Bike Rego Petition

[rok-the-boat]

Rego petition
https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_125744/petition-of-rupert-atkinson-reduce-the-rego-fee-on-all

[Kickaha]

Rego petition
https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_125744/petition-of-rupert-atkinson-reduce-the-rego-fee-on-all

Given that the reasons given for the petition are just about all wrong I wouldn't bother

[F5 Dave]

Most bike accidents are single vehicle. Less and less people commuting so less interaction with cars.

[Laava]

If it were to make regos cheaper, why wouldnt you sign?

[F5 Dave]

Because that's isn't likely to convince anyone. It is a weak argument.
It's like - I deserve a payrise because I turned up at work and barely stole anything.

The counter argument of the most receptive government department (good luck) would quickly slip into, gee, I guess we could do something for Electric Motorcycles. Not those dirty petrol ones.

[pritch]

If it were to make regos cheaper, why wouldnt you sign?

Because it has the proverbial snowball's chance in Hell of succeeding. Also it's so bad I'd be embarrassed to be associated with it.

If it were professionally done and factual I'd sign it, but as is? Thanks but no thanks.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I deserve a payrise because I turned up at work and barely stole anything.



Me too!!!!!!!

[F5 Dave]

I'd certainly favour a rego on the driver with incremental increases for additional vehicles. As it is many probably most riders have cars as well, and many of us multiple bikes. I have an additional Van for carting dirtbikes about. Fortunately that has reduced significantly, but it gets used once a month.

That's unfair, but I don't see govt departments giving a shit.

Stay at school children.

[jellywrestler]

smaller carbon footprint? there's plenty of electric vehicles changing that ratio slowly but surely, not many bikes out there. MPG they aren't great, especially when the limit is two people on a bike and more in the car so a weak argument too
got onto the #metoo and groundswell people, they'll sign it

[James Deuce]

smaller carbon footprint? there's plenty of electric vehicles changing that ratio slowly but surely, not many bikes out there. MPG they aren't great, especially when the limit is two people on a bike and more in the car so a weak argument too
got onto the #metoo and groundswell people, they'll sign it

The worst thing about bikes is their ratio of super toxic emissions (nitrogen oxides) to engine capacity. That's because there isn't the physical space to add all the scrubbers that cars get. CO2 output is way up too, except for the Honda NC700/750s (the most boring and unpleasant to ride bike I've ever tried), simply as a factor of the pumping capacity at higher RPMs, that are 50-100% greater than the average car engine. The only resource based argument you can use with a bike is they take less stuff to make a functional device.

My bike also keeps misgendering me so that makes it much more likely to be cancelled than my car.

Oh, forgot to say. No one in a legislative or regulatory position gives two shits about bikes, even if they own and ride one. They know a motorcycle is a cost negative device, socially and economically. You'd do better to shut up and stop drawing attention to bikes.

[pete376403]

. You'd do better to shut up and stop drawing attention to bikes.

Couldn't have said it better.

[nerrrd]

The worst thing about bikes is their ratio of super toxic emissions (nitrogen oxides) to engine capacity. That's because there isn't the physical space to add all the scrubbers that cars get. CO2 output is way up too, except for the Honda NC700/750s...

So technically just my carbon footprint is an improvement on a car? And I haven't managed to have a single vehicle accident so far...I might start my own petition. Just for me.

You lot with your exciting, fun to ride but toxic and prone to crashing bikes clearly don't deserve one.

[Berries]

Most bike accidents are single vehicle.
Not quite. 1,266 injury crashes last year involving a moped or motorbike, 492 involved no other vehicle so 39 percent.

Was tempted to chime in about the incorrect claim that car drivers are more at fault than riders when the two collide but figured that would drag the thread down.

[F5 Dave]

So technically just my carbon footprint is an improvement on a car? And I haven't managed to have a single vehicle accident so far...I might start my own petition. Just for me.

You lot with your exciting, fun to ride but toxic and prone to crashing bikes clearly don't deserve one.



I certainly don't deserve one. Or the other 6. But I'm not sure what to get next and whether it is worth the constant reorganisation parking hassle.

But despite being my middle name, I've never had a Harley.

Maybe a new set of clothes, and some new leather biker 'friends'?

Grrr. Grrr. Ohh, whoopsiedaisy. :love:

[F5 Dave]

Not quite. 1,266 injury crashes last year involving a moped or motorbike, 492 involved no other vehicle so 39 percent.

Was tempted to chime in about the incorrect claim that car drivers are more at fault than riders when the two collide but figured that would drag the thread down.

Ohh. Ok I stand slightly corrected. Thought I'd heard otherwise at least in previous years

[Moi]

Does the petitioner, Rupert Atkinson, have any idea what the annual licence fee, commonly miscalled 'registration' [rego for those with literacy issues], actually is for a bike?

Answer below...

Annual licence for a 600+cc bike = $24.50.

[F5 Dave]

I'd certainly favour a rego on the driver with incremental increases for additional vehicles. As it is many probably most riders have cars as well, and many of us multiple bikes. I have an additional Van for carting dirtbikes about. Fortunately that has reduced significantly, but it gets used once a month.

That's unfair, but I don't see govt departments giving a shit.

Stay at school children.
Thanks Moi. That's what I would propose. But yes should have said combined fees on driver and admin rego on successive vehicles.

[Laava]

Does the petitioner, Rupert Atkinson, have any idea what the annual licence fee, commonly miscalled 'registration' [rego for those with literacy issues], actually is for a bike?

Answer below...

Annual licence for a 600+cc bike = $24.50.
My S4R is a 600+cc bike and waka kotahi are asking $519 total, but yes, it is made up of the license fee ($24.50+GST), 2 types of acc levy, other levies and admin plus gst

[James Deuce]

So technically just my carbon footprint is an improvement on a car? And I haven't managed to have a single vehicle accident so far...I might start my own petition. Just for me.

You lot with your exciting, fun to ride but toxic and prone to crashing bikes clearly don't deserve one.
Ahem. I have a Versys 650. I own a bike that is in exactly the same category as yours. This has been my least crashy bike too. But I definitely pollute more than you do.

[pete376403]

the capacity step at 600 is fucked-up. I have a KLR 650 - 40 odd HP on a good day so I pay the same as a 'Busa. A Yamaha R6 is 599cc, 117 HP and far cheaper to register. If there has to be a step it should be on manufacturers claimed power. But there should not be a step at all, A Suzuki Swift and Dodge Hellcat would pay the same.

[Hoonicorn]

if you want to pay less in registration, ride a smaller CC bike and do the ACC rider forever courses and get your rebate. Those things alone will reduce your carbon emissions, increase your safety, and cut $200 from your rego.

[Berries]

Where's the fun in that?

If you want to save on annual rego costs and reduce emissions get a shitty little car.

[Laava]

Get a toyota wish, it runs on happy thoughts and sunshine.

[F5 Dave]

Get a fukin boat in this weather.

[R650R]

The petitioner talks about own insurance, I hope to dear god he doesn’t think substituting private health insurance would be better. Proper policies are horrendously more expensive than acc fees and we’d get rorted worse.

A much better chance would be to make motorcyclist a gender and play the equality card... We could have a free the sump campaign about how our sexuality is oppressed as we are not allowed to wheelie our bikes on public roads. Demand equality with cycling community who are able to hold competitive race event said on open public roads with minimal traffic control.
We could have all those destiny church bikers interviewed on tv talk about the daily struggle of trying to feed the kids while trying to buy new tyres for the v-rod after all the burnouts they have to keep doing to be heard.
Demand employers include needs of motorcyclists in next diversity training courses.
😂😂😂😂

[Laava]

Oh-oh, is it a conspiracy now?

[Gremlin]

the capacity step at 600 is fucked-up. I have a KLR 650 - 40 odd HP on a good day so I pay the same as a 'Busa. A Yamaha R6 is 599cc, 117 HP and far cheaper to register. If there has to be a step it should be on manufacturers claimed power. But there should not be a step at all, A Suzuki Swift and Dodge Hellcat would pay the same.
Agreed, but the way I see it, since I don't want anything in the <600cc bracket, my smallest bike is 919cc :ride:
I also pay the rego holding game, so it's rare that all of them are on the road at the same time. Currently 2/3 are on hold...

[pete376403]

Agreed, but the way I see it, since I don't want anything in the <600cc bracket, my smallest bike is 919cc :ride:
I also pay the rego holding game, so it's rare that all of them are on the road at the same time. Currently 2/3 are on hold...

Same here, both the 1100s and the 650 are on hold. If I go to the Cold Kiwi the 650 might get the minimum 1 months worth

[Gremlin]

Same here, both the 1100s and the 650 are on hold. If I go to the Cold Kiwi the 650 might get the minimum 1 months worth
Not to derail this thread, but using form MR27 (can't be done online), you can change the date of expiry. The effect is you can licence a vehicle for 1-2 days if you want. Usual rule about it being on hold for at least 3 months prior etc etc.

Easier online of course, and that has the 1 month minimum (coz it simply doesn't list anything shorter).

[Oakie]

the capacity step at 600 is fucked-up. I have a KLR 650 - 40 odd HP on a good day so I pay the same as a 'Busa. A Yamaha R6 is 599cc, 117 HP and far cheaper to register. If there has to be a step it should be on manufacturers claimed power. But there should not be a step at all, A Suzuki Swift and Dodge Hellcat would pay the same.

Like most I disagree with the steps. My argument is that you'll damage yourself as much on a 250 as you would on a 1000cc bike coming off at 100kph. One price for all, whatever that may be.

[Navy Boy]

Like most I disagree with the steps. My argument is that you'll damage yourself as much on a 250 as you would on a 1000cc bike coming off at 100kph. One price for all, whatever that may be.

I'm not keen on the stepped rego fee system either. However if they were to do it in the same way as cars then you become perilously close to a UK-style system where the band is determined by the vehicle's official average CO2/KM output, much like our rebate/feebate system. That would do our machines no favours at all.

Careful what you wish for... :no:

For years bike manufacturers haven't bothered publishing their machines' average fuel consumption figures as they simply weren't required to, unlike car manufacturers. I suspect that were they obliged to do so then it would get the attention of those whom we don't wish to take an interest in our hobby/passion. :msn-wink:

[jellywrestler]

The owner can only ride one bike at a time . Simple.



that's funny, more than one person can ride the bike, no differnt to having one car in a household with a number of the family driving it

[JATZ]

Bike Rego in NZ is cheap.
My Vstrom 650 was $1600 cad (a whisker over 2k nzd) for 3 months. That is the minimum length of time. They have done away with the no claims discount and because I have an out of province licence there is no discount. That included 3 mil liability cover.
Pay the $$ and be grateful for the ACC safety net

[MarkH]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

[pritch]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

You're over thinking it. The government explained, they worked out how much they needed and then they worked out how much they needed to charge to cover that.
They are not about to change anything - unless it's to increase it.

[Dadpole]

ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

This is a possibility. It would probably be incorporated with the GPS tracking system currently being talked about. It will also come with congestion (toll) charging - with additional cost for peak hour travel - and automatic speeding tickets. Be careful what you wish for. :shit:

[rastuscat]

This is a possibility. It would probably be incorporated with the GPS tracking system currently being talked about. It will also come with congestion (toll) charging - with additional cost for peak hour travel - and automatic speeding tickets. Be careful what you wish for. :shit:

GPS tracking system? Automatic speeding tickets?

Has your tinfoil hat started to kick in?

[rastuscat]

You're over thinking it. The government explained, they worked out how much they needed and then they worked out how much they needed to charge to cover that.
They are not about to change anything - unless it's to increase it.

Cool, finally someone talking some sense. Aside from one small factor.

They worked out how much they need to cover motorcycle related injuries and rehab, then divided it by the number of licenced (registered) motorcycles on the road.

When they realised that would be around $1500 per year, they realised that would be too high, and nobody would comply.

So they charge motorcyclists as a group around 35% of the cost of motorcycle injuries and rehab, and the other 65% is paid by other road users.

It's immensely expensive to cover the cost of injuries and rehab. I am grumpy about the cost to licence my bike, but I understand why. I'm also grateful that we have the system we have, rather that having to pay for individual injury cover. And of course, those who don't buy their own individual cover would be complaining about having to cover the cost of their own injuries.

Many other systems have been suggested, but each has drawbacks. The system they have adopted is seen as the one with the least number of inequities.

Yes, there are some injustices, but it's a case of the best of a bad situation.

[jellywrestler]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

an outdated idea, what about the electric bikes that will flood our roads in the near future, how will they be covered?

[F5 Dave]

Cool, finally someone talking some sense. Aside from one small factor.

They worked out how much they need to cover motorcycle related injuries and rehab, then divided it by the number of licenced (registered) motorcycles on the road.

When they realised that would be around $1500 per year, they realised that would be too high, and nobody would comply.

So they charge motorcyclists as a group around 35% of the cost of motorcycle injuries and rehab, and the other 65% is paid by other road users.

It's immensely expensive to cover the cost of injuries and rehab. I am grumpy about the cost to licence my bike, but I understand why. I'm also grateful that we have the system we have, rather that having to pay for individual injury cover. And of course, those who don't buy their own individual cover would be complaining about having to cover the cost of their own injuries.

Many other systems have been suggested, but each has drawbacks. The system they have adopted is seen as the one with the least number of inequities.

Yes, there are some injustices, but it's a case of the best of a bad situation.
When I've spanked myself up I've made pains to explain to hospital people that it wasn't on the road, but you know they are looking at a form as their hand moves down to tick Motorcycle accident box.
So thank you registered Motorcyclists for helping to pay for my roadracing and dirtbike injuries. But I bet anything on a motorcycle goes into the same ACC analysis of cost.
And not to say, Sport as Rugby would be.

[Berries]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.
Very much a fan of basing cost on actual risk however distance alone would not work. You may well be exposed to risk for a longer time due to the distance covered but there is also something to be said for the experience gained through all those miles compared to some dude who rides on four or five sunny weekends each year.

[rastuscat]

When I've spanked myself up I've made pains to explain to hospital people that it wasn't on the road, but you know they are looking at a form as their hand moves down to tick Motorcycle accident box.
So thank you registered Motorcyclists for helping to pay for my roadracing and dirtbike injuries. But I bet anything on a motorcycle goes into the same ACC analysis of cost.
And not to say, Sport as Rugby would be.


Off road motorcycle injuries are paid from a different account, not the road account.

You're right, there are probably clerical errors when coding, but generally it's done correctly.

[Bass]

Basically agree with the" leave it alone or you'll only make it worse" logic.
However, I have a DR650.
It's over 600cc and so top whack on ACC levy.
It's so low powered that it's LAMS approved.
Now there's logic for you

[rastuscat]

Basically agree with the" leave it alone or you'll only make it worse" logic.
However, I have a DR650.
It's over 600cc and so top whack on ACC levy.
It's so low powered that it's LAMS approved.
Now there's logic for you

Yup, one of the inequities.

My R1200RT is almost LAMS compliant. Lots of weight, not terribly powerful. Just too big to qualify.

[Kickaha]

Off road motorcycle injuries are paid from a different account, not the road account.

I reckon they paid about 100k for me when I ended up in a induced coma a few years ago, thanks guys the drugs were mostly great

[rastuscat]

I reckon they paid about 100k for me when I ended up in a induced coma a few years ago, thanks guys the drugs were mostly great

Bloke I chatted to a couple of years back reckoned his ortho surgeon had estimated $240K to date, arising from a 30 kmh crash into an armco.

We are delicate, and unforgiving of inattention.

[jellywrestler]

When I've spanked myself up I've made pains to explain to hospital people that it wasn't on the road, but you know they are looking at a form as their hand moves down to tick Motorcycle accident box.
So thank you registered Motorcyclists for helping to pay for my roadracing and dirtbike injuries. But I bet anything on a motorcycle goes into the same ACC analysis of cost.
And not to say, Sport as Rugby would be.

the old forms used to have a box for was it on a registered bike on a public road, not so sure now, someone has to pay for all the skiing and rugby accidents