Gareth Morgan in the Herald on ACC levies for bikers

[caseye]

"And I was a freezing worker for longer than I've been a plod - thar's where i learned my cynicism, tact and subtleness..."

Yeah Right, Tui's anyone?
The disease doesn't start until ewes becomes one.

[mashman]

The reality, from a half-wit, is simple and it has been said over and over. People do not go out with the specific purpose of crashing. In fact they go out and do exactly the same things they've done for years, riding the same roads at the same speeds, trying to be as careful as they can and believing that they are within their capability... and why wouldn't they? especially if they've 99.9% of their riding time upright and on 2 wheels (in some cases 1, meh). If they're unlucky they'll have an accident. Oh dear, I dropped the A bomb.

Much to the amusement of a half-wit, some people believe that this can be legislated for :facepalm:, some people believe that accidents can be avoided :facepalm: and now we have people "thinking" that because we can save ?$2.00? per week we'll suddenly become better riders? :facepalm: All of these positions fail to address the obvious flaw. If we haven't crashed yet, or even for a while, do you really think that we're going to change our riding "style"? Even us half-wits understand this concept. By all means try to stop people from crashing and I wish you luck, but if accident rates come down, I'm guessing that that'll be an accident or a serious amount of luck given some of the situations we dodge each day.

As for financial penalty. Might I ask how many people haven't paid their regos in the last few years? Do you really believe that hitting the "bad" riders in the pocket is going to do any good? or will they ignore it and keep on riding? As with trying to prevent accidents, it's a noble pursuit, but it's pissing in the wind and calling it funny tasting lemonade.

That's the reality as far as I can see... but I'm a half-wit. However I do agree Gareth on 1 thing. Money doesn't grow on trees, it's plucked out of thin air and sold on at an attractive interest rate.

[scumdog]

. In fact they go out and do exactly the same things they've done for years, riding the same roads at the same speeds, trying to be as careful as they can and believing that they are within their capability...
.


Some make no obvious effort to be safe, some don't even know how.

And at a risk of sounding like Katman, more than a few grossly over-estimate their 'capabilities'

[mashman]

Some make no obvious effort to be safe, some don't even know how.

And at a risk of sounding like Katman, more than a few grossly over-estimate their 'capabilities'

Very true. But how do you stop these people from riding in such a manner when they're not always crashing. Perhaps a bin a year is acceptable. As I said, if 99.9% of our time is being upright on two wheels, where's the need to change anything that we do?



at a given speed a rider normally wrecks himself more than a car-driver does at that speed.

That made me chuckle, cheers. A serious incident is a serious incident.

[Kickaha]

Perhaps a bin a year is acceptable.

A bin a year? put down the crack pipe bro, I'd consider a bin a decade to many

[Scuba_Steve]

Some make no obvious effort to be safe, some don't even know how.

And at a risk of sounding like Katman, more than a few grossly over-estimate their 'capabilities'

'tis true but if anyone thinks financial raping is going to change any of that, they should deposit all their money into my account immediately... it'll save the world!

[mashman]

A bin a year? put down the crack pipe bro, I'd consider a bin a decade to many

Aye, a bin at all is a bloody shocker... but my point was that a bin a year may be acceptable for some, however misguided that may seem to you sensible people.

[scumdog]

That made me chuckle, cheers. A serious incident is a serious incident.

Generally it takes less of a speed/impact to make a bike incident 'serious'.

But I guess you knew that...

[mashman]

Generally it takes less of a speed/impact to make a bike incident 'serious'.

But I guess you knew that...

I did know that. Is there a golden speed that will definitely result in a serious injury for a motorcyclist?

[nerrrd]

So bringing my bludging half-a-wit to bear again, and taking into account the comments I've read over the years from wiser and more experienced riders than myself (a category into which I would certainly include you, Gareth, if you are still reading) on here and elsewhere, there doesn't seem to be any mystery about what needs be improved to help reduce motorcycle crash statistics: basically it comes down to attitude and ability.

So far I'd say increasing ACC levies has done nothing to improve either, has it? All it's done for me is prompt me to sell my car.

Over the last 3 years since I started riding again I've spent over a grand on training courses and they've all been brilliant, and I fully intend to do more - unless of course I can't afford it due to increases in other costs.

Of the group ones I've attended I can't think of a single instance where someone at the end if the day has said "well that was a complete waste of time" - everyone seems to really enjoy it, and come out of it with a great attitude.

So why not encourage people to do more of this kind of thing? Instead of punishing them at the outset simply for having the temerity to ride a motorcycle? Carrots always work much better than sticks in my experience. And they taste better.

[oldrider]

The Gov't don't give a fat rats arse if every motorbike disappeared overnight.

Binning riders cost too much to fix up and it doesn't matter WHO causes the crash - at a given speed a rider normally wrecks himself more than a car-driver does at that speed.

That's the reality folks, enjoy your ride.

Errr .... thinks, on that kinda reasoning it would pay to make murder legal cause it costs ACC less than fixing up assault victims! :eek5:

[GrayWolf]

Sheesh.
Laphroaig...
You Sir,
for THAT heinous suggestion, and for even THINKING it, should be relegated and forced to drink Teachers, or Bell's (whisky??) for the next decade! :spanking:

[HenryDorsetCase]

Errr .... thinks, on that kinda reasoning it would pay to make murder legal cause it costs ACC less than fixing up assault victims! :eek5:

are you from Fielding?

[Flip]

Well I think that mr Morgan has shown us his true nature and is back pedaling very quickly to try to dig him self out of the hole he is is.

[avgas]

If all you pillocks bitching about your thirty fucking dollars put as much effort into figuring out ways to reduce our crash stats we'd have had the problem solved long ago.
I highly doubt it.
That would mean there would be no ACC on motorcycle rego. Are you saying that there is only ACC on things that a dangerous?

[avgas]

risk of sounding like Katman, more than a few grossly over-estimate their 'capabilities'
Lets keep the Police out of this bro - they do a good job every now and then :lol:

[oldrider]

Morgan's wife is actually the "real motorcyclist" in the family :ride: ... Gareth is more just a follower with means! :scooter: (Are you prepared to be lead by a follower?) :no:

[rustic101]

If all you pillocks bitching about your thirty fucking dollars

All due respect Katman, for me this is not about the money, I am not able to speak for others though. My gripe is about how poorly run MOTONZ is. How ineffective it engages and communicates with individuals it claims to represents, a clear lack of added value they have failed to provide. I'll stop as I could go on.

MOTONZ is a Political tool with Political motives and under that regime will never success other than to create barriers. The only success MOTONZ has achieved to date is divide the motorcycle community and distract from the real issues. Both of which ACC and the Govt will be bloody happy with.

The question is, can it be fixed? The answer is - Yes!

The two primary road blocks to this occurring are; ACC and their intent, and the lack of leadership and independence from the Chair of MOTONZ.

The sooner people drop the issue of the extra money and statistics the sooner action plans can be put in place to improve and provide added value to our road user group.

[Katman]

The sooner people drop the issue of the extra money and statistics the sooner action plans can be put in place to improve and provide added value to our road user group.

And that's the crux of it.

MotoNZ is just a sideshow.

The main issue is getting motorcyclists to wake up to the fact that the only way forward lies in their own hands.

Forget ACC, forget MotoNZ, forget statistics and concentrate on cleaning up our own back yard.

[rustic101]

And that's the crux of it.

MotoNZ is just a sideshow.

The main issue is getting motorcyclists to wake up to the fact that the only way forward lies in their own hands.

Forget ACC, forget MotoNZ, forget statistics and concentrate on cleaning up our own back yard.

Whole heartedly agree.

[bogan]

And that's the crux of it.

MotoNZ is just a sideshow.

The main issue is getting motorcyclists to wake up to the fact that the only way forward lies in their own hands.

Forget ACC, forget MotoNZ, forget statistics and concentrate on cleaning up our own back yard.

Ok, say somebody decide to clean up their own back yard, is there a list of things to do to improve ones own roadcraft, ordered by priority and effectiveness, backed up with relevant info? Honest question, and perhaps one that should get its own thread? The attitude is an important first step, but making the next steps as easy as possible is surely a good thing as well.

[avgas]

Forget ACC, forget MotoNZ, forget statistics and concentrate on cleaning up our own back yard.
I suspect this has already occurred. It may just be me - but I am noticing far less motorbikes on the road (even for a winter).
When I think about my bike has not moved for 2 months now.


ACC is stating the levies will go down when the injury rate goes down (http://www.acc.co.nz/for-individuals/motorcyclists/index.htm#P56_2865)
"How can I help reduce the levies I pay?
The best way for you to reduce the levies you pay is to do your bit to reduce the injuries that are happening. For riding advice visit www.rideforever.co.nz or www.scootersurvival.co.nz."


However, if my beliefs are correct, and the latest stats show that in fact there have been less injuries on motorbikes in the last year.......that ACC will not decrease the levy. Which means the only way this gets cheaper for people is they give up riding altogether.
So I guess the writing is on the walls. Safe riding is irrelevant.
Pay up - or walk. Either way riding a motorbike is going to remain permanently expensive from now on.

Or you could simply break the law, not pay the rego. But there will be a time (unless its privatized) where no rego = no ACC cover. Which is probably what Mr Morgan is looking for. I mean an economists worst nightmare is the freeloader principal.

[mashman]

Or you could simply break the law, not pay the rego. But there will be a time (unless its privatized) where no rego = no ACC cover. Which is probably what Mr Morgan is looking for. I mean an economists worst nightmare is the freeloader principal.

I suppose situations like this (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14231966/thai-hospital-refuses-care-for-kiwi-man/) would become more prevalent. (like these sorts of things aren't already happening... no cover for existing injuries for example).

:rofl:@bludging freeloaders... oh noes, people getting something for nothing, it shouldn't be tolerated.

[tri boy]

I mean an economists worst nightmare is the freeloader principal.

But, he is freeloading of us.
Him and his mates who are funded by rego fees.
So, is he a economist, or a parasite. (guess they can be one in the same)

[Katman]

However, if my beliefs are correct, and the latest stats show that in fact there have been less injuries on motorbikes in the last year.......that ACC will not decrease the levy.


Even if the ACC levy never comes down, if our crash rate drops we've still won.

Our aim has to be not giving them cause to increase the levy further.

[Ocean1]

Ok, say somebody decide to clean up their own back yard, is there a list of things to do to improve ones own roadcraft, ordered by priority and effectiveness, backed up with relevant info?

Dude, better men than you have asked that question of Skatman over the years.

Many many times.

He's never fronted.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Dude, better men than you have asked that question of Skatman over the years.

Many many times.

He's never fronted.


You would think all that steam would be good for something. :scratch:








Anyone have any ironing that needs doing? :lol:

[Katman]

Dude, better men than you have asked that question of Skatman over the years.

Many many times.

He's never fronted.

That's half the problem.

Too many clowns thinking the problem will be solved with a magic wand.

[Bass]

It seems to me that we are all missing the point here. Consider this.
ACC was set up to be no fault and funded by motorists and employers. This means that if you have an accident, you are medically treated without regard to whose fault it was and the cost is borne by motorists and employers. It was done this way because the means of extracting money from these groups already existed and for almost no other reasons. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing.
But surely it follows, that putting the payers into risk assessed groups and charging them accordingly makes absolutely no sense when they are paying for everybody. How do you justify categorising the payers when whole groups of consumers are not levied at all???

I have read most of Gareth' comments as well. Much of what he says is logically correct but not relevant. He is not comparing apples with apples. He effectively admits that e.g. rugby players as a group cost about as much as bikers (in very general terms) but then effectively excuses them by saying that because there are more of them, the individual risk is less and so the comparason is not fair. I cry bullshit! Of course it's fair. ACC are considering us as a group and acting against us as a group. It is the group that is being held to account and so we are entirely fair in making comparasons with the money consumption of other groups.

It is the very fact that some of these other (expensive) groups consume as much money or more money than bikers, but are not levied, that makes risk categorising the payers untenable.

It seems to me that taxing motorists and employers to fund ACC is a pragmatic and practical way to raise funding because I am unable to suggest something better. But risk categorising them in the name of fairness while letting whole groups go untapped is just a logical nonsense.


One further thing - if you accept that the people who pay should be risk categorised and I don't, but I accept that it's unlikely to change, then Gareth is right in one thing; we should be able to reduce our individual levy by improving our individual performance. Employers have had that latitude for years and we are now effectively lumped with them.

[cheshirecat]

Training at test level going right up to UK Police bike stuff for the advanced license. Grades of license giving rego reduction according to grade. Make it real skills based not the PC attitude,1950's era, patronising, badly written, dangerous, muddled thinking, contradictory in parts, out of touch, cuckoo land. unintelligent existing test and road code we have.

[bogan]

That's half the problem.

Too many clowns thinking the problem will be solved with a magic wand.

What, like some clown thinking that just a change in attitude will fix it?

I didn't mean some box ticking list, but something that covers the basics, up to the advanced, in such a way as to encourage rider skill development. I guess maybe its one of those things that there will never be a consensus on, but something has to be better than nothing shirley?

[caseye]

This thread unfortunately proves the Govt's theory that once we as bikers stop being pissed off, we're all pusys.

Oh we're real good at giving one an other a hard time but cut the cheese and ask you to step up inhale and do something about it and watch the lot of you run screaming yelling it's not fair.

Katmans message is valid and applies to one hell of a lot of people who think they are good safe riders, when patently they are not.
This thread also raises the issue amongst ourselves here in KB at least, that so many are prepared to sit on the sidelines and snipe while making no constructive contribution to what could be a damn good informative discussion/debate about what we( you know, us, the motorcyclists) are doing to help ourselves.
bogan, Ocean, Katman has this time put forward a notion, one which was either overlooked or has been deliberately ignored in order to score bloody points, on you both for perpetuating the myth.
If just this small number of KB inhabitants could thrash out a clear course of action and then get someone to run with it , in the certain knowledge that they would not be shot in the back by their own kind we'd have made a start.
How about we actually read what is written, take it on board, leave all the preconceived ideas on the floor and reply with something that can be thought about by the others not simply reacted to.
Well?

2c's worth.

We get organised, we put forward someone from within the biking community who we can all support without bipartisan allegiances and attitudes getting in the way.
We start cleaning up our own back yard, starting with getting the attitude of I'm OK Jack and I will ride anyway I see fit no matter who else it might affect. Off the face of the planet.

Moving on to getting organised and helping trained motorcycle instructors to be well known and patronised by new and returning/refresher types.We make a case for govt to continue (as they have through ACC and other smaller organisations that support advancing riders skill sets through practical instruction) to be given on going funding so all new riders actually have to attend thier courses and MUST Pass before being allowed out on the big wide dangerous roads.

We prove to govt that we are serious and then we make another case for lowering the present ACC rates for bikes and giving control of what is laughingly called MOTO NZ, a group representing all motorcyclists in NZ, to actual elected by "US" types who can better represent actual real riders , not weekend warriors .
Note, I did not say Giving "Back" control, we never had it and it was never meant for us motorcyclists to be involved.

How about these for some starters?

Can anyone out there see why although time consuming this sort of approach would not work given time, effort and real commitment.

[Ocean1]

bogan, Ocean, Katman has this time put forward a notion, one which was either overlooked or has been deliberately ignored in order to score bloody points, on you both for perpetuating the myth.

In this thread?

I looked. Hard. You're gona have to help me here, all I see is abuse and derision.

Seriously. Not a single positive coherent suggestion.

[Voltaire]

That's half the problem.

Too many clowns thinking the problem will be solved with a magic wand.


http://www.safetymoment.net/wp-content/uploads/crestockimages/1363605-ms.jpg

its our own fault....fffst
its our own fault....fffst
its out own fault...fssst.
Clean up the yard...fsst
Clean up the yard...fsst
Clean up the yard...fsst
Selves to blame....
Selves to blame....
over and over and over and over and over......:thud:

[bogan]

In this thread?

I looked. Hard. You're gona have to help me here, all I see is abuse and derision.

Seriously. Not a single positive coherent suggestion.

Yeh, I'd be intersting in seeing this suggestion also.


If just this small number of KB inhabitants could thrash out a clear course of action and then get someone to run with it , in the certain knowledge that they would not be shot in the back by their own kind we'd have made a start.
How about we actually read what is written, take it on board, leave all the preconceived ideas on the floor and reply with something that can be thought about by the others not simply reacted to.

Its the running with it that is a big burden, and you and I both know, it's not a smooth ride! I think a good first step would be to answer the fuck out of the question I put forward before. "What are the most important things for riders with the drive for self improvement to do?" I think there is a more effective answer than go to training days, per individual I'm sure plenty of training days are the best value for time, however we don't all have access to these, and there seems to be a lot of plan B literature, that can be a bit daunting by the range to choose from. Is this a worthwhile thing to work on do you think? or would it just be adding some confusion to an already complex problem?

[flyingcrocodile46]

I think MotoNZ should hire really cool actors like Justin Beeber and Lady Gaga to make a TV series about really cool people who ride motorcycles really safely while providing public safety messages about safe riding, safe sex and the evils of alcohol, drugs and tobacco. That's what I'd do if I had the Lamingtons.

Either that or eat them all while watching peep shows.

[GrayWolf]

Yeh, I'd be intersting in seeing this suggestion also.



Its the running with it that is a big burden, and you and I both know, it's not a smooth ride! I think a good first step would be to answer the fuck out of the question I put forward before. "What are the most important things for riders with the drive for self improvement to do?" I think there is a more effective answer than go to training days, per individual I'm sure plenty of training days are the best value for time, however we don't all have access to these, and there seems to be a lot of plan B literature, that can be a bit daunting by the range to choose from. Is this a worthwhile thing to work on do you think? or would it just be adding some confusion to an already complex problem?

I'd agree that the running and organising is going to be the biggest issue. The course content, or levels of skill required to pass is really already written and the systems already developed. There are/were various organisations in the UK since the 1980's.. Star rider was a very popular one in the London area, RAC/ACU ran courses, and there is the current ones that are aided and run by Police Motorcyclists.. Taking that information we are already 'ahead' in developing training programs, what we really need is 'High level trainers' to teach Tutors/Mentors and to 'peer observe' to keep standards to the correct levels.
My guess is the 'weekend warriors' will of course 'not need' said training, as they are all Rossi clones, and only ride in good weather and for a few hours on a Sunday morning/afternoon. That would likely account for a good 50% of riders, then there are the commuters and 'lifetime/everyday' riders. Probably they are the 'groups' that will come to these training courses on a voluntary basis. Unless we DO introduce a stepped license system, and gain 'rewards' for standardised improved levels of skill in riding. How do I know that the weekend warriors wont attend voluntary courses? they never did when I was doing them in the UK, wasn't 'cool' for sprot bikers to be seen in a 'gaggle' of riders doing things slow and sensible.

[bogan]

I'd agree that the running and organising is going to be the biggest issue. The course content, or levels of skill required to pass is really already written and the systems already developed. There are/were various organisations in the UK since the 1980's.. Star rider was a very popular one in the London area, RAC/ACU ran courses, and there is the current ones that are aided and run by Police Motorcyclists.. Taking that information we are already 'ahead' in developing training programs, what we really need is 'High level trainers' to teach Tutors/Mentors and to 'peer observe' to keep standards to the correct levels.
My guess is the 'weekend warriors' will of course 'not need' said training, as they are all Rossi clones, and only ride in good weather and for a few hours on a Sunday morning/afternoon. That would likely account for a good 50% of riders, then there are the commuters and 'lifetime/everyday' riders. Probably they are the 'groups' that will come to these training courses on a voluntary basis. Unless we DO introduce a stepped license system, and gain 'rewards' for standardised improved levels of skill in riding. How do I know that the weekend warriors wont attend voluntary courses? they never did when I was doing them in the UK, wasn't 'cool' for sprot bikers to be seen in a 'gaggle' of riders doing things slow and sensible.

Agreed, which is why I think what is missing, is something between the nitty gritty of the techniques the courses teach, and the vague interest in self improvement. Something to provoke riders into thinking about what things they need to focus on; tools for critical evaluation so they can decide what nitty gritty techniques to improve with either the aid of a rider skills course or well written literature.

[nerrrd]

Removing the it's-all-ACC's-fault factor from the equation, my concern is that the motorcycling industry in New Zealand is in crisis and needs urgent help or it may expire altogether.

Maybe there needs to be a summit where industry representatives can all get together and discuss the best course of action to take to actively improve rider skills - professional trainers, shop owners, importers, rider representatives, police(?), even someone from ACC if they've got the gumption - people who are involved at the coalface and therefore are much more likely to know what they're talking about than me and can come up with a course of action to help make us more safety conscious. Free training with the purchase of a new bike, for example.

But not just an expensive talk-fest, 'cos they hardly ever happen. And they're not allowed out until they come up with something. And the rest of us have to at least try whatever they come up with without first dismissing it out of hand.

Much nerrrdy-er: a travelling roadshow track day with a "how good a rider are you really?" theme, using a course with different road surfaces/hazards, supervised by qualified trainers, could be a timed competition between teams based on cruisers vs sport bikes vs dual purpose or maybe makes of bike, Honda vs Suzuki vs BMW etc, like a "gymkhana". You think you're a great rider, so prove it, winner gets to wear an awesome custom yellow hi-vis vest...oh yeah! Who wouldn't want to get involved in that! Well I might...

Remind John Key (the minister for tourism) that Henry Cole told everyone on the Travel Channel that New Zealand is a motorcycling nirvana, and if people arrive from overseas and have to ask "where are all the bikers then?" it'll be bad for tourism.

A series of "scared straight" type ads, riders who have crashed telling their stories, don't do what I did, get some training, I did and now I'm back on the bike and enjoying it more than ever (cue mentos smile)...expensive and might put people off riding altogether, and then there's that "it'll never happen to me" thing that people do.

Sorry got a bit carried away here.

[Fatt Max]

Can anyone out there see why although time consuming this sort of approach would not work given time, effort and real commitment.

FFs its worth our best shot isnt it...???

I was pissed off about the whole MSAC thing but I was up for seeing how they went and measure them on their results and actions. After all, means more than words eh...

More fool me, they have emerged as nothing but a mouthpiece for the government's agenda. The only light I saw was that a bikers rights organisation was represented at the time but now even that is not the case, not a good look people.

I agree that we need to take responsibility for our own riding, after all we are the ones that start the engine every day so what happens after that is down to us. At the same time we need to challenge this whole council, take them to task and get what is best for us.

Time, effort and real commitment. Lose the egos, agenda's, jibing and knife throwing. Just get on with it because according to their website, 'we own the options'. Well, lets take ownership of them

[Scuba_Steve]

Can anyone out there see why although time consuming this sort of approach would not work given time, effort and real commitment.

Depends on end goal. If it's to lower cost then yep I can see why it won't work.
All this shit we're being fed is just an excuse being used to "justify" raising cost, it is NOT the reason. The reason is privatization. The excuse is just that, an excuse, one that'll be changed as necessary to obtain the end goal of raising costs & privatizing ACC. Nothing will change that only excuses used will be changed.


Also does anyone know are mopeds still on car licenses & are they still being lumped with bikes???
If so then you ain't gonna achieve a whole lot till they're forced to get the equivalent to a bike licence. I would estimate mopeds to be anywhere upto 30-40% of the "bike" fleet?

[Voltaire]

FFs its worth our best shot isnt it...???

I was pissed off about the whole MSAC thing but I was up for seeing how they went and measure them on their results and actions. After all, means more than words eh...

More fool me, they have emerged as nothing but a mouthpiece for the government's agenda. The only light I saw was that a bikers rights organisation was represented at the time but now even that is not the case, not a good look people.

I agree that we need to take responsibility for our own riding, after all we are the ones that start the engine every day so what happens after that is down to us. At the same time we need to challenge this whole council, take them to task and get what is best for us.

Time, effort and real commitment. Lose the egos, agenda's, jibing and knife throwing. Just get on with it because according to their website, 'we own the options'. Well, lets take ownership of them



Maybe if someone ( else) formed a Party for Kiwi Blokes around hunting, fishing, driving,surfing, riding etc it might be possible to get 5% of the vote and become like Peter Dunn....


Hey Gareth, there are needy people here in NZ too but probably not as glamourous riding around South Auckland on a BMW as treking around Africa. :lol:

Makes me want to have a public burning of Hi Viz vests.....

Another couple of years and we will end up like the one on the right with biker burkas :

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WHqyijIPIAE/SwqdubPgpZI/AAAAAAAAACE/-U7B8tkvTNw/s1600/burkabarbie.jpg

[bogan]

Also does anyone know are mopeds still on car licenses & are they still being lumped with bikes???
If so then you ain't gonna achieve a whole lot till they're forced to get the equivalent to a bike licence. I would estimate mopeds to be anywhere upto 30-40% of the "bike" fleet?

Yup, it is just over 30% iirc. One might ask how including large number of vehicles that struggle to do 50kmhr affect our per km risk too :whistle: They are also on bike licenses, and both license test are a joke anyway...

[Ocean1]

Yup, it is just over 30% iirc. One might ask how including large number of vehicles that struggle to do 50kmhr affect our per km risk too :whistle: They are also on bike licenses, and both license test are a joke anyway...

And they wonder why we have no faith in their accident analisys. I suppose someone must have compared our data collection criteria against similar countries and found it to be broadly identical and found, therefore that all of the negative comparisons are valid?

Scuba Steve might be a bit off the mark in identifying the govt's "real" objective, time will tell. But there's no doubt at all that the way data is collected and selected is groomed to suit the current policy change proposals. Why is the steriotype of the born again biker who buys a Harley/GSXR and immediately crashes it rolled out again? The only facts I've seen surrounding accidents for that demographic is the decline in accidents over the last decade or so, the same period that those who learned to ride forty years ago started to swell rider numbers again, as they did in the seventies. That, and the fact that the highest crash demographic by the length of the back straight is learners and under 25's.

Yes 40 and 50y olds crash, but surely the reason that particular group is singled out isn't because they crash a great deal, but because it costs ACC rather more to cover their income. That, and the perception that they can afford any increase in levies to that particular sector. So yes, by all means levy the rider rather than the bike, and by all means let's have some form of no-clains bonus. But let's hear no more bullshit about having to re-sit your licence or start from scratch if you decide not to ride for a year or two, it just doesn't hold water.

While I'm at it, I'm of the opinion that no ammount of fiddling with levies, advertising or licencing will change the accident stat's much. Consider: who's opinions regarding this current debate, here have changed at all? Anyone? So why on earth would you expect to change such a fundimental human characteristic as personal day to day risk management, a characteristic that operates in split seconds rather than hours of debate.

No, there'll be no dramatic change in the accident stat's short of pricing motorcycles off the road. At which time I'd say the stat's used to demonstrate the success of any policy change will be accidents per year, not per rider.

[Katman]

What, like some clown thinking that just a change in attitude will fix it?


A change in attitude would be the single greatest step in the right direction.

We have to stop looking for ways to blame our misfortunes on everyone/everything else and start investigating how a change in our own actions could avoid those misfortunes in the first place.

We need to lose the acceptance of crashing as being "just one of those things that happen to all of us".

"Shame to hear about your crash, but at least you now get to go bike shopping again" shouldn't be our mantra.

"Wake the fuck up to yourself" should.

[avgas]

Even if the ACC levy never comes down, if our crash rate drops we've still won.

Our aim has to be not giving them cause to increase the levy further.
Not entirely true. The cause to increase can come internally........from recall it wasn't a case of ACC running out of money for payouts that prompted the increase. It was the fact that the "insurance buffer" fence posts moved.

So reality is that you, I or any motorcyclist has no control what so ever in regards to the Levy. If the govt want's to build the coffer/buffer to the next 1000 years, increasing the levy to 10 times the amount it is now. - no one will be able to stop them.

Before you say "BULLSH...!"......I'll ask you a simply question?
What was the levy in the past?

I personally would like to see a decrease in crash stats, independent of anything to do with ACC. But I fear this will come about at the same proportion of decrease in motorcycles on roads. A bit like the stats "Deaths by automatic weapons in NZ" showing a significant decrease in the last 15 or so years.
But even that stat is probably not zero.

[bogan]

A change in attitude would be the single greatest step in the right direction.

We have to stop looking for ways to blame our misfortunes on everyone/everything else and start investigating how a change in our own actions could avoid those misfortunes in the first place.

We need to lose the acceptance of crashing as being "just one of those things that happen to all of us".

"Shame to hear about your crash, but at least you now get to go bike shopping again" shouldn't be our mantra.

"Wake the fuck up to yourself" should.

I agree with all of that, but also realise there are two sides to effecting the change, motivation to change, and the personal cost of effecting the change. Reduce the cost, and it won't take as much motivation. Calling idiots out when they fuck up is one way to increase the motivation, the widespread provision of the tools to aid in a riders identification of their shortcoming is something that I think will be helpful also.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Isn't the simple answer to most shortcomings something along these lines;

1. Retain rego based collection (for ease of implementation and best cost effect and because amongst many other reasons single rider levies don't account for passenger injury costs).

2. Establish a register system by which owners of multiple bikes (who don't loan or hire them out) pay only a single annual Multi bike ACC levy with a time clock that only runs when at least one of the owned bike regos is live. This would involve an initial set up cost and ongoing administration cost in excess of the current system which could be covered by a multi bike account admin fee (per bike) and time clock admin fees to switch the clock off on rainy days and back on when the sun shines.

3. Establish appropriate criteria for and tender out rider and driver training, safety and first aid courses of four or five categories with tough assessment criteria and score based 0 to 10 assessment results (rather than pass or fail). Make the certificates valid for a maximum of three years.

4. Provide levy discount of 1% for every currently certified point achieved through participation in the recognised training courses. With a cap of 50%.

That's my rational moment for the day.

[Ocean1]

That's my rational moment for the day.

Fuck those blue pills don't last long.

In registering motorcycles in Switzerland a single plate is issued. You can bung it on any machine you own.

Too simple?

[Kickaha]

Isn't the simple answer to most shortcomings something along these lines;

The simple answer is to put it on fuel, but then they couldn't target and shaft particular groups of road users

[jellywrestler]

How about we actually read what is written, take it on board, How about Garth Jones and his posse actually read whats written to them, from Motorcyclists with equal or more experience than them sometimes, take it on board and actually do something with some ideas that they get eh????????????
at the moment we pay $30 per bike for them to do something but don't actually get an voice to suggest things that may help.

[jellywrestler]

1. Retain rego based collection (for ease of implementation and best cost effect and because amongst many other reasons single rider levies don't account for passenger injury costs).



and the fifteen partygoers not wearing seatbelts in a people mover all do pay?????????????

[flyingcrocodile46]

Fuck those blue pills don't last long.

In registering motorcycles in Switzerland a single plate is issued. You can bung it on any machine you own.

Too simple?

Well! fuck you very much. You just killed half of the value I saw in clinging to rationality. :lol:

[jellywrestler]

The simple answer is to put it on fuel, but then they couldn't target and shaft particular groups of road users
another loophole for the lycra clad loonies

[Ocean1]

Well! fuck you very much. You just killed half of the value I saw in clinging to rationality. :lol:

Just half eh?

[Kickaha]

How about Garth Jones and his posse actually read whats written to them, from Motorcyclists with equal or more experience than them sometimes, take it on board and actually do something with some ideas that they get eh???????????? .
I didn't realise you'd started a stand up comedy routine

[flyingcrocodile46]

and the fifteen partygoers not wearing seatbelts in a people mover all do pay?????????????

I have conceded that there is fairness to the increased levy and that arguments against it are a dead end brick wall for dummies to spend time headbutting. Though I do feel resentment at being expected to believe the distorted half truths they presented with their half assed statistics.

I see potential to achieve a way of recognition for the unfairness and lack of logic in penalising multi bike owners and that some riders riding practices warrant a rebate as does the participation in changing our individual attitudes through better rider training.



Just half eh?

I am about to take something to sort that out, but at the moment I still see value in the rational of providing incentive for people to help themselves and others by taking advantage/participating in improving attitudes and survial kills by development of practical riding skill training and risk management. That is the sort of thing that MotNZ should be advancing as it above anything else (barring the banning of bikes) will have a direct and measurable effect in reducing accident injury costs to ACC (which is all they are there to do).

It ain't rocket science, just common sense.

[Voltaire]

Isn't the simple answer to most shortcomings something along these lines;

1. Retain rego based collection (for ease of implementation and best cost effect and because amongst many other reasons single rider levies don't account for passenger injury costs).

2. Establish a register system by which owners of multiple bikes (who don't loan or hire them out) pay only a single annual Multi bike ACC levy with a time clock that only runs when at least one of the owned bike regos is live. This would involve an initial set up cost and ongoing administration cost in excess of the current system which could be covered by a multi bike account admin fee (per bike) and time clock admin fees to switch the clock off on rainy days and back on when the sun shines.

3. Establish appropriate criteria for and tender out rider and driver training, safety and first aid courses of four or five categories with tough assessment criteria and score based 0 to 10 assessment results (rather than pass or fail). Make the certificates valid for a maximum of three years.

4. Provide levy discount of 1% for every currently certified point achieved through participation in the recognised training courses. With a cap of 50%.

That's my rational moment for the day.

Your preaching to the choir :killingme:killingme:killingme

[flyingcrocodile46]

Your preaching to the choir :killingme:killingme:killingme

A minister has to do something to kill time between games of pin the tail on the choirboy

[scumdog]

How about Garth Jones and his posse actually read whats written to them, from Motorcyclists with equal or more experience than them sometimes, take it on board and actually do something with some ideas that they get eh????????????
at the moment we pay $30 per bike for them to do something but don't actually get an voice to suggest things that may help.

They probably DO read all those 'good ideas', from each experienced rider.

Only it must be like reading a giant shopping list from the Tower of Babel...:crazy:

[jellywrestler]

They probably DO read all those 'good ideas', from each experienced rider.

Only it must be like reading a giant shopping list from the Tower of Babel...:crazy:
Maybe it is like the shopping list but you'd think a group like this would at least have a method of notifying the people who submitted stuff, and also their minutes were open to the public; like the advertising standards authority etc

[Scuba_Steve]

They probably DO read all those 'good ideas', from each experienced rider.


you're sounding awfully optimistic there SD, meet your quota early today did you??? :lol:

[scumdog]

you're sounding awfully optimistic there SD, meet your quota early today did you??? :lol:

Yup, and did it all from home...;)

[avgas]

They probably DO read all those 'good ideas', from each experienced rider.

Only it must be like reading a giant shopping list from the Tower of Babel...:crazy:
Doubt very much that skilled/experience riders want anything changed at all. Experienced riders know what to expect and plan accordingly.
Any rider that has any suggestion for MotoNZ apart from "Fuck off" or "give me back my money"...........shows a lack of ability to comprehend things around them (including other riders).........aka experience.

Experience has shown me that making the roads safer, making drivers more aware, creating training courses etc etc............generally does not improve the road toll.

[idb]

Doubt very much that skilled/experience riders want anything changed at all. Experienced riders know what to expect and plan accordingly.
Any rider that has any suggestion for MotoNZ apart from "Fuck off" or "give me back my money"...........shows a lack of ability to comprehend things around them (including other riders).........aka experience.

Experience has shown me that making the roads safer, making drivers more aware, creating training courses etc etc............generally does not improve the road toll.

Well, I beg to differ if you'll allow me esteemed sir.
I'd quite like my multiple registrations to be cheaper.

[scumdog]

Fuck those blue pills don't last long.

In registering motorcycles in Switzerland a single plate is issued. You can bung it on any machine you own.

Too simple?

How expensive is their rego?

And what kind of accident cover do they have.

The 'one-cost-regardless-of- bikes-owned' idea would not be popular when the cost is figured out, it would be astronomical and I guess the poor guy with on old GN 250 wouldn't be happy to see the 'rich' fella with 6 bikes paying the same amount as him.

[Scuba_Steve]

How expensive is their rego?

And what kind of accident cover do they have.

The 'one-cost-regardless-of- bikes-owned' idea would not be popular when the cost is figured out, it would be astronomical and I guess the poor guy with on old GN 250 wouldn't be happy to see the 'rich' fella with 6 bikes paying the same amount as him.

If I'm reading the right info, the avg driver would be paying around $300-650 NZD for vehicle licensing each year (you pay for highest capacity engine all others included) & their accident cover/health care is amongst (if not) the best in the world.

Trucks might get stung a little tho their highest cost is around $9k NZD (I assume this is for "big rigs") but da dude with only a GN250 would be paying around $150 NZD

[Ocean1]

How expensive is their rego?

And what kind of accident cover do they have.

Looks like registration cost 45 francs.

Passenger accident insurance is private and optional.


The 'one-cost-regardless-of- bikes-owned' idea would not be popular when the cost is figured out, it would be astronomical and I guess the poor guy with on old GN 250 wouldn't be happy to see the 'rich' fella with 6 bikes paying the same amount as him.

Probably not. Bet he'd be almost as unhappy as the multiple bike owners who are currently paying his share of that astronomical fee.

[Ocean1]

If I'm reading the right info, the avg driver would be paying around $300-650 NZD for vehicle licensing each year (you pay for highest capacity engine all others included) & their accident cover/health care is amongst (if not) the best in the world.

It's a power / weight formula, and yes you pay for your Porshe RS, the rest are free.

[avgas]

Well, I beg to differ if you'll allow me esteemed sir.
I'd quite like my multiple registrations to be cheaper.

Explain to me how MotoNZ makes them cheaper. They give you a coupon or something?

[idb]

Explain to me how MotoNZ makes them cheaper. They give you a coupon or something?

Can I remind you of your statement

Doubt very much that skilled/experience riders want anything changed at all.
...and from there it degenerated into foulmouthery such that I couldn't read any more.

So...in a nutshell...I would very much like things to change to the extent of not being charged ACC for more than one bike.

[avgas]

Context is a wonderful thing. All previous statements are re: conversations with MotoNZ.
I fail to see how MotoNZ = decrease in ACC levvy seeing as that is there employer an all.

But while we are at it - may as well keep going. I would like MotoNZ to decrease my ACC levy and give me new brake pads for at least one of my bikes. Anyone want a Pony?

Can I remind you of your statement

...and from there it degenerated into foulmouthery such that I couldn't read any more.

So...in a nutshell...I would very much like things to change to the extent of not being charged ACC for more than one bike.


Doubt very much that skilled/experience riders want anything changed at all. Experienced riders know what to expect and plan accordingly.
Any rider that has any suggestion for MotoNZ apart from "Fuck off" or "give me back my money"...........shows a lack of ability to comprehend things around them (including other riders).........aka experience.

Experience has shown me that making the roads safer, making drivers more aware, creating training courses etc etc............generally does not improve the road toll.


They probably DO read all those 'good ideas', from each experienced rider.

Only it must be like reading a giant shopping list from the Tower of Babel...:crazy:


How about Garth Jones and his posse actually read whats written to them, from Motorcyclists with equal or more experience than them sometimes, take it on board and actually do something with some ideas that they get eh????????????
at the moment we pay $30 per bike for them to do something but don't actually get an voice to suggest things that may help.

[idb]

Context is a wonderful thing. All previous statements are re: conversations with MotoNZ.
I fail to see how MotoNZ = decrease in ACC levvy seeing as that is there employer an all.

But while we are at it - may as well keep going. I would like MotoNZ to decrease my ACC levy and give me new brake pads for at least one of my bikes. Anyone want a Pony?

Isn't that what I said?
I would like things to change so that I get a decrease in my ACC levy...MotoNZ could do it, The Red Crescent could do it, I don't care.


I don't need no stinkin' context!!!

[Swoop]

I personally would like to see a decrease in crash stats, independent of anything to do with ACC. But I fear this will come about at the same proportion of decrease in motorcycles on roads.

If motorcyclists did make a decrease in accident statistics, the idiots at the top will only claim that it was their policies (etc, etc) that made the decrease. A bit like Paula Rose claiming the fatality-free long weekend was police doing and had absolutely nothing to do with the shittiest weather for yonks.
Guess what will happen to the levy? Would it go up or down...?

We are on a loser to nothing either way. (Oops, fucked up the spelling for KB, should have been "Looser":brick:).

[Voltaire]

How can motorcyclists decrease the stats, surely no one sets out from home with the intention of being in a crash?
When on the bike I am a lot more focused that when in the van as I don't look at every side street and parked car trying to guess what they will do.
Really all the Govt has to do is price motorcycles off the road, I bet the rego take is well down on pre 2010.

My wife went on a 'Free' ACC scooter course....only 2 people could be bothered turning up.......makes it easy for ACC to say they offered and no one was interested.

In a few years it will be " looks Mummy( er care person who may be male or female)...whats that...?.."
" oh its a motorcycle you don't see many of them any more'

[GTRMAN]

How can motorcyclists decrease the stats, surely no one sets out from home with the intention of being in a crash?
'

- Commitment to better training / upskilling
- Riding to the conditions
- Being aware and considerate of other road users
- Not treating the road as your own personal race track.
- Having an accurate picture of our actual skill level rather than what our ego tells us.....

[avgas]

- Commitment to better training / upskilling
- Riding to the conditions
- Being aware and considerate of other road users
- Not treating the road as your own personal race track.
- Having an accurate picture of our actual skill level rather than what our ego tells us.....
So not driving like a politician then?

[Voltaire]

- Commitment to better training / upskilling
- Riding to the conditions
- Being aware and considerate of other road users
- Not treating the road as your own personal race track.
- Having an accurate picture of our actual skill level rather than what our ego tells us.....


If every one did that what a nice world it would be........the Govt is using the time honoured method of stopping what they don't like....taxation. Price the problem off the road.

[caseye]

I've copied and posted this from the speeding thread.
I have asked Shesti if I could and I've not altered it in anyway.
My point in posting this here is I feel it is entirely relevant to our discussion re driver/rider training standards being so low here that if we actually made a concerted effort to clean things up we could do a lot in a short time.
Attitude, Ability, responsibility, they all go out the window when we give motor vehicles to novices.
Lets work on not giving novices anything until they proved they can handle it.

"Now, I come from Europe, and I can say that infrastructure and speed are NOT the causes of people here crashing. It's simple - people here just can't drive. They are pampered by government laws, it's too easy to get the license, and speed limits make people mediocre. That is also THE ONLY reason for traffic jams in Auckland - people just don't know how to drive.
I was present when a guy got his motorcycle license without obviously being able to control his bike.
My friend is a taxi driver here, and he gets calls on a regular basis from people who just ask him to park their car?!?
You are not thought how to change lanes and include in traffic - instead of increasing the speed and keeping with the traffic - people here slow down and expect someone to brake and let them change lanes.
There are many examples - who's been driving in any European country knows what I mean.

Other things I've noticed:

I've seen much worse roads - and people driving much faster safely on them without problems.

Automatic transmission makes idiots of drivers - there's no way you can properly learn to drive unless driving manual.

100 kph speed limit is ridiculous. If that is normal - cars & bikes that go over 200 wouldn't be made.

In Germany there are Autobahns where there's no speed limit - and crash rate on them is above 50% less than on regular Autobahns. You drive much more careful when you know that someone can fly by you driving 250 or more (oh, yeah, driving slow in the right lane on motorway and not moving to the left when someone behind you is approaching faster is one of the things NZ drivers also do).
There was an experiment in America (I don't remember, Nevada or Arizona or something) where they've taken off speed limit from one portion of highway. For that portion - rate of crashes decreased 70%. As soon as they returned speed limit on - the crash rate got back to same again.

Speed limits in NZ are too low, and drivers are really bad. Investing in drivers education and raising the standards for issuing someone a drivers license - with a more practise driving oriented test, where driver actually proves that he/she is able to control the vehicle would do much more than limiting speed. All the crashes I've seen here are caused by the people that doesn't know how to control their vehicle. I haven't seen such rate of bad drives anywhere in the world, and believe me - I've been places In fact - I've been shocked seeing how people (cannot) drive here.

There's much to that, and personal responsibility and knowing your capabilities - never drive beyond them...but - if you never go near the border - you'll never improve... "

Many thanks Shesti

[Voltaire]

I suggest Shesti asks his Taxi mate to drop him at the airport.:tugger:

I 've ridden/driven in Europe on and off the Autobahns ( they are pretty boring) and driving in Germany is very good...as is Belguim , Denmark, Sweden and Norway..it goes into decline the further south you go.....The French the Spanish, Portugese, Greek and Turkish drivers are pretty average.....
I saw a spectacular crash once on the Autobahn between Stutgart and Munich....the tail back went back miles......the cars were a mess as you would expect at 160 kmph plus ( it was the olden days of the 80's)

[caseye]

Would have made you a very young man then Voltaire.
Ha , trust you to spoil a good argument with facts from one who has been there.
Point is though and I know it's not lost.
We do have an abysmal standard of driving and yes riding here, it could be made a lot better without going to extremes, someone just needs to get it started.
Why not a bunch of hairy arsed bikers?

[Voltaire]

Would have made you a very young man then Voltaire.
Ha , trust you to spoil a good argument with facts from one who has been there.
Point is though and I know it's not lost.
We do have an abysmal standard of driving and yes riding here, it could be made a lot better without going to extremes, someone just needs to get it started.
Why not a bunch of hairy arsed bikers?

Maybe everyone should spend a weekend helping at A and E......
The standard of driving/riding discussion has been going on for years and years, I remember fitting my 500/4 with a device that made the headlight flicker.....thus noticed by cars....:brick: mind you I was happy with just a leather jacket, work boots and jeans then.....not any more.
What was the original post....paying for multiple bikes......can't say I'm keen but they ain't gonna change that.....easy money.:angry2:

[Maha]

Would have made you a very young man then Voltaire.
Ha , trust you to spoil a good argument with facts from one who has been there.
Point is though and I know it's not lost.
We do have an abysmal standard of driving and yes riding here, it could be made a lot better without going to extremes, someone just needs to get it started.
Why not a bunch of hairy arsed bikers?

..and how many times has it been 'attempted' before Mark?
The Auckland Action Group (2009) at least got out there and put 3-4-rides together, albeit with ever decreasing numbers at each ride.
So clearly, that is not the way to go.
I now believe its an 'up to the indivdual' thing.
Cleaning up the stats....starts with one.

Not alot of thought is given to error when the decision is made to ride like you're at the track.
What goes on inside the helmet can (and often does) dictate the outcome of your day on the bike.

[GrayWolf]

Whats as interesting is MrKiwi and Mr Morgan have both gone very quiet when some suggestions and/or challenges have been placed.... Does make one wonder just what they are really thinking?

[oneofsix]

Whats as interesting is MrKiwi and Mr Morgan have both gone very quiet when some suggestions and/or challenges have been placed.... Does make one wonder just what they are really thinking?

Possibly that Stoney was only the tip of the iceberg and now they have found a whole world of opinionated arseholes.

[caseye]

LOL, Love it, could be you are 100% on the money there oneofsix.
Mark you have pin pointed where it all needs to start and noted that what we tried to achieve was never going to work, sad lot aint they mate.

[Flip]

They have learnt two things;
1, They are fucking around with peoples lifestyles and that they do not have popular support to do so.
2, Bikers don’t trust both ACC and their lap dogs MotoNZ.

For the first time in a long time I am looking forward to another large Biker protest. Also escalating the level of belligerence to a level NZ has not seen in a while.

[Bald Eagle]

For the first time in a long time I am looking forward to another large Biker protest. Also escalating the level of belligerence to a level NZ has not seen in a while.


The last time this country managed to get motivated to a civil disobedience level was about some footy game and who was allowed to play it in a country thousands of miles away. ( Anyone remember 1981 ).

NZ'ers are a bloody apathetic bunch generally.

Move along nothing to see here.

[bogan]

Possibly that Stoney was only the tip of the iceberg and now they have found a whole world of opinionated arseholes.

Bang on! It's not just kb either, no more debating on their website either :nono:

[Swoop]

Bikers don’t trust both ACC and their lap dogs MotoNZ.

Perhaps they should change their title to Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quango)uangoNZ?

[Katman]

They have learnt two things;
1, They are fucking around with peoples lifestyles and that they do not have popular support to do so.
2, Bikers don’t trust both ACC and their lap dogs MotoNZ.

For the first time in a long time I am looking forward to another large Biker protest. Also escalating the level of belligerence to a level NZ has not seen in a while.

Before you go getting all Rambo on us it would be wise to consider what you mean by "popular support".

The government certainly don't have motorcyclist's "popular support" for fucking around with their lifestyle but I would suggest that the general public are, at best, indifferent towards motorcycling and at worst, actually supportive of the governments moves against us.

That is why we need to start being seen by the general public as something more than just clueless idiots.

[oneofsix]

Before you go getting all Rambo on us it would be wise to consider what you mean by "popular support".

The government certainly don't have motorcyclist's "popular support" for fucking around with their lifestyle but I would suggest that the general public, at best, are indifferent towards motorcycling and at worst, actually supportive of the governments moves against us.

That is why we need to start being seen by the general public as something more than just clueless idiots.

So you want a bunch of clueless idiots to see us as more than clueless idiots. Good luck with that.
We are a subgroup so normal prejudice will come into play, those that aren't onside will not come onside just because you are nice to them.
I have also discovered that more of the general public are on our side than we generally believe but for them it is up to us to fight, they will support. One or two, like diesel owners, have also realised we were the stalking horse and are therefore more likely to fight with us. Fight doesn't mean punch up, more support is gained by pressure, debate and argument, but a bikehoi does get attention.

[Katman]

One or two, like diesel owners, have also realised we were the stalking horse and are therefore more likely to fight with us.

Cool. Will they both come in the same car?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Cool. Will they both come in the same car?

Or we could dub them!

[oneofsix]

Or we could dub them!

They might prefer a sidecar.

OK I should have said on or two groups :lol:

[Voltaire]

The last time this country managed to get motivated to a civil disobedience level was about some footy game and who was allowed to play it in a country thousands of miles away. ( Anyone remember 1981 ).

NZ'ers are a bloody apathetic bunch generally.

Move along nothing to see here.


The footage from that make it look pretty big, here in Auckland most people pretty much went about their business.
Although some KB's here were actively involved on both sides....:rolleyes:

[Murray]

I remember 81 for a number of reasons 1) being standing on a corner in Wellington nothing happening until a few media vans turned up 30 protestors turned up and chanted and then they all left? All over in 15 minutes. 2) Maori mate of mine in the police on the front line telling me he had people calling him a black bastard and spitting in his face??

We need people like that to support us - and the media!!!

[Oscar]

I remember 81 for a number of reasons 1) being standing on a corner in Wellington nothing happening until a few media vans turned up 30 protestors turned up and chanted and then they all left? All over in 15 minutes. 2) Maori mate of mine in the police on the front line telling me he had people calling him a black bastard and spitting in his face??

We need people like that to support us - and the media!!!

Your memory is flawed.

http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1311390898/062/5331062.jpg

[oneofsix]

I remember 81 for a number of reasons 1) being standing on a corner in Wellington nothing happening until a few media vans turned up 30 protestors turned up and chanted and then they all left? All over in 15 minutes. 2) Maori mate of mine in the police on the front line telling me he had people calling him a black bastard and spitting in his face??

We need people like that to support us - and the media!!!


Your memory is flawed.


The affects roll on. At a guess we have one Rugby supporter and one anti-apartheid.

'81 the year that started a boost in interest in soccer. :clap:

[Oscar]

The affects roll on. At a guess we have one Rugby supporter and one anti-apartheid.

'81 the year that started a boost in interest in soccer. :clap:

1981 was the year I stopped playing Rugby.
I've played Football off and on ever since.

I don't know where he was in Wellington for a Tour Protest in 1981, but it obvioulsy wasn't Molesworth Street..

http://mp.natlib.govt.nz/image/?imageId=images-33647&profile=access

[Voltaire]

1951 Strike, see Kiwis are not apathetic.....

http://static.stuff.co.nz/1322018935/125/6021125.jpg

[bogan]

1951 Strike, see Kiwis are not apathetic.....

http://static.stuff.co.nz/1322018935/125/6021125.jpg

Hang on, is clicking like on a facebook not the same as what those guys used to do? :nono: :weird:

[Flip]

The problem is if you go head to head with the rozza with night sticks you are going to get your lumps. I got stiches in 81 proving that point.

I certanly would however do a 2 min random stoppage protest on the motorway at 0745 then fuck off.

[Bald Eagle]

Interesting, my grandad was in the 1951 pic and I,ve got a similar framed 1981 pic with me in it, must be genetic

Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk 2

[flyingcrocodile46]

1951 Strike, see Kiwis are not apathetic.....



Wow! A hat store would have been the go back then

[avgas]

1951 Strike, see Kiwis are not apathetic.....

http://static.stuff.co.nz/1322018935/125/6021125.jpg
Why did the police go on strike? :rolleyes: And why did people protest that the police should go back to work? :killingme

[Berries]

Why did the police go on strike? :rolleyes:
Lack of public respect?

[Voltaire]

Why did the police go on strike? :rolleyes: And why did people protest that the police should go back to work? :killingme

According to Ross Meurant's book " the Land of the Long Batton"

.....the 1951 strike came about with the release of the " Keystone Cops" a US documentary series on policing.
It was made in the 1020's but had only recently opened in NZ theatres as it had been banned by the Frazer government during the war.
What it revealed was that the NZ police were in fact dressed up in 1890's uniforms with short battons and silly hats,
Police were seeing linking arms in public places all over the country....there was public outcry, the police went back to saying " ello ello ello wats all did den" and all was well in the black and white world of the 1950's.....

Ross Meurant who was a constable in the 1951 strike never forgot for this and vowed to get longer battons.........


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/KeystoneKops.jpg

[scumdog]

Ross Meurant who was a constable in the 1951 strike never forgot for this and vowed to get longer battons.........

]

Yes Ross is always supportive of Police...

[oneofsix]

Yes Ross is always supportive of Police...

He was the one that first searched the Crewe gardens but did NOT find the shell casing, right?

[Oscar]

Ross Meurant who was a constable in the 1951 strike never forgot for this and vowed to get longer battons.........



That's impressive considering that he was born on the 26th August 1947.

[Voltaire]

That's impressive considering that he was born on the 26th August 1947.

:killingme

[GTRMAN]

That's impressive considering that he was born on the 26th August 1947.


"Meurant served in the New Zealand Police between 1966 and 1987" - wikipedia

[Swoop]

He was the one that first searched the Crewe gardens but did NOT find the shell casing, right?
Correct. Straight out of plod school and doing things by-the-book. He stated exactly that on the telly the other night.

[oldrider]

Devise a new tactic that embraces your groups strong points while attacking the oppositions weaknesses that result in maximum impact in your own groups favour!

To keep being effective you also have to be able to repeat the action quickly, anywhere, any time, with minimum negative impact on your own group.

I.E.

When you are swimming in the ocean and a big shark suddenly appears, you get alarmed.

That alarm manifests into dysfunctional panic when you don't know where it is, what it is doing and when it might come back.

OK, Nick Smith and ACC made their move on motorcyclists ... how long ago????

Motorcyclists reacted and fizzled away ... are ACC and Nick etc concerned about where we are, what we are doing, or that we might come back?

Yeah right ... they gave us Gareth and his little group to spend a bit of the dosh they stole off us! .... Well that fixed it I'm sure! (place sarcasm smiley here!)

And how long ago was that? :shit:

[oneofsix]

Devise a new tactic that embraces your groups strong points while attacking the oppositions weaknesses that result in maximum impact in your own groups favour!

To keep being effective you also have to be able to repeat the action quickly, anywhere, any time, with minimum negative impact on your own group.

I.E.

When you are swimming in the ocean and a big shark suddenly appears, you get alarmed.

That alarm manifests into dysfunctional panic when you don't know where it is, what it is doing and when it might come back.

OK, Nick Smith and ACC made their move on motorcyclists ... how long ago????

Motorcyclists reacted and fizzled away ... are ACC and Nick etc concerned about where we are, what we are doing, or that we might come back?

Yeah right ... they gave us Gareth and his little group to spend a bit of the dosh they stole off us! .... Well that fixed it! :facepalm:

And how long ago was that? :shit:

What is the new tactic you are proposing? Every time another ride has been proposed the nay seers have said that the first one achieved nothing and that another would be a waste of time and yet you say it did achieve something :eek5:

[nosebleed]

That's impressive considering that he was born on the 26th August 1947.

Fair cop!

But not this?


According to Ross Meurant's book " the Land of the Long Batton"

.....It was made in the 1020's but had only recently opened in NZ theatres as it had been banned by the Frazer government during the war...


Pretty sure that tips the history of film making over on it's head

[GTRMAN]

The U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published this national agenda for motorcycle safety. Makes for very interesting reading.


www.msf-usa.org/Downloads/NAMS_print.pdf

[Voltaire]

Interesting reading , I was surprised by the amount of alcohol impaired riders 36%.
Glad I sold my sports bike as they appear to damage your lucky sac in an accident much like the old Triumphs tank rack. Cruiser tank speedos also were sac unfriendly.
Modified bikes were more likely to be involved than standard bikes.
Spoke wheels are also bad as the tyre deflates.....

[GrayWolf]

Makes for very interesting reading.




Amen to that!

[HenryDorsetCase]

What is the new tactic you are proposing? Every time another ride has been proposed the nay seers have said that the first one achieved nothing and that another would be a waste of time and yet you say it did achieve something :eek5:

paint your face brown, and go to the waitangi tribunal saying that riding a motorbike is part of the tikanga. Dont forget to get legal aid to the tune of a couple hundred large on the way thru

[HenryDorsetCase]

Interesting reading , I was surprised by the amount of alcohol impaired riders 36%.
Glad I sold my sports bike as they appear to damage your lucky sac in an accident much like the old Triumphs tank rack. Cruiser tank speedos also were sac unfriendly.
Modified bikes were more likely to be involved than standard bikes.
Spoke wheels are also bad as the tyre deflates.....

You know those Gold wings with air bags? I've often thought that airbag should be about a foot lower and a foot further back.... cushion the nadgers. You could do it on a goldwing and most modern bikes too: the fuel is under the seat and the "tank" is mostly airbox.

[MrKiwi]

Whats as interesting is MrKiwi and Mr Morgan have both gone very quiet when some suggestions and/or challenges have been placed.... Does make one wonder just what they are really thinking?

No, I've been away with work and not near a computer (quite refreshing to be away from a computer). Just catching up on reading now. Some of the reading is quite interesting and most of it has been been said before. It's useful to have it in one thread on this site though...

[GrayWolf]

No, I've been away with work and not near a computer (quite refreshing to be away from a computer). Just catching up on reading now. Some of the reading is quite interesting and most of it has been been said before. It's useful to have it in one thread on this site though...

Apology then for the assumption...


You say most of this has been 'said before' but is useful in one thread.... so can we ask, if this has been voiced before, why are none of these concerns being 'openly' debated or investigated? Like I would, and guess most of us here; if presented with a healthy factual debate... (oh hang on this is KiwiBiker :ar15:) I feel there could be forward movement of some description. In the end according to the 'brief' MotoNZ is supposed to represent us, the Motorcyclist. At present it really does appear that, having been given the brief... it is being pursued 'in house'. Many of us out here also have decades of riding experience, and in other countries. Yet we are seemingly not expected/competent/viable enough to have input into our future?
No one from the 'pro hi vis' side of the arguement can show quantitative research that proves absolute hi-vis will indeed save lives, just like compulsory headlights 'reduced' fatal accidents. Qualitative research is simply based on 'personal perception/feelings', not on 'hard facts'.
My simple belief is this..... Education should come before Legislation....
Give Motorcyclists the opportunity to upskill, improve accident statistics of 'self inflicted' incidents then if after say 5yrs plus? Then if there IS a proven need for intervention by an authority to improve that safety record. They can at least with a clear conscience say..."we gave you the chance"

Right now how I would 'percieve' MotoNZ ACC etc is similar to the current Govt's thinking.... you voted us in, so you already accepted our policies (asset sales)
except we DIDNT vote MotoNZ in. I for one certainly do not accept this arguement 'for' over Hi-vis for a starter. it is not researched as a specific in the motorcycle environment, and to attempt to apply thinking that 'it can be seen roadside' when worn by road workers and emergency services, or even in my workplace (kiwirail) the wearer is 90% of the time either stationary, in a localalised situation or moving slowly. They are NOT moving at any real speed and changing 'location' rapidly or, merging into (blending) traffic or rapidly moving in and out of differing levels of light/shadow, colouring or 'background'.
When and I mean WHEN I see Quantitative statistical research performed on motorcycle specific hi-vis, conducted in 'real world' situations in all types of environments/weather/traffic levels/road and weather conditions which proves there is an even 20% improvement in accident figures or proven conspicuity? I will join the 'dayglo' club.

As an obvious question... if a high percentage of our 'accident' rate is 'self inflicted' (loss of control) with no other vehicle involved... how in any real conscience can a group who is to 'represent' motorcyclists NOT be yelling LOUD, proud and public-ally in the media for advanced training to be sanctioned, way before this 'political donkey' and hi vis IS a political vehicle. From my limited understanding the traditional view of Govt/Police is that advanced training creates overconfidence.... surely MotoNZ could be most excellently employed in getting THAT donkey to move its lazy arse in the right direction?

Yours (and I guess you can say a cynical A hole)
GW

[Magnum Noel]

Well said that Man:2thumbsup

[Katman]

Give Motorcyclists the opportunity to upskill, improve accident statistics of 'self inflicted' incidents then if after say 5yrs plus? Then if there IS a proven need for intervention by an authority to improve that safety record. They can at least with a clear conscience say..."we gave you the chance"


Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

[MrKiwi]

Apology then for the assumption...


You say most of this has been 'said before' but is useful in one thread.... so can we ask, if this has been voiced before, why are none of these concerns being 'openly' debated or investigated? Like I would, and guess most of us here; if presented with a healthy factual debate... (oh hang on this is KiwiBiker :ar15:) I feel there could be forward movement of some description. In the end according to the 'brief' MotoNZ is supposed to represent us, the Motorcyclist. At present it really does appear that, having been given the brief... it is being pursued 'in house'. Many of us out here also have decades of riding experience, and in other countries. Yet we are seemingly not expected/competent/viable enough to have input into our future?
No one from the 'pro hi vis' side of the arguement can show quantitative research that proves absolute hi-vis will indeed save lives, just like compulsory headlights 'reduced' fatal accidents. Qualitative research is simply based on 'personal perception/feelings', not on 'hard facts'.
My simple belief is this..... Education should come before Legislation....
Give Motorcyclists the opportunity to upskill, improve accident statistics of 'self inflicted' incidents then if after say 5yrs plus? Then if there IS a proven need for intervention by an authority to improve that safety record. They can at least with a clear conscience say..."we gave you the chance"

Right now how I would 'percieve' MotoNZ ACC etc is similar to the current Govt's thinking.... you voted us in, so you already accepted our policies (asset sales)
except we DIDNT vote MotoNZ in. I for one certainly do not accept this arguement 'for' over Hi-vis for a starter. it is not researched as a specific in the motorcycle environment, and to attempt to apply thinking that 'it can be seen roadside' when worn by road workers and emergency services, or even in my workplace (kiwirail) the wearer is 90% of the time either stationary, in a localalised situation or moving slowly. They are NOT moving at any real speed and changing 'location' rapidly or, merging into (blending) traffic or rapidly moving in and out of differing levels of light/shadow, colouring or 'background'.
When and I mean WHEN I see Quantitative statistical research performed on motorcycle specific hi-vis, conducted in 'real world' situations in all types of environments/weather/traffic levels/road and weather conditions which proves there is an even 20% improvement in accident figures or proven conspicuity? I will join the 'dayglo' club.

As an obvious question... if a high percentage of our 'accident' rate is 'self inflicted' (loss of control) with no other vehicle involved... how in any real conscience can a group who is to 'represent' motorcyclists NOT be yelling LOUD, proud and public-ally in the media for advanced training to be sanctioned, way before this 'political donkey' and hi vis IS a political vehicle. From my limited understanding the traditional view of Govt/Police is that advanced training creates overconfidence.... surely MotoNZ could be most excellently employed in getting THAT donkey to move its lazy arse in the right direction?

Yours (and I guess you can say a cynical A hole)
GW

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
- more awareness and tolerance from all road users that the road is a shared space (cuts both ways - personally some of my scariest moments have come from other bike riders but most come from bigger vehicles with more than two wheels)
- increased conspicuity of bikes and riders (and I'm not talking about high viz vest here although a lot of people say we should wear them but a lot of riders say to hell with that. I recently had to replace my jacket which was red and black but my only choice for the range I bought was black with a small amount of reflective material or one with lots of high viz day glow green. I couldn't bring myself to wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me).

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

[GrayWolf]

Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

Sometimes societies, groups, cultures have to reach the 'tipping' point before they will really accept the need to change. Just like the use of oil... we KNOW it's a finite rescource, they have said we have more than likely passed 'max production' ability and oil WILL become an ever increasing expensive commodity.... Yet what do we do (world wide) buy and by buying enable manufacturers to produce ever increasing high power, rather than using high economy technology.
Only when there is a finite oil crisis and its inevitable there are concequences in the immediate future, will man step up and alter the behaviour

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

[Katman]

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

I agree entirely (although I actually think we reached tipping point some time ago).

I sincerely hope that we will see a reversal from where motorcyclists have brought motorcycling to.

I suppose time will tell.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
- more awareness and tolerance from all road users that the road is a shared space (cuts both ways - personally some of my scariest moments have come from other bike riders but most come from bigger vehicles with more than two wheels)
- increased conspicuity of bikes and riders (and I'm not talking about high viz vest here although a lot of people say we should wear them but a lot of riders say to hell with that. I recently had to replace my jacket which was red and black but my only choice for the range I bought was black with a small amount of reflective material or one with lots of high viz day glow green. I couldn't bring myself to wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me).

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

Well said 'that' man.
:dodge:

[Oscar]

Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Sometimes societies, groups, cultures have to reach the 'tipping' point before they will really accept the need to change. Just like the use of oil... we KNOW it's a finite rescource, they have said we have more than likely passed 'max production' ability and oil WILL become an ever increasing expensive commodity.... Yet what do we do (world wide) buy and by buying enable manufacturers to produce ever increasing high power, rather than using high economy technology.
Only when there is a finite oil crisis and its inevitable there are concequences in the immediate future, will man step up and alter the behaviour

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

An incentive (by way of ACC levy discount) would make the difference

[GrayWolf]

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
Agreed to above, so the Council/MotoNZ etc will actively be seen advocating the cause for training? I'll repeat from my understanding its the Govt/Police that have taken the 'overconfidence' stance... surely here the council/MotoNZ can indeed advocate for improvement in this attitude?
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
I'd even go further and push for a stepped licence system similar to Europe, and remove the automatic right to a scooter from car drivers anyway. We are about to get the 'LAM's' bikes... so there is already the 'acceptance' for a power/weight system, a simple CC rating is not effective, my own bike is high CC 'low' power. I'd also agree 100% with applying 'pressure' even a (worthwhile) legal requirement, to get people wearing at least a minimum of correct gear, even on mopeds/scooters.

"wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me)."
Yes the 'hi brite' jackets are somewhat powerful, but as I said IF it is proven by real world statistics to really give a decent improvement? I'd 'man up' to wearing it.

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

This is the statement that I know we are not going to agree on... it reads as.... we as the council have decided that conspicuity IS the answer, one way or another. And there's the 'rub' there isnt any factual research to substantiate the statement. It's on 'belief' (quantitative). You are correct that hi vis enables you to see an object but it has limited uses as I explained in an earlier post. I can assure you as a Locomotive Engineer, The thing that WORKS is the fact the Hi vis is basically static and we ARE looking for it. Its part of the expectation of trains, expect trains/workers/ etc at any time, even when they are NOT expected. I can also vouch that the concentration we have to use is higher than on the road especially in the urban network system.
Now here;s the 'anti' arguement,,,, if the average driver has the stereo going, the cell phone (remotely operated) YEH right, kids playing up, shopping list on their mind, shit day at work, going to an important meeting.. all the 'usual' things a motorist experiences? There is the 'hole' in the conspicuity arguement,,,, when driving a train rule 6 is often quoted.... driver distraction, no radio (apart from communication) no one in the cab, Concentration is expected to be completely on the task of driving, so the brain is not processing extemporaneous information already and has the reserve to process extra external stimuli. The average Motorist is driving on 'remote' as a brain function. I will assume you have read the research that the cerebellum has an amazing amount of input into learnt motor/cognitive behaviours, far beyond the basic motor skills it was traditionally thought to operate but its at a subconscious level. So most drivers ARE operating on 'remote', so why would the conspicuity etc suddenly snap them back into full attention?
So here's a wee thought... Hoodies... yup real good for peripheral vision as a driver, wonder what the reaction would be if car drivers were legislated to not have a hoodie up in the car? Probably the same reaction as there's been on cell phones. I bet you see plenty of them in use while driving the car. Really the conspicuity push is a parallel to the stopping wearing of a hoodie when driving the car....following the logic legislating Hoodies would also improve conspicuity, no? I'd bet if the numbers were calculated the amount of young(ish) (Yup i'd say we've all seen the 40'odd yr old driver wannabe sowl brutha wearing them) would be fairly equal to the amount of bike riders on the road.
Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.
Thanks, will be good to see the advancements made on this.... especially if the council has taken on the wire median barrier issue as part of it

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.
if I appear to be only critical? I wont apologise, but will say if i see something I agree to, I am equally as analytic and will put forwards the 'good oil' as well.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

Again I will add a thank you, it cannot be easy to be constantly given negative feedback... but lets hope that there is the chance for KB per se, to be equally responsive with some positive feedback as well.....

[Voltaire]

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

Its almost like McCarthyism and ' Communists'......... 'motorcyclists....they work among you unseen.....'

[Katman]

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.

[Scuba_Steve]

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.

"ramming the message home" to a group that has a large percentage of rebels (with or without a cause)... umm :facepalm:

"ramming it home" may work for a few, but for the majority of bikers I'd say it's just piss them off & may have them rebelling against the message for no other reason than it's being rammed down their throats...
Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

[Katman]

Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

If you're going to hammer in a big nail you're better off using a big hammer.

[GrayWolf]

If you're going to hammer in a big nail you're better off using a big hammer.

That's what I tell the missus when she say's I've got a big arse.....:banana::lol:

[GrayWolf]

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.


"ramming the message home" to a group that has a large percentage of rebels (with or without a cause)... umm :facepalm:

"ramming it home" may work for a few, but for the majority of bikers I'd say it's just piss them off & may have them rebelling against the message for no other reason than it's being rammed down their throats...
Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

You both have a valid point, for pressing the message home hard, and that there is a high degree of 'rebel element' mentality in biking.
To my mind, and where I do have to agree 100% with Katman, is how bikes are perceived by the owners. In reality those who use bikes for 'everyday' transport are in a minority, even within a 'minority sub group'.... I've said this myself in other posts, bikes are now seen as luxury toys, hence the volume sales of 'crotch rockets'.. these are impractical, narrow focused, toys. Sprotbikes are Ego strokers pure and simple, for 99% of the purchasers. So how do you attempt to bring home a 'safety warning' on operating a fun toy? There I think is the $1m dollar question. Most riders are weekend warriors/sunday morning blast riders/ fair weather riders. How do you make the message 'serious' for these people? For me, (and other 365 riders) it already is, the bike is my ONLY transport.

[MrKiwi]

Again I will add a thank you, it cannot be easy to be constantly given negative feedback... but lets hope that there is the chance for KB per se, to be equally responsive with some positive feedback as well.....

Thanks for you reply - the Council should be open to constructive criticism which is what you did in your post, so thanks.

On conspicuity - no we have not decided it IS the answer but an analysis of the data (with caveats around the lack of total preciseness but the data is good enough to show the trend and relativity) shows that a lack of conspicuity contributes as a factor (small contribution to a main contribution) in about 60 to 65% of motorcycle crashes. Given this we decided that conspicuity as one factor is worth time and effort to better understand. It's not a silver bullet if fixed but it is a common enough factor to be worried about it. However, I accept there are a wide range of views and even getting people to agree to disagree is a better place to be at than ignoring it. Mostly we are keen to have an informed debate and discussion and not just rely on anecdotal views - a point you make well.

You raise an interesting point around hoodies (physical barriers that impair the breadth of view) and I have taken that on board. Cheers.

[flyingcrocodile46]

If you're going to hammer in a big nail you're better off using a big hammer.

Fucking dinosaur. In this day and age the enlightened use screws :rolleyes: Hammers and nails are sooo yesterday.

If nothing else, our news headlines repeatedly show us the damage that results from fuckwits using big hammers in all walks of life. It is a tool for people who are too fucking retarded to use more sophisticated and effective tools. Do schools use hammers? NO! Why the fuck not? Because they don't fucking work.

SET UP A FUCKING INCENTIVE SYSTEM. It ain't rocket science, just common fucking sense.

[Kickaha]

On conspicuity - no we have not decided it IS the answer but an analysis of the data (with caveats around the lack of total preciseness but the data is good enough to show the trend and relativity) shows that a lack of conspicuity contributes as a factor (small contribution to a main contribution) in about 60 to 65% of motorcycle crashes. Given this we decided that conspicuity as one factor is worth time and effort to better understand. It's not a silver bullet if fixed but it is a common enough factor to be worried about it.

Have you looked at data from both pre and post "headlight on" legislation?

[MrKiwi]

Have you looked at data from both pre and post "headlight on" legislation?

Yes. One of the challenges from the data is being able to identify the results of a single intervention against the background of multiple factors. The data has been analysed and there is a trend but it is not possible to accurately ascribe outcomes to a specific intervention other than a trend. Accidents normally associated with a lack of visibility trended downwards post the legislation but was masked by an increase in motorbikes on the road at the time and that quite a few riders already rode with lights on anyway.

However, I have to declare an interest in the headlight on legislation as this was an intervention I managed through government when previously working at the Ministry of Transport leading the road safety policy programme. The main rationale for the headlights on legislation was to create a distinction between bikes and other road users. This distinction is gradually being lost for day time riding as more and more cars now have day time running lights fitted as standard equipment.

[bogan]

Yes. One of the challenges from the data is being able to identify the results of a single intervention against the background of multiple factors. The data has been analysed and there is a trend but it is not possible to accurately ascribe outcomes to a specific intervention other than a trend. Accidents normally associated with a lack of visibility trended downwards post the legislation but was masked by an increase in motorbikes on the road at the time and that quite a few riders already rode with lights on anyway.

However, I have to declare an interest in the headlight on legislation as this was an intervention I managed through government when previously working at the Ministry of Transport leading the road safety policy programme. The main rationale for the headlights on legislation was to create a distinction between bikes and other road users. This distinction is gradually being lost for day time riding as more and more cars now have day time running lights fitted as standard equipment.

Will the data/analysis be made public?

I think conspicuity is up there with loss of control, in that it is a big box to pidgeon hole the majority of accidents into. I mean lets face it, for an accident to occur, if they are in control, 99% of the time it'll they have been unobservant (conspicuity). This makes it attractive to try and make things more conspicuous. However, the reality of the situation is far more complicated than brightness == visibility; any analysis which doesn't address this point will be flawed, and useless.

[GrayWolf]

Fucking dinosaur. In this day and age the enlightened use screws :rolleyes: Hammers and nails are sooo yesterday.

If nothing else, our news headlines repeatedly show us the damage that results from fuckwits using big hammers in all walks of life. It is a tool for people who are too fucking retarded to use more sophisticated and effective tools. Do schools use hammers? NO! Why the fuck not? Because they don't fucking work.

SET UP A FUCKING INCENTIVE SYSTEM. It ain't rocket science, just common fucking sense.

Actually the 'hammer approach' was very effective when used correctly. Many 'old sods' here will remember the 'love shown' by teachers with a slipper or cane at school.
Would I advocate some of the beatings we had dished out? NO...
BUT what the 'hammer' did give was a 'CONCRETE CONSEQUENCE' Do that and this WILL happen. A definite line in the sand, that if you chose to cross, you did so knowing the likely outcome. Did we? Hell yes, I am sure I was one of the kids who kept the asain bamboo cane industry going.
what you say is correct, when the 'hammer' is used by a fuckwit? it's all turns to custard. History also shows some highly successful hammer users.
Our Driving while under the influence laws are a good 'demonstration' of an incentive law...... a 6 month suspension of licence, community service? Cmon, lets get serious, 5 yrs minimum.. if you kill someone? Life ban, with NO reprieve..... lets take it from there for any following offences.

[Katman]

I think conspicuity is up there with loss of control, in that it is a big box to pidgeon hole the majority of accidents into. I mean lets face it, for an accident to occur, if they are in control, 99% of the time it'll they have been unobservant (conspicuity).

(Ignoring the idea of apportioning 'fault' for a moment).....

All this talk of conspicuity fails to address the fact that with better observational skills motorcyclists would be more likely to avoid the unobservant driver.

Blindness works both ways you know.

[bogan]

(Ignoring the idea of apportioning 'fault' for a moment).....

All this talk of conspicuity fails to address the fact that with better observational skills motorcyclists would be more likely to avoid the unobservant driver.

Blindness works both ways you know.

Exactly my point, 'visibility' is just one part of a much larger problem caused by unobservant road users. It is too easy for legislators to equate the two and burden us with ineffective yellow rubbish (and I'm not talking about suzukis here :bleh:).

[Katman]

Exactly my point, 'visibility' is just one part of a much larger problem caused by unobservant road users. It is too easy for legislators to equate the two and burden us with ineffective yellow rubbish (and I'm not talking about suzukis here :bleh:).

The last thing I ever want is to be forced to wear day-glo.

Trouble is, if motorcyclists don't start using their eyes and their brains, that's exactly where we're heading.

[MrKiwi]

The last thing I ever want is to be forced to wear day-glo.

Trouble is, if motorcyclists don't start using their eyes and their brains that's exactly where we're heading.

I certainly hope we we do not end up with day-glo being mandatory. Being seen is important and there are several ways that can be achieved, but so much more depends on how we ride our bike is my view.

[GrayWolf]

I certainly hope we we do not end up with day-glo being mandatory. Being seen is important and there are several ways that can be achieved, but so much more depends on how we ride our bike is my view.

I think many share your hope, and the more this subject is discussed I'd guess there will be more and more fracturing of the debate at many levels.

One of your statements does pique my 'red flag' curiosity. Not what you said but how Politicians would 'grasp it' and run with it.... That conspicuity is a "small contributing factor in a larger contributing factor" It's the ease of identification that a poli' will love. We cant actually 'prove' the driver was daydreaming, SMIDSY may be admitted, but then of course if we are wearing hi-vis? But hang on, what about this 55watt halogen headlight thingy perched on the front of the bike that's supposed to be a visual 'reminder'?

Poli's look for the easy way out, 'minor' contribution or not, the fact there is an identification of commonality of partial cause? WILL be enough for them, thank you very much. Day lights? As has been mentioned in other places, cars are now using LED daylights, so that is going to lose 'impact' ,,,, maybe we do need something to improve 'eye catching' headlight modulators? We all know politicians want 'quick results' every time over long term benefit, so they 'look good' to the plebeians.
Maybe the thing to do for us is to NOT identify a 'quick fix' for them, but purely tout for 'long term, long haul' fixes.

[Katman]

maybe we do need something to improve 'eye catching' headlight modulators?

Is it not infinitely preferable (if not easier) to start insisting that motorcyclists use their eyes?

[Scuba_Steve]

End of day people don't see rastuscat on his popo bike, don't see these brightly coloured big pieces of steel we call buses, they don't see the HUGE noisy "Hi-Vis'd" piece of steel we call trains, they sure as hell aint gonna see a tiny hi-vised biker... Hi-vis is NOT an answer, it won't make bikes anymore safe & has the flow on effect of making people who have to wear them (road workers for example) less safe due to "overcrowding" which is the last thing they need, they're already being made unsafe by "boy who cried wolf" temporary speed signs

[Katman]

End of day people don't see rastuscat on his popo bike, don't see these brightly coloured big pieces of steel we call buses, they don't see the HUGE noisy "Hi-Vis'd" piece of steel we call trains, they sure as hell aint gonna see a tiny hi-vised biker... Hi-vis is NOT an answer, it won't make bikes anymore safe & has the flow on effect of making people who have to wear them (road workers for example) less safe due to "overcrowding" which is the last thing they need, they're already being made unsafe by "boy who cried wolf" temporary speed signs

Bingo.

The only answer is to expect greater accountability from ourselves for our own welfare.

[Berries]

End of day people don't see rastuscat on his popo bike
May be they do?

Just saying.

[bogan]

Bingo.

The only answer is to expect greater accountability from ourselves for our own welfare.

Which is good for numero uno, but what about others? I often notice how other people happily sit in blind spots, or just be content looking at indicators to figure out what other cars will do, why not try to stop them from having accidents as well as ourselves?

[Katman]

Which is good for numero uno, but what about others? I often notice how other people happily sit in blind spots, or just be content looking at indicators to figure out what other cars will do, why not try to stop them from having accidents as well as ourselves?

Serious question for you.

Which do you think is easier to achieve?

Change within oneself or forcing someone else to change.

[bogan]

Serious question for you.

Which do you think is easier to achieve?

Change within oneself or forcing someone else to change.

It depends on the change, in this case its easier to get ourselves to change. Other cases, like when some noisy fucker keeps waking you up by doing unnecessary shit like sharpening knives at 530am, its probably easier to get them to change.

My point is, its not about what is best for oneself, I already look for ways to improve my roadcraft; but what about others I care about that do not, how do we get them to change?

[Katman]

It depends on the change, in this case its easier to get other people to change.

Bullshit.


My point is, its not about what is best for oneself, I already look for ways to improve my roadcraft; but what about others I care about that do not, how do we get them to change?

In my whole time on here all I've ever tried achieving is convincing people that change is easier within ourselves.

You can :brick: all you like trying to convince cars drivers to up their game.

I'll :brick: against a different wall.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Change within oneself or forcing someone else to change.

You're trying to do both. First bit was easy I'm sure. Next bit...you may as well speak to a post half the time.

Edit. You beat me to it!

[bogan]

woops, total brain fart, put 'other people' instead of 'ourselves', I can see how you'd be surprised by that answer, as it is only the complete oppposite of what I meant :p

[Katman]

You're trying to do both. First bit was easy I'm sure. Next bit...you may as well speak to a post half the time.

Edit. You beat me to it!

I've already achieved the easy one.

Now I'm concentrating on the hard one.

[GrayWolf]

Is it not infinitely preferable (if not easier) to start insisting that motorcyclists use their eyes?

Kat at the risk of being downright 'obvious' stop thinking and preaching a 'one groove record', and start thinking like a slimebag (politician).
They have to be SEEN by the great unwashed masses to be doing 'something' to reduce the terrible carnage that has been highlighted.... ye gods man, let the bikers do it themselves? Where is ANY political gain in that? There is NO POINT continuing a 'monotone dialogue'. By that I mean, your the only one saying it, whether it has high validity or not.
It's like the 'dog control' laws, we all know they were a 'knee jerk' reaction, but as much as it was a knee jerk to the events, it was a high profile, lets DO SOMETHING media event that gets us (party/govt) in the public eye as taking action. As much as I would shudder at the thought, if by some terrible tragedy a group (say 10-20) large enough of motorcyclists were severely injured and/or killed, by a truck.... and it was a SMIDSY accident? I will bet my left, in fact and my right one too, that there would be an unstoppable 'political juggernaut' that would have hi vis as a law within a few months at the longest. It would be the political leverage to be seen to be 'doing something' the bastards love to be given.
Blanket statements like,,,,insist we should use our eyes? are wonderful.... so you approach a T junction at 100kph, assess the situation... OK stopped and looking at you (which we all know means nothing) is joe numbnuts turbonutter, in his 1990's high K's worn out, smokey Soobuu legacyGT or WRX. may be worn out but will still likely turn in 5 second 0-100 figures readily. He decides as you approach that he can 'go for it' and turn across you..... all you can do is take avoidance action... open ruddy eyed or not mate.. it now comes down to TRAINING, SKILL, ABILITY and most importantly, the one thing that is an unpredictable variable.. the poor fucker on the bike him/herself..... what if just for that split second they freeze? and mate dont tell me people do not freeze or take time to process 'danger' information.
If you try that sausage, I will simply ask you to go talk to a few train drivers who have had suicides or cars 'appear' where they shouldnt'... there is a split second WTF..... process, decide.. react..
BANG too late you just hit joe numbnuts, as he pulled out on you. Having your eyes open doesnt stop all accidents, it just gives you 'sometimes' a better chance of either surviving, or mitigating.

[Katman]

Kat at the risk of being downright 'obvious' stop thinking and preaching a 'one groove record', and start thinking like a slimebag (politician).

No thanks.


By that I mean, your the only one saying it, whether it has high validity or not.

Not these days thankfully.

[duckonin]

[QUOTE=GrayWolf;

Blanket statements like,,,,insist we should use our eyes? are wonderful.... :niceone:[/QUOTE]

'
"Also add/use your brain in the equation" :rolleyes:

[bluninja]

I wished having seen this I'd engaged my brain and stopped after the few pages :rolleyes:

So for those KBers that use their eyes, brains, make themselves conspicuous, and work on their roadcraft and bike handling skills continuously....

How does one convince the not so committed/skilled to make the effort?

I 'persuaded' one young rider to attend a skills course nearby. He said how good it was and that, when I discussed the need to practice my braking, that I should go on the course myself as they did lots of braking practice. He seemed shocked when I said that practicing skills was something you did yourself, not just on a course. I told him that Bikers Gear had a closing down sale on tomorrow and maybe he should buy some gloves with fingers before he takes his full license in a few months.

The thing about personal responsibility is that it can only go so far in risk mitigation in a shared environment that are public roads.

Why is it so hard to focus on improved driving skills, rather than just pick on motorcycling? 31% of bike accidents are bikerider lost it....that leaves 69% with shared culpabilty....hitting this number from both sides would have a bigger effect than just focussing on the riders of the 31%

[Ocean1]

SET UP A FUCKING INCENTIVE SYSTEM. It ain't rocket science, just common fucking sense.

Like "pay attention or we'll grind your fingers off and snap your legs like twigs"?

Dude, skatman thinks he IS an incentive scheme. What he can't bear to think about is that his "message" might be less effective than real life consequences. Don't burst his wee bubble, eh?

[Voltaire]

SET UP A FUCKING INCENTIVE SYSTEM. It ain't rocket science, just common fucking sense.

I thought they had....by making bike rego higher than cars.....message: buy a car...they are safer....and with a metal box more forgiving of poor driving.....mostly.

Part from the Japanese wasn't the introduction of the Mini the beginning of the end for motorcycling as daily transport.....or was that Churchill.....:msn-wink:

"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

[Usarka]

End of day people don't see rastuscat on his popo bike


May be they do?

Just saying.

If I had a dollar for every time I saw an ambulance/police car/fire engine stuck behind a car on the auckland motorway even with lights and sirens blazing I'd have $362.53 by now.

[GTRMAN]

It would seem from all the posting in this thread that the plural of 'Motorcyclist' is 'Argument'

Some say hi viz is the answer, others counter with cagers should be more observant, yet others seem so tied up in the 'look' of their gear that they can't see that someone wearing all black may make a hard to see moving target.

Is it any wonder that few people in a position of authority take us seriously when given the opportunity we act like a bag of cats?

Katman has a valid viewpoint, we first and foremost need to take personal responsibility for our riding and all the skills / techniques that come into play when we do.

Only then can we hope to change the attitude of other people.

The sad truth is that the perception of the many will always be tainted by the actions of the few. Can anyone here say that they haven't had some moron shoot past them doing something dangerous on a bike and thought 'statistic waiting to happen'? Well that is how most everyone in a car is going to perceive motorcyclists.

It is my experience in life that if you keep asking the 'but why?' question you can eventually uncover the root cause of an issue. So why can't we clinically apply this to the current argument? are we collectively afraid that it may result in someone saying 'you need to change'?

[wide chicken strips]

And that's the heart of the matter, which has apparently been decided to move to the later while we were watching something else.

Though considering it's Sir Owen, and Mr Gareth, I know which one I'd rather listen to :rolleyes:


The risk figure is bollocks and irrelevant anyway, nobody pays either insurance or ACC on a per km basis. If you ever needed proof that MOTOTNZ are just an ACC propaganda machine, them running those figures instead of per bike risk provides it.

Analysing motorcycle safety on a "per km" basis is quite valid. The airline industry measures flight safety by "flight miles" which is a totally fair measurement of risk versus the amount of activity undertaken.

[wide chicken strips]

No doubt ACC will be using my accident in January to wave around and say "See see.. look how much this costs."

While it might have been a bumper nudge and swearing when in a car, on a bike it was ass to the grass and permanent disability in my right arm.

Nevermind the fact that the driver of the car was ticketed on the spot by the police, for what he did that caused me to crash.

Why should I lose an ACC no claims for an accident that was proven to not have anything to do with me other than I was the victim?

As Gareth Morgan has just painfully pointed out to us whinging about being "the victim" and quoting the "No fault" provisions of the ACC Act is to perpetuate the myth about ACC. "No Fault" means that no parties involved in an accident have the need or right to sue another party in the same accident because ACC is not interested in "fault" or "blame". What ACC does have to do by law is recover the cost of the accident from the relevant user group so "No Fault' simply doesn't come into the equation!

[bogan]

Analysing motorcycle safety on a "per km" basis is quite valid. The airline industry measures flight safety by "flight miles" which is a totally fair measurement of risk versus the amount of activity undertaken.

Depends on the groupings, would the airline industry include helicopters for that stat? Military? Hang gliders? Wing suits? Cos MOTONZ though it was fair to group the scooters in with the rest of the bikes, 30% of a fleet being barely capable of doing 50kmhr, might skew the km data just a tad wouldn't you agree?

And then there's the fact that he often uses it as justification to charge us more, we are not charged by the amount of activity undertaken, so it is a useless metric there anyway.


As Gareth Morgan has just painfully pointed out to us whinging about being "the victim" and quoting the "No fault" provisions of the ACC Act is to perpetuate the myth about ACC. "No Fault" means that no parties involved in an accident have the need or right to sue another party in the same accident because ACC is not interested in "fault" or "blame". What ACC does have to do by law is recover the cost of the accident from the relevant user group so "No Fault' simply doesn't come into the equation!

Just noticed you're quoting from the beginning of the thread. Perhaps read in a bit more, this stuff has been addressed at length.

[oneofsix]

As Gareth Morgan has just painfully pointed out to us whinging about being "the victim" and quoting the "No fault" provisions of the ACC Act is to perpetuate the myth about ACC. "No Fault" means that no parties involved in an accident have the need or right to sue another party in the same accident because ACC is not interested in "fault" or "blame". What ACC does have to do by law is recover the cost of the accident from the relevant user group so "No Fault' simply doesn't come into the equation!

But only from motorist, especially motorcyclists. No cost recovery from cyclists, horse riders nor pedestrians even though one or more of those groups cost ACC more than motorcyclist.

One smells :bs: Political propaganda, where a part or small truth is taken and massaged into a big misrepresentation