Labour response to this mornings ACC add

[Ixion]

No they don't . F'instance Labour supported National on the boy racer crushing bill

And National supported Labour on the smacking bill (PLEASE don't let's get started on that again - it was just one cross party bill that came to mmind)

[Ozzie]

Sure he is, or is he just hijacking your issue?

Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by each other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

[MattRSK]

Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by either other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

Good point.

[Ixion]

My enemies enemies are my friends. Temporarily. Sure Labour are only supporting us because they see us as a stick to beat National with. And will cast us aside when we are no longer of use to them.

But, in the meantime, they're fighting our fight. So, we support them.

Moreover, the fact that labour are pitching so hard shows that they think Lthey can hurt National on this.

[Ozzie]

Fuck, Bring it, I want to hurt National!

[Motu]

They would probably be trying the same thing. They're all as bad as each other really.

No denying they are as bad as each other,but Labour has never tried to privatise ACC,they reinstated it when National last privatised ACC.Privatising ACC was a National pre election policy - they dropped the issue very quickly when they found voters didn't approve.

[StoneY]

Sure he is, or is he just hijacking your issue?

Well I know the MOTIVATION may not be as pure as the breeze passing though the space between your ears, but it is moot

This gives me hope that we can win this, and Davids intentions, whatever the motivation, are clearly in OUR favour

Happens I have met David a number of times when I worked in Govt as a Union delegate just before the Nats won last year

So, what IS his motivation?
Definitely based on getting a nail into the Nats for sure, but MAYBE he likes the fact his mates have bikes he can take for a hoon once every few months....you know?
And if ACC get their way, they may not have bikes anymore due to kids that need to eat

MPs can actually be human beings, and as far as motivations, I have dealt with a LOT of MP's, Labour and Green MPs tend to have more of a social conscience than Nats that's for fuckin sure

[Deano]

Labour would be trying to put up the levies based on ACC's recommendation was my point, not the privatisation issue.

[StoneY]

Does it make a difference?

For all I know, half the people on here don't like me, and I probably don't like them either, as long as we can stand by either other and shove it to Nick Smith, John Key and the ACC!

He can get our view in the media, a whole shite load cheaper and for better effect than we can, if I could bling him I would!

Post of the thread bro triple bling to you

[MattRSK]

Well I know the MOTIVATION may not be as pure as the breeze passing though the space between your ears, but it is moot

Cool story bro....... Just stating an opinion didn't mean to piss you off.

[Deano]

Just stating an opinion didn't mean to piss you off.

How dare you !!

[Mcycle]

ACC’s Press Ad’s of 5 November are a sign of desperation by ACC, and an attempt to ‘divide and rule’ by posing more spurious arguments.

My recommendation is to not be tempted into responding to the often irrelevant points raised in this advertisement.

Stick to the simple winning arguments so clearly detailed on the web site; www.bikersagainstacc.org.nz.

If anyone does respond, do it by letters to the Editor, to all papers up and down the country and simply pick out key points eg

“In it’s 5 November advertisement ACC say that Motorcyclists aren’t being singles out, yet in 2008 there were 1,475 motorcycle accidents and 50 deaths, and motorcyclists paid approximately $12.3 million in levies. At the same period there were 1,170 bicycle accidents and 36 deaths. Cyclists paid no ACC levies.

In targeting motorcyclists ACC is ignoring the key fact that ACC was established to draw upon the overall resources of the community to ensure that ALL those who suffer an accident do not find themselves disadvantaged because they cannot afford treatment or rehabilitation, or meet the expenses associated with a lengthy court case. Saying that motor cyclists must pay much more than presently because they are ‘responsible’ for their accidents not only breaches the principal behind the scheme, it also re-introduces the notion of fault into the scheme when it was set up in the first place to avoid it.”

Keep up the good work folks, we are winning!!

[Mudfart]

the politicians shud go to any A and E on a Thurs, Fri, or Sat night and look at all the drunk idiots wasting tax payer money. I wonder if they wud put up the price of alcohol? NO. Why? Because NZers spend 12.5 million dollars on alcohol per week! So I imagine that the breweries have some very strong political sway. Maybe we cud start a church, Ill claim tithings and request gifts, and give all the money to all our registrations, insurances etc.... and maybe if we paid enough we wud automatically be entitled to political sway. AHHHH the beauty of being free, existing under a corruption free society of democracy. Me fikken grandad took two italian bullets for what?

[R6_kid:Me]

I particularly like this line:

How much more at risk are motorcyclists?
Motorcyclists are at very high risk of continued steep fee rises because the consultation is a sham. The Government’s already made up its mind.

[86GSXR]

Direct from the Labour ACC spokes to me, you got it here on KB even before the Press knew it

Labour have gone WAY onside here, they want the BIKER vote end of story

Brilliant thread, here's hoping eh!