alternatively, cut entitlements even more.

And THAT is the long haul that we need to be in for. The next ACC Amendment Bill next year
[/SIZE]

Nick Smith clearly stated yesterday that this is not enough and hinted that other increases will follow. He's just opening a gate. If they put these increases on, they will go again next year and next year. Instead of one big increse thei will have 2-3 smaller ones. We haven't won anything. ACC hasn't backed down and they haven't been defeated. They just used us to get more political capital - "look we've listened to voters and reduced the proposed increases. But you'll see that we were right and these increases will not be enough. We will have to go another round next year and then cut some entitlements too" - that's pretty much what Nick Smith said.

In another words, they painted the stick a diferent colour, but it's the same stick that they shove up our arse.

[caseye]

Not confused at all Les.
The ACC investments and the Super fund are actually what are fiscally supporting the Government at the moment...a broke scheme doesn't shell out a $700 million dividend.
What is being engineered here is a change to the foundations of the scheme, from a no fault compensation scheme to an outright insurance scheme.
By accepting the increase we are effectively saying that risk modeling is OK....and it is for an insurance scheme but not a no fault scheme. A scheme whereby we forgave the right to litigate. It is just what they wanted....divide and rule...cause an uproar by suggesting an outrageous levy and then backing off to half and have us say look what we achieved. Meanwhile the more important damage is done. The horse has bolted.
BRONZ and Ulysses have played right into the politicians hands. ACC where never going to get the increases suggested. It was overinflated and based on bullshit data that even my primary school son could see thru. What has been achieved, and is much more important to ACC, is the publicly sanctioned ability to levy based on perceived risk or cost recovery.
Now that we have bent over and taken half a handle bar up the arse the focus will be "Whose next?" The very thing we were campaigning against.
We Lions have stood up and.... squeaked.



Did you attend the BRONZ meeting way back when we had hundreds of people there?
At that meeting this very issue was discussed, we all agreed that the aim was No increase, we all knew our aim wasn't going to be perfect.Les told us then, that the campaign was going to be a long one.
Les said "it's Liveable' he did not say BRONZ endorsed it, he also said he would go back to his members and see what they wanted to do.
If you have joined BRONZ under some missapprehension, then I;'m sorry but we need everyone who did join to stay joined and to think of other ways of geting the message across to the Govt, the ACC and the public.
"Who's next" didn't fail.It was a resounding success. The general public and other affected groups are Now beginning to realise that we were Not doing what we did just for ourselves and more imprtantly that we were right .
Others will be next.
What is needed now is as united a front as BRONZ (Us) can get and to talk to all the other affected groups out there and to get on side with the Democracy First people and get truely organised, Our aim?
1/To remove National from office by will of the general public.
2/To make sure that any incoming Govt knows to reinstate ACC as an Accident Compensation Corporation and to make it lean mean and capable of looking after itself forever more without making individual groups More laible than others.One Levy for all Licence holders would be another good idea.
While I believe that what I've said above is correct and that it will work, I'm also of the opinion that it is time to raise the stakes from our end.
I for one, will never again park alongside another motorcycle in the same car park.
I will wear my BikeHoi badge with pride in my Leadership and the knowledge that we went, we changed people minds and we gave them another view of us bikers.
We started our protest rides not knowing what the figures were going to be, we played nice because it was prudent to do so.
Protests from now on need to be directly targeted at Govt,ACC and Nat MP's.
Then we can be unruly, we can be Loud and we can be seen as a threat to their very existence as politicians.

[phred]

So whens the next BRONZ meeting.

[RDJ]

What is being engineered here is a change to the foundations of the scheme, from a no fault compensation scheme to an outright insurance scheme... where risk modeling is OK... and we (previously) forgave the right to litigate.

Excellently summarised. Thank you.