Originally Posted by
p.dath
I had my meeting this morning with the senior policy analyst and the general manager of motoring affairs this morning. I have to say I entered the meeting expecting that I would achieve nothing. I thought the AA would be firmly entrenched in their position.
I'm happy to say I walked away with a positive attitude, as I feel I have actually given them pause for thought, and they indicated they were going to working on some of the issues I have raised.
I started the meeting by saying I was not a representative of the motorcycling community, but that the view I hold is also held by a lot of others in the motorcycling community. I told them that the motorcycling community was disappointed with the response from the AA, and felt the policy choices by the AA had acted against the motorcycling community.
The meeting lasted for an hour, and that was pretty much solid talking by both parties. I'll try and summarise the major bits. So much was talked about. They bought up lots of numbers, but luckily I had studied up the prior two nights on a lot of the statistics released by ACC. I was able to counter a lot of the numbers mentioned, or at least cast doubt on them. Weather they believed me or not, by the end of the meeting I think I gave them considerable pause for thought on information that has been released by ACC.
I spoke for sometime on the Woodhouse report, and the community values. I think I have almost completely turned them on the issue of pre-funding. They told me they were meeting with Nick Smith (ACC minister) tomorrow, and would talk to him about the continued need for pre-funding. They said they had invited someone from Ulysses to the meeting, and would like to invite another motorycycle related group along, but weren't sure who to approach. So if someone from BRONZ is interested in attending ministerial meetings in Wellington along with the AA and Ulyses, put your hand up and I'll put you in contact with the right people.
Now your probably thinking they are just going to mention this to the minister. I'm pretty confident they are going to take it further, and I think there is a very good chance this will become a formal policy of the AA (it has to go before the national board before this can happen). Expect to see some press on this issue during 2010.
I spoke to them about how I felt there the costs of ACC should be shared equally by all. I said the risk assessment system should be dropped. Anything that looks like insurance should be gotten rid of. They said that the risk assessment is enshrined in law now, and that it would be difficult to change. They were reluctant on this one, but said if they could get pre-funding dropped, then they would take another look at this one.
I did point out that if pre-funding was dropped then all motorists could have an ACC cut immediately.
We spoke a lot about taxes, enforcement, education. I said I personally opposed solutions where the Government tried to tax a problem out of existence (tickets, fees, etc). They already have the same view. I said I was very much in favour of education to solve issues instead. They told me they held the same view, and had already been working on the issue with the Government. They are pushing the Government to offer subsidised advanced rider/driver training courses. I told them with regard to rider training, that it is unlikely that a commercial operator could make money from it, and hence I didn't think we would get many people entering the market. I suggested to them that perhaps the AA (being a non-profit group) could consider offering nation wide rider training. They didn't say no, but weren't keen on it, but are going to take it under advisement. I say put your money where your mouth is if your preaching it ... haha.
I spoke to them about the AGM in March, and asked them how they feel if I made some motions that forced the AA to adopt policies, such as a return to the Woodhouse principles. He didn't look so happy about this idea, but said if such a motion was made and carried by the members at the AGM then they would abide by it.
He said three of the AA districts already want a return to the Woodhouse principles. If a few more districts come on board then they would probably adopt the policy (which also means all motorists paying the same equal share of ACC).
I spoke about collection of ACC levies. The AA is of the opinion that the fees should be mostly levied against Petrol, and a tiny bit against the rego. I'm happy with that.
I told them I would be in further contact to ask about their progress on the issues I have mentioned.
So much was talked about. If more comes back to my memory I'll make some other posts. I think that was all the major bits.
Reply With Quote
:
Bookmarks