Gareth Morgan in the Herald on ACC levies for bikers

[HenryDorsetCase]

I'm with Gareth.

A sensible proposal based on the facts.

All you people talking about dodgy statistics, and using anecdotal evidence as the basis for your arguments need to do the same due diligence, and put up some convinincing counter proposals.

Or consider the point at which you will be priced off the road: is it $528 p.a.? is it $1000 p.a.? Is it $2000 p.a.? $5000?

[MrKiwi]

I thought the council members were banned from posting on Kiwibiker? Or be banned from the council.

We've never been prevented from commenting on here, but we have been held accountable for what we say and the agreed protocals within the Council, which is normal practice for appointment to any board, council or advisory body.

[Katman]

I don't agree that over-taxation is an effective way to achieve this.

Yeah, perhaps we should just ask motorcyclists nicely to up their game.

That's bound to work.

[MrKiwi]

After reading some of the comments both here and on other sites I feel there are a few misconceptions out there. Here is a follow up article... http://garethsworld.com/motorbike-ri...d-to-get-real/

An excellent explanation of the no fault system...

[Paul in NZ]

After reading some of the comments both here and on other sites I feel there are a few misconceptions out there. Here is a follow up article... http://garethsworld.com/motorbike-ri...d-to-get-real/

Erm - darn.... Gareth much kudos for leaping into the tigers, erm, lion, ah, bear, no fluffy kitten pit. Please resist the temptation to blog anything though...

While I agree with you in principle I still think there needs to be a couple of freebies chucked in. Just for the sake of fairness.

Given the stats people quote AND the number of people I know who never ever or very seldom ever experience any major trauma on a motorcycle the problem must lay with a few who repeatedly cost heaps. Is it possible to see any figure featuring incidence of repeat claims? Surely its those who won't change that we should really target cost recovery at?

Personally I'd take the whole concept further into a social WoF. Pay your taxes, don't commit crimes, raise your kids properly and earn a discount on your ACC or extra retirement income or summat. Encourage people to participate in society?

[Paul in NZ]

I'm with Gareth.

A sensible proposal based on the facts.

All you people talking about dodgy statistics, and using anecdotal evidence as the basis for your arguments need to do the same due diligence, and put up some convinincing counter proposals.

Or consider the point at which you will be priced off the road: is it $528 p.a.? is it $1000 p.a.? Is it $2000 p.a.? $5000?

Its hard when you don't have the data I whine....

$1000pa in a lump sum would probably see me off.... (good riddance they all cry)

[Swoop]

All you people talking about dodgy statistics, and using anecdotal evidence as the basis for your arguments need to do the same due diligence, and put up some convinincing counter proposals.

OK. Bike licence since 1979 and NO ACC claims from motorcycling. Where is my fucking refund or rebate?

Counter proposal? Already doing it by not paying for rego, which is obviously just getting more beaureaucrats parking their fat arses on the governmental gravy train.

[Bald Eagle]

When the penalty for non-compliance exceeds the cost of compliance, then compliance becomes the preferred option... maybe.

[tbs]

Hi Gareth, and welcome to Kiwibiker.
I personally hope you will stick around and talk to us, although I imagine you will have to weather a fair few personal attacks. This is Kiwibiker afterall.

I'm pasting in the final paragraph from the link you provided:

All of this is commonsense and if we’re serious about reducing the levy costs we’re having to pay for on-road riding injuries, we should be demanding these changes. Shagging round with road design, conspicuity of rider and bike, and roadside ads to tell motorists to look out for the motorcycle – is the sort of fiddling about that occurred while Rome burned.

I think we ALL agree with this and a lot of us are very happy to hear it from you. I think there has been a growing concern that you were using your role on the advisory council as a platform for a political agenda, and baring this in mind, publishing your thoughts on our ACC levies under your own name probably came across as more politically motivated than you intended.

So while I hopefully have your attention, I would love to hear your thoughts on the ability level of the average motorcyclist in New Zealand, and how that level can be significantly improved. Soon after I bought my first bike I attended a training course with Pro-rider, and I was very surprised to see how many seasoned and confident riders on the course were riding with terrible technique. Poor technique, poor machine control, poor road-craft, poor understanding of the physics involved, and very little understanding of our own weaknesses.... I submit would these account for a huge number of injuries, both single vehicle and where others are involved.
My big concern is that there is so much more involved in safely controlling a motorcycle than a car, and yet there is no requirement, or really any incentive to learn properly. It sounds like you want to use ACC levies as the incentive, but I suggest the whole licensing system needs to be radically re-assessed to produce competent riders int he first place.

Looking forward to your further contributions.

Blair Shallard.

[Ocean1]

When the penalty for non-compliance exceeds the cost of compliance, then compliance becomes the preferred option... maybe.

Quite the opposite in fact.

When either the rules deviate from socially accepted behaviour or the penalties exceed a certain level then a majority of people ignore both.

You can find out why if you can be bothered but there's enough evidence that we're already beyond that point. I'd suggest further restrictions or higher penalties will simply be ignored by everyone rather than the current simple majority.

[bogan]

All you people talking about dodgy statistics, and using anecdotal evidence as the basis for your arguments need to do the same due diligence, and put up some convinincing counter proposals.

Did that over a year ago, even used data everyone could get access to and look through if they wanted. We didn't use the per km stuff because the figures were rare, and not very transparent, even less transparent are the ACC costs; any coincidence the least transparent figures are the favourites for TPTB?
However, summary was 3.5x more likely to have an accident on a per vehicle basis (closest we could get to a per rider figure). The counter proposals were (and still are);

levy on petrol

levy on license (but without all this insurancy bullshit, a single charge rate for everybody, or by vehicle classes if necessary)

recombine the ACC accounts and have it all on income tax (re-jigger benefit payouts to suit)

[GrayWolf]

After reading some of the comments both here and on other sites I feel there are a few misconceptions out there. Here is a follow up article... http://garethsworld.com/motorbike-ri...d-to-get-real/

Thank you for the follow up Gareth, and; thank you for having the 'nuts' to front up in KB, which I guess from reading, you've realised can be a 'Zoo' where anything from 'tame to downright maneater' replies occur towards posts/individuals.
Yes I agree there is an elevated risk when riding a Motorcycle, however I do object strongly to my mode of transport being referred to as an 'high risk activity'. It IS NOT an activity, I ride a Motorcycle every day as transport.. I don't even own a car, by choice. (OK, I admit wifey does though)
Yes I see stupid behaviour by both riders and car drivers during my rides to work often.
EXAMPLE: yesterday on the way to work, 3 lane road, I was in middle lane and was going to move to the right as I was approaching a slower moving vehicle. (yes a little over 100kph I will admit) there was a vehicle to my right which as I indicated, I noticed it closing the gap when I performed a rear observation.... Yup, spotty dickhead in his battered Wrex with his bimbo in the passenger seat, deciding to 'go the motorbike', drew level with me, then sat at the same speed, throttle blipping etc. I had to slow down to leave a braking gap between myself and the slower moving vehicle in my lane.
Now according to the statistics I am X45 times more likely to be injured... and ACC pay regardless of fault so I am in a high risk category. Lets say I accept the fact I am in a 'higher risk group'. Now if a worker is killed or seriously injured OSH will investigate and penalise/prosecute those to blame. Had I been taken off my bike yesterday, quite possibly I would have been severely injured and a Police investigation would ensue. Once fault was established.. Here is where I have always advocated compulsory insurance ... the spotty brats insurance would have to cough up, he then gets an increased premium, or refusal to insure. My ACC costs would be 'recoverable' to some extent. There is I guess the crux of my arguement, ACC may operate 'no fault' but the Police, legal system, OSH and insurance companies do.. so those ACC costs can be mitigated to an extent for the 'victim'.
The same 'model' will also work in reverse for the 'Rossi wannabe's' as well as the ' boy racers'.
I certainly am not the type to put myself in the firing line, as yourself has done, and I will always applaud those who do. What maybe I would like to see is yourself or MotoNZ start to publish some good facts; research like the one conducted in Holland a while ago showing how increasing motorcycle use even by 10% on a heavily congested road reduced tailbacks and travel times even for the car drivers. As much as there are accident statistics, we need some of the good oil spread about as to the benefits bikes do have on city congestion, road wear, etc.
Really all the statistics I have seen you use are doom and gloom ones.......How about a bit of sunshine for the group who fund MotoNZ?

[Flip]

What cost would get me off my modern (sic) bike?

I would probably not ride if the fixed total cost PA was about $5k. So far I currently spend about 0.8k on insurance, say 0.8k on R+M, 0.53 on reg.

If riding a modern gets too expensive I would just pop over to the US and bring back a WLA or the UK and/or bring back a Norton cafe racer and ride around on this.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I am on record as saying my preferred option is fuel levy in terms of "pay as you go"

The good news is that soon only rich people such as Gareth and myself will be able to afford to ride on the road, all you hoi polloi can go ride dirt bikes or play rugby or something.

Oh yeah, Ima start base jumping. Sounds like fun

[HenryDorsetCase]

One interesting part of the responses here is that it is fairly obvious MOTONZ is tasked with dealing with riders as a class of road user, and thats what all the palaver about statistics (and yes, I've heard about statistics and damn lies).

EVERY SINGLE response from you guys is "me" "me" "me", "I" "I" "I".

very enlightening. Sure, thats what people do, and how people are: we dont really give a shit about others, its all about me. But if you are specifically tasked with looking at a bigger picture, why would you be specifially blamed for that? Its hilarious.

Meh, whatevs. I'ma go crack open a bottle of Bollinger to wash my motorbike with.