The Lean - A statistical factsheet

[OV Lander]

So, with all the recent bicycle deaths we have seen a spate of cyclists demanding increased and improved cycleways for the registration fees.

I know, seems like they already get a good deal with a number of facilities for zero contribution to the road fund.

But they also make zero contribution to the ACC fund. Has there been (I'm sure there has, but do we know the results) any research on how many cycle deaths/injuries there are compared to motorcyclists? What are these costs?

If the government are serious about 'user pays', then these guys should be paying their way, surley.

When they do pay their way, then sure, let them have some infrastructure, but until then the Police should be activley pursueing the Rode Code breaches that cyclists perform on a daily basis and which is actually putting them at risk: jumping red lights, not lookig behind them, leaping off kerbs in front of cars etc..etc..

[Reckless]

But they also make zero contribution to the ACC fund. Has there been (I'm sure there has, but do we know the results) any research on how many cycle deaths/injuries there are compared to motorcyclists? What are these costs?

When they do pay their way,

Its very likely a large portion of their accidents are put down as "Bike Accident " in the doctors office and we get lumbered with it anyway??

[bogan]

So, with all the recent bicycle deaths we have seen a spate of cyclists demanding increased and improved cycleways for the registration fees.

I know, seems like they already get a good deal with a number of facilities for zero contribution to the road fund.

But they also make zero contribution to the ACC fund. Has there been (I'm sure there has, but do we know the results) any research on how many cycle deaths/injuries there are compared to motorcyclists? What are these costs?

If the government are serious about 'user pays', then these guys should be paying their way, surley.

When they do pay their way, then sure, let them have some infrastructure, but until then the Police should be activley pursueing the Rode Code breaches that cyclists perform on a daily basis and which is actually putting them at risk: jumping red lights, not lookig behind them, leaping off kerbs in front of cars etc..etc..

Cyclist's cost (going by ACC's numbers) is around a fifth of Motorcyclist's.

Personally I don't like the idea of singling out other road users (though ACC are looking at viable ways of taxing cyclists already) for a pay by risk scheme, as I'm convinced a no fault/risk ACC is what's best for New Zealanders. As I've said before, if we can afford to pay for dole bludgers to sit around doing nothing, we can afford to pay for people's accidental injuries.

[Winston001]

So, with all the recent bicycle deaths we have seen a spate of cyclists demanding increased and improved cycleways for the registration fees.

I know, seems like they already get a good deal with a number of facilities for zero contribution to the road fund.

But they also make zero contribution to the ACC fund.

If the government are serious about 'user pays', then these guys should be paying their way, surley....

Pedestrians use the roads. Want to see them pay road registration and ACC as well??

[davereid]

Pedestrians use the roads. Want to see them pay road registration and ACC as well??

That's the catch isn't it. In spite of ACCs bleating, there is no "fair"way to fund a universal accident scheme.

If you use a poll tax, my mother in her rocking chair will pay the same as a base jumper.

If you use a fuel tax, cyclists don't pay.

If you use a registration tax, it is the same for those who do 10km as those who do 1000,000 km.

But overall, its hard to avoid the conclusion that a fuel tax is the best option.

Its easy to collect and can be done at virtually no cost.

Its very hard to avoid.

It reflects in a crude way the distance travelled.

Compare that with continuous vehicle licensing.

It was done to collect the tiny amount of money that was being avoided by a small amount of people who would skip a months rego.

To do it they need a small army of people to manage it and manage exemptions.

Its still easily avoided by just driving sans rego, exactly as was the case before it was introduced albeit instead of doing for a month, its now 3 minimum.

And it has seriously fucked over people who let the licence get beyond a year, by de-registering their cars, and by giving them a bad credit rating.

It achieves nothing except misery, generally for the poor and poorly informed, and it does it at great cost.

[Ocean1]

It achieves nothing except misery, generally for the poor and poorly informed, and it does it at great cost.

Yup. Same as most compliance licencing systems.

Thing is, they're all designed to extract payment for services the "consumer" didn't ask for and in a lot of cases didn't want.

Any surprise there's avoidance issues?