Don't fall for Nick Smith's bullshit

[Stan]

After today's Ulysses Club protest, Nick Smith tried to spin it like this: Nasty ACC wants to charge you a fortune to register your bike but, since I'm your friend, I'll rein them in and your rego won't go up so much.

Don't fall for it. This isn't an ACC decision, its purely a political decision, taken by Nick Smith and the puppet ACC board that he appointed.

The real agenda is to portray ACC as a basket case so that they can justify opening it up to competition and make the insurance industry VERY happy.

[James Deuce]

The real agenda is to portray ACC as a basket case so that they can justify opening it up to competition and make the insurance industry VERY happy.

NZ Insurance companies are, in the main, uninterested in the type of "cover" ACC provide. They can't do it anywhere as cheaply or as comprehensively, and certainly not in the way that a Compensation scheme does. They aren't geared for liability legal battles and don't want to spend the money necessary getting there.

[Stan]

NZ Insurance companies are, in the main, uninterested in the type of "cover" ACC provide. They can't do it anywhere as cheaply or as comprehensively, and certainly not in the way that a Compensation scheme does. They aren't geared for liability legal battles and don't want to spend the money necessary getting there.

Yes, I have noticed that they're sounding a bit less eager than they did last time around, probably because they still feel the pain of being kicked in the nuts by Labour. But that won't stop them taking the money and we'll all end up paying the price through reduced coverage and increased premiums.

You've only got to look at what a great job the government did by opening the electricity industry to competition to see that this is a BAD idea.

The changes to ACC are about a lot more than us paying higher rego for our bikes, its about the government attempting to destroy a bloody good institution.

[Pedrostt500]

Don't trust any politician as far as you can kick em!.

[StoneY]

Nick hunted me down after almost everyone had left, and tried his flawed numbers on me....

Epic FAIL

I don't believe I out debated a senior cabinet minister in less than 3 minutes...but I did!

He is so unsure of his data, despite repeating it over and over....I feel were gonna win I really do

[Coldrider]

Nick hunted me down after almost everyone had left, and tried his flawed numbers on me....

Epic FAIL

I don't believe I out debated a senior cabinet minister in less than 3 minutes...but I did!

He is so unsure of his data, despite repeating it over and over....I feel were gonna win I really do

They are just like corporates, full of bluster and overtalking, their failure is that they get personally involved, instead of sending layers of 'buffers' below them to face the fodder.

[RentaTriumph]

There's statistics then theres bullshit. Politicians talk the latter.

[Winston001]

The real agenda is to portray ACC as a basket case so that they can justify opening it up to competition and make the insurance industry VERY happy.

You've only got to look at what a great job the government did by opening the electricity industry to competition to see that this is a BAD idea.

The changes to ACC are about a lot more than us paying higher rego for our bikes, its about the government attempting to destroy a bloody good institution.

Oh puuleaaseee Stan, conspiracies are one thing we do not need. Just a quick reminder that NZ is the least corrupt country in the world. And the Winston Peters fiasco before the last election made it pretty clear that political parties in NZ get sod-all donations. There is zero chance of insurance companies paying off a National/Maori/ACT coalition of MPs.

Instead some MPS - probably including Nick Smith - believe ACC would be forced to be more efficient if it was open to competition from insurance companies. The objective is to reduce the cost of cover which would benefit our economy - and be popular with voters.

I happen to disagree with this approach because I think ACC largely works well. But there are no conspiracies.

[Stan]

Oh puuleaaseee Stan, conspiracies are one thing we do not need. Just a quick reminder that NZ is the least corrupt country in the world. And the Winston Peters fiasco before the last election made it pretty clear that political parties in NZ get sod-all donations. There is zero chance of insurance companies paying off a National/Maori/ACT coalition of MPs.

Instead some MPS - probably including Nick Smith - believe ACC would be forced to be more efficient if it was open to competition from insurance companies. The objective is to reduce the cost of cover which would benefit our economy - and be popular with voters.

I happen to disagree with this approach because I think ACC largely works well. But there are no conspiracies.

I'm not saying there's any consiracy. Just that Smith and the National party are ideologically driven towards competition/privatisation whether the figures support it or not.

ACC isn't broke and doesn't need fixing.

[StoneY]

The angle we need to present is that Nick Smith is a (erhem) 'victim' of bad advice and misinformed underlings, and get him to see the stats from our point of view

I got halfway there today....he was engaging with me till he tried '50,000' bikes....earlier its been 74 thousand, 83,000...

True number from MOT stats I threw in his face is 116,000 and change
He panicked...no shit panicked, Laxi, Hawkeye and a few others tried hard not to laugh!

NOW

MISINFORMED is not necessarily the same as 'out to get you' even tho we feel like they're out to get us

So we can win our case by re-directing the attention to the fact that we are subsidizing everyone else, and when its truly analyzed there are better ways to prop up ACC

Which aint actually broken.... anyway, as Stan so rightly notes


So the panel of the BIKEOI will present exact stats, and analysis, and a petition at least

And we can only note the massive, MASSIVE public support we got today.

[caseye]

Go Stoney boy! c ya on the 17th mate.
Shoulder to shoulder.

[MacD]

I happen to disagree with this approach because I think ACC largely works well. But there are no conspiracies.

I agree there a unlikely to be any real conspiracy, but there certainly is a political agenda at work here. We are continually fed the line that competition will result in decreased costs, however international comparisons with other private insurance-based systems, such as operate in Australia and Canada, show that ACC is already more efficient in terms of costs.

ACT is simply (and I do mean simply) ideologically opposed to a state-owned accident insurance system.

Of course there should be debate about the level and range of coverage of a system like ACC, but the current approach is to claim that the sky is falling (somebody really needs to explain to Nick Smith the difference between a loss and a future liability) in order to justify political, rather than economic, actions.

[nothingflash]

There's statistics then theres bullshit. Politicians talk the latter.

Statistics prove this

[FJRider]

The decision to "attempt" the increases are ACC's, but approval must be gained from the "Minister" first ...

[Voltaire]

Nick is misinformed he needs steering in the right direction.
Luckily the steering committee is arriving in Wellington on the 17th.

We are coming to help you Nick.
Have calculator.
Will travel.