Who's next campaign! (all's quiet on the ACC front!)

[oldrider]

Who's next campaign? Looks like Nick has won hands down! :yes:

Just got my notice for renewal of registration for my little old Toyota Townace truck!
Licence fee$43.50
ACC Levy $467.08
Other Levies $1.64
Administration $6.72
GST $77.84
Total $596.78

Plus my bike, car and trailer it's getting to be like I can't afford to stay alive!

The combined taxes for just living are killing me and I can't afford to fucking well die either!

Bikers made a spirited stand to begin with but that just seems to have fizzled out now! :facepalm:

Every time there is a change of government it seems to cost me an arm and a leg and they are all as bad as each other!

Off to bed while I can still afford to sleep! (I think!) Rant over for now! :shutup:

[Brian d marge]

whatcha gonna do about it

buggerin off is a good option

not paying them is also an idea,

joining a group that has a single unified voice , is another

a bicycle

Stephen

( I buggered off, all good here !...but it would be nice to build a house and retire in NZ , but not if I cant afford to live there )

[Scouse]

Who's next campaign? Looks like Nick has won hands down! :yes:

Just got my notice for renewal of registration for my little old Toyota Townace truck!
Licence fee$43.50
ACC Levy $467.08
Other Levies $1.64
Administration $6.72
GST $77.84
Total $596.78

Plus my bike, car and trailer it's getting to be like I can't afford to stay alive!

The combined taxes for just living are killing me and I can't afford to fucking well die either!

Bikers made a spirited stand to begin with but that just seems to have fizzled out now! :facepalm:

Every time there is a change of government it seems to cost me an arm and a leg and they are all as bad as each other!

Off to bed while I can still afford to sleep! (I think!) Rant over for now! :shutup:Fookin you were one of the biggest "lets get rid of Hellen" advocates on this site brings to mind the saying "careful what you wish for"

[StoneY]

Was chatting with the Labour ACC spokesperson yesterday as he happens to be my MP anyway, and a good bloke.
He came on our 'Who's Next' rides last in October 09 on my Ducati and had a ball


He agrees this is not a cool situation.
To a man all the Red's I have spoken with agree this is a rort............ but hey they're gonna say what I wanna hear aint they?

Food for thought.... if a govt was to change this and make the entire levy on fuel alone, based on the fuel type - eg diesel, petrol, avgas, whatever.... how would that sit with us and the wider community?

If petrol became say 2.08 PL and the ACC levy vanished from our registration, how would that balance?
I'm shit at math.

[rainman]

Food for thought.... if a govt was to change this and make the entire levy on fuel alone, based on the fuel type - eg diesel, petrol, avgas, whatever.... how would that sit with us and the wider community?

If petrol became say 2.08 PL and the ACC levy vanished from our registration, how would that balance?
I'm shit at math.

I think it might have to go up a bit more than that - and the risk is that petrol will get more expensive anyway - but my 2c is the punters would probably prefer it. Would have to be total removal of the ACC levy though, otherwise everyone knows both will just creep up over time.

[Owl]

If petrol became say 2.08 PL and the ACC levy vanished from our registration, how would that balance?
I'm shit at math.

For me on my bike...........about $60 per annum.:D

[blackdog]

Was chatting with the Labour ACC spokesperson yesterday as he happens to be my MP anyway, and a good bloke.
He came on our 'Who's Next' rides last in October 09 on my Ducati and had a ball


He agrees this is not a cool situation.
To a man all the Red's I have spoken with agree this is a rort............ but hey they're gonna say what I wanna hear aint they?

Food for thought.... if a govt was to change this and make the entire levy on fuel alone, based on the fuel type - eg diesel, petrol, avgas, whatever.... how would that sit with us and the wider community?

If petrol became say 2.08 PL and the ACC levy vanished from our registration, how would that balance?
I'm shit at math.

@50 litres per week over TWO (or 3 or 4...) vehicles with an 8c rise over one year equals $208

@80 litres pw over a year its $332.80

I'll take it!

[lone_slayer]

I think I would rather pay a couple more cents on my petrol and get rid of rego all together there is no need to rego a vehicle other than to say hey this is mine and pay shit loads of money I think the goverment would do a lot better having it as part of fuel costs that way theres no way avoiding it, you have to pay but your paying for what you use

[oneofsix]

there is no need to rego a vehicle other than to say hey this is mine

It doesn't even do that. The rego only says "hey the tax has been payed for this vehicle". It is not a proof of ownership.

[lone_slayer]

Well that makes it worse why the hell do we bother with this it makes no sense its just another thing you gotta go pay which would be easier for everyone if it was pay at pump the more you drive/ride the more you pay. also means your acc levy is covered by all vehicles offroad farm etc

[oldrider]

Fookin you were one of the biggest "lets get rid of Hellen" advocates on this site brings to mind the saying "careful what you wish for"

Yes, because it was Helen and her cronies tinkering with ACC that gave this nutter Smith the opportunity to lie his way through to change it.

Otherwise criticism accepted!

[cheshirecat]

Who's next campaign? Looks like Nick has won hands down! :yes:

Just got my notice for renewal of registration for my little old Toyota Townace truck!
Licence fee$43.50
ACC Levy $467.08
Other Levies $1.64
Administration $6.72
GST $77.84
Total $596.78

Plus my bike, car and trailer it's getting to be like I can't afford to stay alive!

The combined taxes for just living are killing me and I can't afford to fucking well die either!

Bikers made a spirited stand to begin with but that just seems to have fizzled out now! :facepalm:

Every time there is a change of government it seems to cost me an arm and a leg and they are all as bad as each other!

Off to bed while I can still afford to sleep! (I think!) Rant over for now! :shutup:

My personal view is we now need to think differently - smarter and target better. Much has been learnt in the recent notomob and notobikeparkingtax movements - google them and check their forums. There are numerous international bike protest websites - the best is the French one Angry Bikers (but in French) I was in London last year and saw demos in action. I think our demo was significant but now we need to move on, a week is a long time in politics - Through fb/twitter and so forth every individual can make a contribution no matter how small. The situtation here is no longer just NZ it's international and not just bikesl, thats very significant in influencing those who are meant to represent us.

Information and inteliigence is all. There is an election comming up.

[MSTRS]

Put it all on fuel? One of the many ideas that were thrown about back when bikers collectively were angry.
Agree it makes perfect sense - let those who use fuel, pay. No regos ticking down to zero while a vehicle sits idle. Very few would bother putting rego on hold - it's only about $50pa without the ACC - so govt admn would benefit too.
The but is that no user group could be targetted/manipulated by bullshit risk-rating. TPTB wouldn't like that...

[Bald Eagle]

. TPTB wouldn't like that...

If it upsets TPTB then it's got to be good for the rest of us.

[riffer]

I for one would be very pleased if Labour were intending to scrap the ACC Levy portion of registration and instead place extra levies on fuel.

It just seems more equitable to me. This covers offroad vehicles, chainsaws, weed-eaters, lawnmowers, stationary engines (these can result in injuries and ACC claims), and also ensures that those who do more mileage will chip in more.

Of course, it could be claimed it's not entirely equitable as those with less fuel-efficient vehicles will subsidise those with more fuel-efficient I think it's a fair trade-off.

I think a phone call to my local MP is in order too, given that he's the same MP as you StoneY.

[phill-k]

I guess if you own and drive a truck for a living you wouldn't be much impressed with the fee going on fuel, the existing system is fairer to all, the amount levied however is not.

If as bikers we campaign to have the ACC levy put on fuel we will become the laughing stock of NZers and politicians as well.

[Scuba_Steve]

I still think ALL vehicles should have RUC's & the charges should be on that :yes:.

[oneofsix]

I still think ALL vehicles should have RUC's & the charges should be on that :yes:.

RUC's don't cover off roaders where as fuel would. Fuel would also get you when mowing the lawn or on your boat (dreaming). Fuel wouldn't get veggy oil burners, electric or fully cover hybrids.
Oh what a perfect world we live in :shutup:
Basically there isn't a one solution fits all.

[MSTRS]

I guess if you own and drive a truck for a living you wouldn't be much impressed with the fee going on fuel, the existing system is fairer to all, the amount levied however is not.

If as bikers we campaign to have the ACC levy put on fuel we will become the laughing stock of NZers and politicians as well.

Please explain how the existing system is fairer.

[Fatt Max]

Remove the levies on ACC but dont put it on fuel

Instead, tax shagging. Since owning a bike I have been very much lacking in that department, must be me sweaty gonads in this hot weather.

That would work for me...

Or, better still, increase the levies for politicians cars. Those flash beemers the poliies have treated themselves to could do with a nudge.

Dont tax pies though, I will be right fucked off if they do that....

[lone_slayer]

Those flash beemers the poliies have should all be axed except maybe the prime ministers theres nothing wrong with a new commodore and in a few years time when they upgrade again they could be passed on to the cops so they can get the thrashing they deserve:yes:

[Hellzie]

Basing it on the amount of petrol you use is unfair as different vehicle types have different risk factors. Bikes are known to have a much higher risk factor than your standard passenger vehicle, yet they use less fuel (generally) and therefore would pay less ACC.

Not that the current system is fair - but ACC are starting to make some mutterings that should improve the system.

Reading a lot of the posts on here, I think people need to be a bit better informed about what the levy is used for and what the statistics are before they make judgement. There is a lot of useful (and motorcycle specific) information on the ACC website.

ACC - for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/for-individuals/motorcyclists/index.htm)

ACC Levy Consultation - info for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc088982.pdf)

"For the past six years, our levies have been set so that ‘other vehicle’ owners fund 88-90% of the costs of injuries sustained by motorcycle and moped riders. The table below shows the percentages since 2000/01."

Levy Consultation (http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/consultation-have-your-say/levy-consultation/index.htm)

Recommendations for Levy Rates for motorists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc090399.pdf)

[lone_slayer]

but again it comes down to very few people own just a motorbike

[lone_slayer]

How about multi vehicle discount?

[blackdog]

Not that the current system is fair - but ACC are starting to make some mutterings that should improve the system.

Reading a lot of the posts on here, I think people need to be a bit better informed about what the levy is used for and what the statistics are before they make judgement. There is a lot of useful (and motorcycle specific) information on the ACC website.


"For the past six years, our levies have been set so that ‘other vehicle’ owners fund 88-90% of the costs of injuries sustained by motorcycle and moped riders.

not been around here long have you

[Hellzie]

but again it comes down to very few people own just a motorbike

Yea I know what you mean, so that percentage is somewhat skewed, but I would think even if you consider that most bikers also have a car, other drivers are still somewhat subsidising motorcyclists to some extent.

[lone_slayer]

Can someone start a poll to find out how many vehicles we all own?
ie
Motorbike
Bike + car
bike x2 + car
bike + car x2
more than 2 bikes + car
Bike + more than 2 cars

Would be really interesting where we all stand on this

[MSTRS]

Yea I know what you mean, so that percentage is somewhat skewed, but I would think even if you consider that most bikers also have a car, other drivers are still somewhat subsidising motorcyclists to some extent.

Fuck that. ACC is no longer operating the way it was originally designed. Risk-rating based on vehicle type is a crock.
I have NEVER had an ACC vehicle claim, so I am personally subsidising all those who have/do.

[Scuba_Steve]

RUC's don't cover off roaders where as fuel would. Fuel would also get you when mowing the lawn or on your boat (dreaming). Fuel wouldn't get veggy oil burners, electric or fully cover hybrids.
Oh what a perfect world we live in :shutup:
Basically there isn't a one solution fits all.

Nope got that right, maybee a split with ACC on fuel all other road charges on RUC's? But still won't quite cover electric vehicles but then with RUC's being able to be individualised to groups guess we could just add their ACC in there

[Usarka]

I think it's Nick Smiths daughter.....

[Bald Eagle]

Basing it on the amount of petrol you use is unfair as different vehicle types have different risk factors. Bikes are known to have a much higher risk factor than your standard passenger vehicle, yet they use less fuel (generally) and therefore would pay less ACC.

Not that the current system is fair - but ACC are starting to make some mutterings that should improve the system.

Reading a lot of the posts on here, I think people need to be a bit better informed about what the levy is used for and what the statistics are before they make judgement. There is a lot of useful (and motorcycle specific) information on the ACC website.

ACC - for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/for-individuals/motorcyclists/index.htm)

ACC Levy Consultation - info for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc088982.pdf)

"For the past six years, our levies have been set so that ‘other vehicle’ owners fund 88-90% of the costs of injuries sustained by motorcycle and moped riders. The table below shows the percentages since 2000/01."

Levy Consultation (http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/consultation-have-your-say/levy-consultation/index.htm)

Recommendations for Levy Rates for motorists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc090399.pdf)

If you believe the ACC misinformation I have to ask do you work for ACC or Nick the Prick and do you also believe ACC is broke

[StoneY]

ACC - for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/for-individuals/motorcyclists/index.htm)

ACC Levy Consultation - info for motorcyclists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc088982.pdf)

"For the past six years, our levies have been set so that ‘other vehicle’ owners fund 88-90% of the costs of injuries sustained by motorcycle and moped riders. The table below shows the percentages since 2000/01."

Levy Consultation (http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/consultation-have-your-say/levy-consultation/index.htm)

Recommendations for Levy Rates for motorists (http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc090399.pdf)


You have swallowed the bait havent you?

70$ per car in cross subsidization is a total myth - do the math

2.15 MILLION x 70$ = a shitload more than motorcycle injuries add up to for an entire 5 years let alone the current 'to be funded' year
I still argue this point at every MSL meeting I attend

Buy a better quality calculator before accusing those who have been involved in this issue for 2 years of not having 'correct data'

I for one have far more current data and numbers than ACC's website.

[oneofsix]

Basing it on the amount of petrol you use is unfair as different vehicle types have different risk factors. Bikes are known to have a much higher risk factor than your standard passenger vehicle, yet they use less fuel (generally) and therefore would pay less ACC.


argument has validity but confuses risk with cost. The risk factor isn't necessarily higher, but the medical cost typically are. Hence the larger bikes pay more ACC levy even though the smaller bikes have more crashes.

[lone_slayer]

can anyone add that poll? i wanna know how many of us are paying multiple amounts of acc

[blackdog]

can anyone add that poll? i wanna know how many of us are paying multiple amounts of acc

On average just assume all of us. For every one that only has a bike, there is another that has 3 or more.

[Hellzie]

You have swallowed the bait havent you?

70$ per car in cross subsidization is a total myth - do the math

2.15 MILLION x 70$ = a shitload more than motorcycle injuries add up to for an entire 5 years let alone the current 'to be funded' year
I still argue this point at every MSL meeting I attend

Buy a better quality calculator before accusing those who have been involved in this issue for 2 years of not having 'correct data'

I for one have far more current data and numbers than ACC's website.

I admit I have read the data assuming it is right, and if it's not it doesn't surprise me. Very interested to see your current data? is it available for download somewhere?

Yes I have only recently started reading about all this, have tried to be well informed before voicing my opinion, and am not saying that EVERYONE else is uninformed but I do think that SOME of the comments on here are quite unrealistic and unfair or not workable.

Enjoying the discussion though..

[StoneY]

Can someone start a poll to find out how many vehicles we all own?
ie
Motorbike
Bike + car
bike x2 + car
bike + car x2
more than 2 bikes + car
Bike + more than 2 cars

Would be really interesting where we all stand on this

Nice idea - you can make the poll yaself just start a new thread

I have
1x Toyota Caldina (shared ownership)'
3x big bore mootrcycles (my own)
Missus has a gsx250 (hers)
5 vehicles....... I see fuel as a very valid option, also catching the teenager using the lawnmower (the missus son)

Fuel works and provides equity and for a truckie its a business expense and is still likely cheaper than the current commercial levy they pay

[MSTRS]

I admit I have read the data assuming it is right, and if it's not it doesn't surprise me. Very interested to see your current data? is it available for download somewhere?

Yes I have only recently started reading about all this, have tried to be well informed before voicing my opinion, and am not saying that EVERYONE else is uninformed but I do think that SOME of the comments on here are quite unrealistic and unfair or not workable.

Enjoying the discussion though..

There's a lot of us that have almost lived and breathed this problem for 18 months. There is almost nothing we haven't heard or thought about or explored. One thing we have all learned is that ACC and Nick the Prick tell lies. You would do well to remember that whenever you come across any sort of 'official' release from either of them.

[Hellzie]

There's a lot of us that have almost lived and breathed this problem for 18 months. There is almost nothing we haven't heard or thought about or explored. One thing we have all learned is that ACC and Nick the Prick tell lies. You would do well to remember that whenever you come across any sort of 'official' release from either of them.

Coming into this discussion relatively green, and going only by what I have read, I am just saying it as I see it. I am very interested in it and would like to find out more, so if you could point me in the direction of more accurate information, would be much appreciated. Also, I think key word there is "almost nothing" .. you should welcome new voices with new opinions, rather than dismissing them so quickly. Fresh minds often come up with new ideas that haven't been discussed or thought of. I may not be one of them, but then again I might be.

[MSTRS]

Yes, you might. Not flaming any suggestions you may have...UNLESS they are based on info you have garnered from official releases. Such as the 'subsidy' issue. Or even the 18x more likely to have an accident crap. For instance.

Take a week or so to trawl through the ACC forum here. Read everything. Including all the linked reports and studies etc. Then you will know what most of us know.

[oneofsix]

Fuel works and provides equity and for a truckie its a business expense and is still likely cheaper than the current commercial levy they pay

Really? The levy you pay goes up with the distance traveled, more fuel used. Most accidence occur within 5k of home. Therefore the long distance traveler has the lower risk of accident but the higher levy.
I was told a long time ago that a mistake with NZs accident stats was they are based on death per population whereas when you look at deaths per k traveled our rates are average to low.
Also more k's traveled tends to mean more experience and therefore saver operator
:devil2::devil2::devil2::devil2:

[Bald Eagle]

There is never going to be a levy option which satisfies every combination of user / vehicle / km's travelled.

The big issue is to quote from another thread "the difference between equality and equity" when actually all we want is a system that does not discriminate based on some form of risk/fault based formula.

[oneofsix]

all we want is a system that does not discriminate based on some form of risk/fault based formula.

:gob: like the ACC scheme as it was originally planned. :innocent:

[StoneY]

Coming into this discussion relatively green, and going only by what I have read, I am just saying it as I see it. I am very interested in it and would like to find out more, so if you could point me in the direction of more accurate information, would be much appreciated. Also, I think key word there is "almost nothing" .. you should welcome new voices with new opinions, rather than dismissing them so quickly. Fresh minds often come up with new ideas that haven't been discussed or thought of. I may not be one of them, but then again I might be.

Email Dr Charles Lamb - associate Proffessor of Lincoln University and the head of the Australaisian Institute of Motorcycle Studies

He can give you more information
And...just check the numbers with a 10$ warehous calculator

All this info is here on this website as well if you search the ACC campaign section - I am at work and limited to brief responses at present

[martybabe]

Coming into this discussion relatively green, and going only by what I have read, I am just saying it as I see it. I am very interested in it and would like to find out more, so if you could point me in the direction of more accurate information, would be much appreciated. Also, I think key word there is "almost nothing" .. you should welcome new voices with new opinions, rather than dismissing them so quickly. Fresh minds often come up with new ideas that haven't been discussed or thought of. I may not be one of them, but then again I might be.

As you can see from the posts on here it is almost impossible to come up with a plan that suits and is fair to all road users, heaven knows a lot of us have been trying since the tyrannical regime came down so heavy and unjustly on our case.

I for one welcome any new perspectives on the issue but it has to be based on the facts as they are not on the proven bare faced lies of the ACC nick Smith.

Seriously mate, those statistics are falsehoods and propaganda designed to fool the electorate... and it did, Even you as a biker coming to this issue late in the day have taken that data as legitimate and truthful and referenced it as such.

I hope someone can point you in the direction of the legitimate statistics so you can see what we've all been fighting for and hopefully come on board.

Truth is we got shafted majorly and unjustly, proven over and over again, getting TPTB to acknowledge their deceit and correct it so the system is fair to all is one hell of a task.

[StoneY]

I hope someone can point you in the direction of the legitimate statistics so you can see what we've all been fighting for and hopefully come on board.


Supplied with Dr Lambs email in private

I will try find the pdf compressed presentation version from his May 15 presentation of the real analysis by him and his team of PHD's (real ones not like Candor's fictional list)

[Hellzie]

Great thanks for that! Meanwhile I have lots of reading to do of all the threads in the ACC levy campaign section on KB.

[lone_slayer]

Now have my Poll How many vehicles do you have registed?

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/134696-How-many-vehicles-do-you-own

[StoneY]

Now have my Poll How many vehicles do you have registed?

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/134696-How-many-vehicles-do-you-own

Good work...join BRONZ dude we need workers who follow through

:)

[phill-k]

Please explain how the existing system is fairer.

Personally I'd like to see some more balance in the system and a multi faceted collection method, part registration and part fuel, this would then somewhat balance the user pays system, the person running their car for instance only 5000kms won't end up paying as much as the person doing 50,000kms, bike rego would still be greater than cars but then at least as has been stated the off roaders come into the mix, but the more the issue is forced and ACC adapts to the more user pays principle - levies on sport etc the closer and easier it becomes for a rouge government to sell ACC.
Before you all jump up and down and say selling it is a good idea, think about Smiths recent comments on the elective surgery issue, at present ACC win 65 - 70% of the claims against it taken through to appeal, the poor bastards that have a doctor tell them one thing and then find that to actually get their rightful compensation or operation they have to endure a court case places a hell of a lot of pressure on the claimant, Smith is happy with this scenario and won't order an investigation into ACC's practises until such time as they start losing 50% of their court battles, is this any way to have to have your supposed rights sorted out under the act, why don't we just go back to suing everyone.

[MSTRS]

Personally I'd like to see some more balance in the system and a multi faceted collection method, part registration and part fuel, this would then somewhat balance the user pays system, the person running their car for instance only 5000kms won't end up paying as much as the person doing 50,000kms, bike rego would still be greater than cars but then at least as has been stated the off roaders come into the mix, but the more the issue is forced and ACC adapts to the more user pays principle - levies on sport etc the closer and easier it becomes for a rouge government to sell ACC.
Before you all jump up and down and say selling it is a good idea, think about Smiths recent comments on the elective surgery issue, at present ACC win 65 - 70% of the claims against it taken through to appeal, the poor bastards that have a doctor tell them one thing and then find that to actually get their rightful compensation or operation they have to endure a court case places a hell of a lot of pressure on the claimant, Smith is happy with this scenario and won't order an investigation into ACC's practises until such time as they start losing 50% of their court battles, is this any way to have to have your supposed rights sorted out under the act, why don't we just go back to suing everyone.

Please explain how this would be different to how the system is now ...

[phill-k]

I'm not in a position at present to work out the exact numbers but obviously if the total levy for this part of ACC is 10 and at present 6 is collected via rego and 4 via fuel, we still need to collect the 10 thus if the fuel levy was increased and we collected 7 then obviously we would still need the three from the rego and this would still be proportioned across the risk, but taking into account such things as hybrid vehicles ect. Bikes would still pay proportional more but everyone would see a reduction in the fixed cost and thus the fuel side of it would capture more users.

However as I stated previously this would need to be equitable so that it didn't increase the cost above and beyond what is fair to say heavy transport operators.

Obviously working the numbers would be difficult but it could be done to create the same level of levy but spreading the cost more equitably around those users such as boaties, off roaders ect.

[MSTRS]

I'm not in a position at present to work out the exact numbers ...

I don't mean to sound condescending, but some of us did just that some time ago.
Currently, the levy on petrol is 9.9c/l. There is none on diesel.
Using the average kms, on an average vehicle - if I remember right - the amount extra on fuel would be 7.7c/l. That would be sufficient to drop the levy on petrol driven vehicle regos altogether. Then add off-roaders, boaties and all petrol driven tools...*
I'd suggest rounding the total up to 20c/l on petrol and adding 10c/l to diesel at the pump.
Sorted.




* ACC could be accused of double-dipping on the wage account for leisure injuries, though.

[mashman]

Broken record on the turn table, s s s s s s s s s s s s s single levy... You can get injured anywhere at any time to any degree, tis the luck of the draw...

We pay for fuel from our wages, we pay for our rego from our wages, we pay levy on our wages, why not get ACC to do some calculations based on what the total bill for last year was (which is all it boils down to anyway :yes:, oh and remember the profit they made too)... wonder what an extra 1.5 cents per $100 would cover... t'would keep admin costs down too.

[Brian d marge]

Its not about being fair , its all about money

Acc isnt broke we all know that , a tax on fuel is fair , we all now that ,,, but ya can sell to investors , if they cant own it , no you need short term gains , to make the balance sheet look good

So you run it as a business model, ( last time checked business was there to make a profit , oh and do what ever is needed to make that profit )


If life was fair Milk would be ... affordable :facepalm: ( in NZ of all places )

Nope this isn't about what is right and fair , this is all about a few people making money

and time people took control of NZ ,,,,by ,,, doing ,,, SOMETHING ,

Hell even I have correspondence with NZ politicians and I don even live there

Stephen

PS the opposition haven't said boo on a few interesting issues

Coal , under a nice forest , dig it up sell it, oh who needs coal ...the Chinese ..and please have half of the company as well ..

Dairy ...

Acc, haven't seen anything from the left on this

and blackball ( south island ) has been sold to a Swedish developer )

no I made that last one up .....:innocent:

[admenk]

Good work...join BRONZ dude we need workers who follow through

:)

Always a danger after a curry :shit:

[mashman]

Its not about being fair , its all about money


sorry... i keep forgetting that :)... do you think that ACC would consider trying to work towards the Woodhouse principles again (or at least an up to date version)? :shifty:

[MSTRS]

Not without a change (again) in the legislation...

[mashman]

... and/or a change in the board again :)... I would dearly love a crack at making ACC work again... it ain't like anyone would complain about it :shifty:

[ynot slow]

Remember the people when at ACC leaflet handouts who said "don't own a bike,no worries for me"when we tried to explain increases in levies for bikes meant most levies would rise?Well looking on trade me last night I flicked to the community notice board saw this thread WHEW! MASSIVE ACC INCREASES IN CAR REGISTRATION,people whinging about increases in ACC levies,very tempted to say WE TOLD YA,nobody listened.

[MSTRS]

...,nobody listened.

They seldom do...

[yungatart]

...very tempted to say WE TOLD YA,
I have actually done that...told them I had no sympathy for them, either.


They seldom do...
They still aren't....

[riffer]

You're taking the wrong tack guys. I've had a number of people at work bitching about their relicencing fees (they drive diesels).

I've simply agreed with them that it is indeed shocking and unwarranted, and suggested that what they could do is organise a drive to Parliament to protest to the Politicians.

The general reply to that one seems to be "touche"...

[Owl]

I've simply agreed with them that it is indeed shocking and unwarranted, and suggested that what they could do is organise a drive to Parliament to protest to the Politicians.

I would, but can't afford the diesel/RUC etc!:facepalm:

[wingrider]

Spoke Direct to Darren Hughes tonight. Asked him to take the following matter to Phil and co.
Nick Smith has stated on TV to a reporter that ACC is facing a $370m payout for claims covering the CHCH Eathquake. When asked how that would afect levies he stated that ACC has an $11m surplus so the payouts would not be affected. He went onto say that as all payouts are future proofed by this surplus and that it would take 3 earthquakes of the same significance befor having an impact on ACC funds. I note this is the same ammount of events required to have an impact on EQC payouts as well.
My question was. at the rally was this ammount of $11m not quoted by us and we were informed we did not have the facts right? Were we not told that ACC was broke and opening it up to privatisation was the only saviour?

Darren informed me that Phil and co have picked up on numerous comments made in the past few days regarding ACC's financial staus appear to confirm that the public was deliberatly lied to by Nick Smith and that the matter was being investigated.

I am not trying to trivalise the destruction that has occured in CHCH, not would I want to see anyone who has suffered denied what they are legally entitled to from ACC, but feel a we need to now rise up and ask why the facts as we knew them to be at the time of the rally were denied and yet now are the same ammounts being given to the public as security to ensure there is enough money in the kitty for these expected payouts.

I put it to Darren that if our case was proven then the matter needs to be esculated to the speaker of the house as a case of deliberate missleading by Nick Smith.

[Brian d marge]

because the spin doctors are at work in order to privatize ACC

very insightful question unfortunately the answer is simple

Stephen

[riffer]

Because the ACC coffers are ringfenced into different areas. When ACC said they were broke regarding motorcycles, what they meant was that the amount of money they had allocated into the motor vehicle fund wasn't enough to cover could potentially be spent.

Apparently...

[StoneY]

Good questions Wingrider.

And its 11b not m that surplus mate
As Riffer states the individual allocations get ringfenced on a yearly projected budget
I still oppose us paying more but would have been a fool to not accept the recent minsiterial appointment onto the MSAC (Motorcycle Safety Advisory Council)

That only manages the 30$ ringfenced MSL contribution, and has no influence on any other matters

BRONZ Wellington is having semi-regular meetings with the ACC spokeperons from each of the opposition parties throughout this year, and it may pay to ask us the questions you wish to be posed to the ACC spokes for Labour.
Happens he is my local MP Chris Hipkins.

It's not likely a focus of Phil himself at the moment considering all the issue's he faces in an election year

PM me for a more direct communication path mate

Brent

[MSTRS]

If Nick the Prick is now owning up to a figure of $11b (which was the figure we had 15 months ago, and ACC has increased that surplus in the intervening time), then can we assume that recent reports stating the surplus is $14b are closer to the truth?

[StoneY]

Well Riffer and me went to the 'big house' and caught up with a few pollie's

Cant say what their total plan is but it appears a fairer option than the current one
Directions they are looking are far more palatable, and more in line with the original ACC scheme, although we did recieve an admission they are likely to stick with pre-funding models, as due to the curve of inflation, pay as you go is no longer a realistic model

One major thing is tho, the opposition oppose any version of privatising ANY part of the scheme, thats a bonus at least.........

[oldrider]

One of the reasons I no longer belong to Ulysses is because of the image they try to project!

Articles like this leave me cold. http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/motoring/4868641/Baby-boomer-bikers-ride-on

Patched up Harley wannabees that really like the macho bad arse "bikes are dangerous" image sucking up to ACC and their stinking bullshit statistics!

Maybe it's just me but that's what I read into the article and it pisses me off! :yes:

I ride a bike because I think they are "safer" than any other vehicle on the road, it is a legitimate, legal and necessary form of transport, not a flaming unnecessary expensive toy! :facepalm:

[Hopeful Bastard]

One of the reasons I no longer belong to Ulysses is because of the image they try to project!

Articles like this leave me cold. http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/motoring/4868641/Baby-boomer-bikers-ride-on


Good read... But a bit confused at this paragraph in there...


According to 2008-10 police data for the Nelson Bays region, of 142 accidents involving motorcyclists, police deemed them to be more likely at fault in 124 of them: 87 per cent. Forty-six accidents (32 per cent) involved cars which failed to give way or "did not see/look".


Is someone bad at maths, or am i misunderstanding things at 4.30 am?
87% + 32% = 119%
142 + 46 = 188
:blink:

[rastuscat]

One of the reasons I no longer belong to Ulysses is because of the image they try to project!

Maybe it's just me

Yes it is.

Believing that yours is the only way to enjoy riding is BS.

[rastuscat]

Good read... But a bit confused at this paragraph in there...

Is someone bad at maths, or am i misunderstanding things at 4.30 am?
87% + 32% = 119%
142 + 46 = 188
:blink:

Some crashes are caused by two people.

[MSTRS]

Some crashes are caused by two people.

But the fault would have to be shared equally.
How do you ratify the biker was 'more likely at fault' when the car failed to give way?

[StoneY]

Its obvious to me that the fact the motorcycle fleet, nationwide, having trippled in size is being conveniantly overlooked for the sake of creating statistics to suit a purpose.

I do my utmost to make this issue known to TPTB within my 'roles' I hold but ... I get ignored
:angry:

[Pedrostt500]

Me thinks that the Enemy will try for another push accross nomans land towards the end of 2012.
A Motorcycle Event in the Welly region for Mid October ish would be a good jumping off platform to revisit, those who think that we have a short memory for their dirty tricks, and under hand ways.
My thoughts of an Event for this time would be an Expo of all things bright and shiny in the Motorcycle world, from all Makes, Accessory Importers, and local Manufacturers, including all the various branches of motorcycling in NZ, both off and on road.
Just a Thought.

[Brian d marge]

Me thinks that the Enemy will try for another push accross nomans land towards the end of 2012.
A Motorcycle Event in the Welly region for Mid October ish would be a good jumping off platform to revisit, those who think that we have a short memory for their dirty tricks, and under hand ways.
My thoughts of an Event for this time would be an Expo of all things bright and shiny in the Motorcycle world, from all Makes, Accessory Importers, and local Manufacturers, including all the various branches of motorcycling in NZ, both off and on road.
Just a Thought.

tis a good Idea , combine a show and protest .....

Hope it happens, but I wont be holding my breath

Stephen

[StoneY]

Today is the 2 year anniversary of the BIKEOI
Start planning for next year now ans who knows what we could achieve

[Maha]

2 x 0 = ?

[Pedrostt500]

My thinking, is a Two Wheeled Expo, Yep even invite the Cyclists along, the Expo would be a good non political event, at say for convenience, at the West Pac Trust Stadium.
But the real reason is to have an Event that interacts with the Public, and also allows various groups with in the Whole Motorcycling Spectrum to check out what each other is all about, and with in this growing the Motorcycling Community as a whole, wich is good for us as Motorcyclists, & it is good for the Motorcycling Industry. I would even all ow ACC a spot so they can say what they are about, ( yep I can hear the grumblings of some now, but hey can't keep everybody happy all the time.)
October is a good time for this as it allows the Bike and Accessory Importers and Wholesalers to show off their Shiney bits for the new Summer Season, and promote their Retailer networks through out the Country.
Now the Trickey bit how to pay for it, and set it up, I have $5.00 and a squashed minty.

[riffer]

2 x 0 = ?

You are obviously forgetting September 1993.

We rode our bikes to Parliament back then and filled up the grounds completely with motorcycles.

[Brian d marge]

You are obviously forgetting September 1993.

We rode our bikes to Parliament back then and filled up the grounds completely with motorcycles.
yup fogot that , I have the memory of the great unwashed, or a goldfish , which ever is the longest .....

Ive stocked up on arse lube ,,, if national get in ....a reaming we will go , a reaming we will go ...hey ho a merry o a reaming we will go ....

all together now .....!

<<<<my arse hurts

Stephen

[oneofsix]

is this the strategy we should have adopted, a few raids on Nick and John's meetings? Bike gear works as well in those circumstances as camo.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6016852/Men-in-camouflage-gear-spoil-meeting

[caspernz]

There is truth in statistics. The cost to ACC of helping a motorcyclist recover from an accident is way higher than a tintop pilot. So as well as making our voice heard in a public manner, we can all do our bit to work on reducing the cost to ACC of our chosen mode of transport.

As much as I am a motorcyclist myself, I'm also a professional truck driver, and even with rose coloured glasses I have to say that motorcyclists in general take the most risks and break the most rules. I'm all for loud protests, but lets improve our image in the publics' eye a little as well huh?

[Pedrostt500]

I would just like us to be prepared for another attempt by the powers that be, to try to alienate us, as an excuse to privateise ACC.
Some times I'm guilty of wearing my stupid hat when out on my bike, and having to think to myself "what was I thinking or not thinking", when I have a near miss on the bike, the only person who has my interests and physical well being at heart, when out riding is myself.

[StoneY]

There is truth in statistics. The cost to ACC of helping a motorcyclist recover from an accident is way higher than a tintop pilot.

Nope.

The figures we found in 09 as we prepared for BIKOI were that car victims cost a lot more medically

Also there are a fuckload more of them getting hurt due to the fleet size.

Where Bikers cost a tad more in the ACC annual report and all the data I saw, was the higher income earning 'new riders' like CEO's and Production managers etc..... the salary compensation.

Bikers tend to be earners you see.......

The medical costs are about even, a tad HIGHER on the cage side in fact (coz if ya cage is fucked up enough to get you REALLY hurt, its BAD!)

[MSTRS]

Nope.

The figures we found in 09 as we prepared for BIKOI were that car victims cost a lot more medically

Also there are a fuckload more of them getting hurt due to the fleet size.

The medical costs are about even, a tad HIGHER on the cage side in fact (coz if ya cage is fucked up enough to get you REALLY hurt, its BAD!)
There may be more car regos contributing to the ACC pool, but there's actually a good point in there...in that a car also has the potential to injure many more in a single event.
There is also merit in the idea that each car pays a levy based on the number of seats (potential injuries)...



Where Bikers cost a tad more in the ACC annual report and all the data I saw, was the higher income earning 'new riders' like CEO's and Production managers etc..... the salary compensation.

Bikers tend to be earners you see.......

This is the one that really twists my knickers.
High earners pay more into the Leisure fund (whatever it's called) BUT...all costs from a motor vehicle crash are paid for out of the Motor Fund. Including income compensation.
This is a double-dipping scam of the highest magnitude and every bike rego is paying for it.

Is this sufficient to get people off their arses (again) ???

[StoneY]

Is this sufficient to get people off their arses (again) ???

Tag, your it.

If you do wanna re start a protest campaign John I am there buddy...as an individual that is (I am only another member of BRONZ nowadays)

I burned enough calories over the last two years, happy to follow someone else on the campaign trail this time.

Whats your thinking, BIKOI 2?
Seriously mate, if you wanna start something, I am keen. What angle do you think we can try that hasn't already is the question mate.

[StoneY]

is this the strategy we should have adopted, a few raids on Nick and John's meetings? Bike gear works as well in those circumstances as camo.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6016852/Men-in-camouflage-gear-spoil-meeting

Well, text me when ya ready to roll, I will be there :)

[NONONO]

nuther one here.

[Maha]

is this the strategy we should have adopted, a few raids on Nick and John's meetings? Bike gear works as well in those circumstances as camo.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6016852/Men-in-camouflage-gear-spoil-meeting

There was a mild attempt to disrupt Mr Key at a Sth Akl venue once, but security put paid to that and those that were there were hardly even noticed..I was on the very ride (pre Bikoi) to John Key's office in Kumeu...9-10 of us went and the end result was...one slightly put out office lady.
Better success was to be had at the Akorana Yatch Club, but once again, no follow up.
We entered the meeting (where Nick was guest speaker) in an orderly fashion. Were not told to leave at anytime.

No point in targeting Nick Smith any longer, he has moved on.

[MSTRS]

Tag, your it.

If you do wanna re start a protest campaign John I am there buddy...as an individual that is (I am only another member of BRONZ nowadays)

I burned enough calories over the last two years, happy to follow someone else on the campaign trail this time.

Whats your thinking, BIKOI 2?
Seriously mate, if you wanna start something, I am keen. What angle do you think we can try that hasn't already is the question mate.

Actually, I think we'd get more mileage out of having a question put to the house re the Income double-dip scam AND if anyone knows a journo that will do a (national press) feature on it.
As for starting a new protest, I never stopped. Just went a bit quiet perhaps. Also, I'm not a leader when it comes to that sort of thing.

[StoneY]

Actually, I think we'd get more mileage out of having a question put to the house re the Income double-dip scam AND if anyone knows a journo that will do a (national press) feature on it.
As for starting a new protest, I never stopped. Just went a bit quiet perhaps. Also, I'm not a leader when it comes to that sort of thing.

I burned my 'little black book' after the last reporter I trusted burned me on the Wellington parking stories in STUFF mate.

Ask Riffer for a honest journo - he has some contacts, and knows the traps too.

[DEVVIL]

nuther one here.
:Punk::Punk:Still here :2guns: