The ACC saga - a new approach.

[R-Soul]

I didn't think you were one for conspiracy theories KM... and if the future is set towards the removal of motorcycles from the road by 2050, then we can have ZERO accidents, let alone deaths, between now and then and still end up with the same result, the removal of motorcycles... Can't wait til they try legislating bikes off the road... that'll be an interesting stand off at the beehive.

What the fuck do you think they just did with their first tranche of ACC levy rises?
Of course they wont do it in one swoop. But those costs will rise uyearly until the amount payable by ACC for bike costs is negligible, because the number of bikes are negligible...

[R-Soul]

You don't get it, do you?

Do you seriously believe that if we rock up and say "motorcycle license testing is inadequate and driver inattention is a majpr problem" TPTB will say "we won't listen to your concerns about road safety because Johnny Powerranger is an idiot and Nigel Noob can't ride".

get off your bandwagon and look at the bigger picture.

I believe that if we DONT rock up and say "this is how we can cut accidents in half/quarter by doing XXX" the man will say "have another ACC levy increase until we are not making a loss on you hot head/stupid/unprotected MINORITY bike types".

If we go to them and say "in order to get bike accidents down, we will require a restructuiring of the entire univers of road vehicle licensing" they will say "have some more ACC levies".

If we go to them and say, give us a chance to show that these are the problems, and that we can cut the ACc costs by some shrewd bike training (because after all, we are our own worst enemy), they might be more inclined to give it a chance. They might still even turn around and go, "nah, you guys are too dumb, and have been for too long - we dont think it will make a difference, so have some more levys..."

If we dont show some really logical, constructive way of preventing them from having to pay for the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, we can expect more levies. And it will need to be almost completely self driven by us, because you can COUNT on a politiican to NOT get off their ass and NOT make things happen. The path of least resistance is a way of life for them.

In fact I am surprised that CSS has not drawn a up business plan and gone to the transport minister and promises that if he signs on the dotted line, the ACC costs will fall. They take a big chunk of the $23m slush fund, and they do everything. And the license regs are changed so that attendance at CSS for your basic skills handling course is compulsory, and full license holders take refresher courses every two/three years.

If it fails- we are still the idots that keep riding like maniacs. If it works, the minister smells like roses.

[shrub]

I believe if we breeze up the Our Masters and say "motorcycle crashes are too high, and there are what we believe are the causes based on the following research. We want to do something about it, so we would like to propose that we work with you to develop a strategy to achieve that, and we want to work with every other road user including cars" we would be listened to and might actually see some good done.

And that's where people like Charley Lamb and organisations like BRONZ have a role.

[mashman]

What the fuck do you think they just did with their first tranche of ACC levy rises?
Of course they wont do it in one swoop. But those costs will rise uyearly until the amount payable by ACC for bike costs is negligible, because the number of bikes are negligible...

A year is a long time. Lots can happen in a year.

[Katman]

I believe if we breeze up the Our Masters and say "motorcycle crashes are too high, and there are what we believe are the causes based on the following research. We want to do something about it, so we would like to propose that we work with you to develop a strategy to achieve that, and we want to work with every other road user including cars" we would be listened to and might actually see some good done.

And that's where people like Charley Lamb and organisations like BRONZ have a role.

We need to concentrate on cleaning up our own back yard.

Leave the car drivers to TPTB to deal with.

I guarantee if we said "we aim to reduce motorcycle accidents by at least 50%" and then delivered, we would be seen in an entirely different light.

[mashman]

shrub... ( http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...lying-about-us ) BRONZ, Prof Lamb, these guys... ( http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/78...-crashes-rider ) ... ( http://www.odt.co.nz/your-town/wanak...otorcycle-club ) ... are the ones out of touch.

I sort of know one of those people . And from what I can tell, he's no wallpainting, but he does like his riding...

[R-Soul]

I believe if we breeze up the Our Masters and say "motorcycle crashes are too high, and there are what we believe are the causes based on the following research. We want to do something about it, so we would like to propose that we work with you to develop a strategy to achieve that, and we want to work with every other road user including cars" we would be listened to and might actually see some good done.

And that's where people like Charley Lamb and organisations like BRONZ have a role.

I am not saying that what you are suggesting is not right. Hell yes, there should be better driving all round. What I am saying is that political effects will overcome practical and useful discussion and advancement.

If I was the government I would say "alright, lets give it a go, but show us that it sworks fiorst by fixing up your own (most expensive) house first". If the scheme ios a success, and ends up saving them money, you can bet they will extend it to cagers (once they have good justification for it). But they wont risk their political careers pissing off the general population of car drivers with more intensive licensing requirements on an unproven scheme because "the bikers say so". Forget that.

[R-Soul]

A year is a long time. Lots can happen in a year.

The most likely thing that will happen is that every one (including ourselves) will get bored with it, forget about us poor bikers, lose interest in our cause, and set us up for the second tranche of increases. Tell me it aint so.

[R-Soul]

Poiticians follow the path of least resistance, like teh spineless proicks they are. (Really- who goes into politics if not for personal gain or a thirst for power, or because its a sure way of staying in a job? No real will to do better by the people there...).

Understand this: Its VERY easy for them to just raise levies. One phone call, amending one line of legislation. Its clearly the path of least resistance. Especially when it is against a political minority.

The $23m safety fund is merely a tip of the hat to allay public concerns that not enough is being done to prevent accidents. i would not be surprised at all if they actually had no political will to do much with it. Call me cynical.

The only way to get them doing stuff for us instead of against us, is by HANDING IT TO THEM ON A PLATE. And showing them that they will come out looking like roses, with a better bottom line.

We need to show them a better path of even less reistsance. It must be obvious to even them that it will have more benefits to them for the same amount of work. The plan must basically be drawn up for them from scratch, and work on almost no money.

Politiicans being politiicans, they willprbably not even be willing to consider an alternative, just because it involves more organisation.

[shrub]

I am not saying that what you are suggesting is not right. Hell yes, there should be better driving all round. What I am saying is that political effects will overcome practical and useful discussion and advancement.

If I was the government I would say "alright, lets give it a go, but show us that it sworks fiorst by fixing up your own (most expensive) house first". If the scheme ios a success, and ends up saving them money, you can bet they will extend it to cagers (once they have good justification for it). But they wont risk their political careers pissing off the general population of car drivers with more intensive licensing requirements on an unproven scheme because "the bikers say so". Forget that.

So how do we fix our house? Post more threads on KB? Do courses? Ride slower? Wear better gear? Ban learner riders? Put trainer wheels on our bikes and get a man to walk in front holding a red flag?


There seems to be a school of thought that until we have slashed the crash rate we have no right to demand that our safety be taken into account. Unfortunately there is no silver bullet that will result in a sudden (or even rapid) drop in motorcycle crashes because if most of us immediately slowed down, did every course we could and wore the best gear on the planet, there would still be learners who don't know about target fixation riding into potholes, born agains underestimating their (and their bike's) limitations and idiots mistaking the Akaroa road for Ruapuna; and they're the ones having most of the crashes. Some people won't be told and some people don't know they need to be told.

But what about the rest of us? What about those of us that ride carefully, do courses, wear good gear etc? Do we have no right to demand that car drivers learn to see us, that roading engineers design roads that aren't dangerous and that people learn to indicate? Should we sit on our arses and whine, or should we get behind BRONZ and people like Charley Lamb who are working hard to make a difference? Should we sit back and wait for bikers to stop doing dumb shit, or should we start campaigning for change?

And when I talk about change, I am talking about road safety campaigns that are about motorcycle safety that target every road user, including motorcyclists. I'm talking about strategies that actually deal with the issues that result in motorcycle crashes. All of the issues.

[mashman]

The most likely thing that will happen is that every one (including ourselves) will get bored with it, forget about us poor bikers, lose interest in our cause, and set us up for the second tranche of increases. Tell me it aint so.

It may well be so. BUT, if that is the case and they go through another round of motorcycle levy increases... I can see a HUGE backlash against ACC, primarily because they're offering businesses a 50% discount... that alone goes against the principles of ACC, and I won't pay higher levies so that business can get yet another fucking discount that I have to subsidise... I subsidise them enoiugh as it is

[Katman]

So how do we fix our house?

For a start, we could take a different attitude towards accidents. If the 'Oh dear, crashed my bike, yay time to go shopping' threads are anything to go by, there are far too many that look upon accidents too lightly.

Even the 'Biker Down/RIP' threads show we're all too quick to pour out sympathy regardless of whether it's deserved.

[mashman]

For a start, we could take a different attitude towards accidents. If the 'Oh dear, crashed my bike, yay time to go shopping' threads are anything to go by, there are far too many that look upon accidents too lightly.

Even the 'Biker Down/RIP' threads show we're all too quick to pour out sympathy regardless of whether it's deserved.

"If you drink and drive you're a bloody criminal"... i see that on TV and laugh myself silly...

Yeah, because telling people, that already know that they fucked, up is really gonna accomplish your goal WTF!!! RIP's are a sign of respect, even if the death was the riders own fault. Grow a heart Tin Man.

[Katman]

Grow a heart Tin Man.

Grow a brain Scarecrow.

[warewolf]

Nobody is saying that there is not room for improvement right across the road user spectrum, but to take the attitude that "we don't have to make any improvement till everyone else does" will see us treated as nothing more than a pouting spoilt child.

Comprehension epic fail...