There are enough bikers around the country to sort a programme of action out, have no fear on that front -- but they need to be asked to contribute. "Leadership" isn't about being able to miraculously pull rabbits from hats on demand. Rather it's about focusing people on issues that concern them. Ask the audience, as most candidates on WWTBAM generally have to do.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
Look – I really don’t like paying the rego fees even though in the wider scheme of things I’m at a point in my life where it does not hurt too much… Having said that, I’ve recently ditched 3 really fun bikes that I probably would have kept to manage the costs.
Yes I think that in some cases the fees are OTT but I’m also mindful that in many cases we are reaping only what we have sowed… There are many people on this site that have benefitted from a trip in a chopper or ambulance and all the rebuilding that happens after this and in that case the current charges are small beer considering what has been spent on them. Of course there are others who never seem to fall (long may this continue) and to them it seems excessive.
No one really minds that there IS an ACC charge – the question is what’s fair and reasonable.
The second issue is who are motorcyclists? There are many many sub groups and each one has slightly different needs and exhibits a different collective identity. One of the biggest, or at least the loudest, groups is the 1% clone, thunderbike riding rebel without a cause. These guys can look a little intimidating and being rebels often exhibit only a sketchy adherence to the best in safety equipment and risk minimisation techniques (some sports bike riders also please stick your hand up here). To some – these groups look intimidating and high risk.
I would argue that getting public support but having a bunch of angry guys on bikes turn up loudly at parliament (while no one is there) isn’t going to generate the kind of public buy in required to fix the issue. It’s hard to argue that you can’t afford $500 annual fee when you turn up on a $30,000 toy fitted with $10,000 worth of bling and then start pissing everyone off with noise and anger…
I’m just not convinced and I ride bikes…
In my humble Opinion
The PUBLIC don't give a shit and don't really matter as they wont generally support us at the front line.
They have their discounts and will take that and run. Joe Bloggs wont come out without a bike and support us.
They will forgive us for blocking the Auckland harbor bridge, or streets around Parliament for a morning or even treat it as some excitement in their dreary day!
This is our fight and I don't expect any practical support from anyone without a bike.
In fact negative support from those high risk activities Hiding from possible extra charges Ie cyclists, MX riders, snow borders, Skiers etc as they should have an ACC charge on their gear/bike/board/Ski purchases. Now that would be fairer now its a risk based system? But it begs the question in this new risk based environment what would they put on a 1000cc bike???? Thats where its wrong its not ACC
The reason the Bikoi worked was
1/- They got the figure always wanted imho
2/- The protest was big enough for the NZ Govt to have to show wider NZ that as the govt in a democracy they couldn't simply ignore that many voters.
3/- They knew that there was a small danger as bikers we could actually step it up a level? IS it now that time?
Personally (and without any research) I think the ACC is a mess? Right from the basic information coming from accident sites.
I'm damn sure it costs more to fix a scooter rider in Jandels that comes off at 80K as it does to fix a 1000cc rider with all the gear in the same accident?
We pay them our ACC dollars to spend all day to present their view of the figures against us and none of us has the time to build a case that might fight it.
If we really want to invest in our future the best thing we could do is all pay $20-$50 bucks and have someone full time (Bronz, New organisation??) research for a year to see if ACC are right or wrong.
We are never going to be together enough for that to happen (and they know it).
ACC are never going to give us full disclosure on what happens from each crash site to their yearly CC based charges.
If we could get that factual base (and ACC weren't actually correct) we could really make a noise!!
Nothing wrong with protest. Without the above we only really have Loud angry protest Left.
On a Motorcycle you're penetrating distance, right along with the machine!! In a car you're just a spectator, the windshields like a TV!!
'Life's Journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out! Shouting, ' Holy sh!t... What a Ride!! '
My thoughts are that this is not a protest. Its a meeting. Government even gave them a venue. But dont sell anything there.
I would have thought something more directed at ACC. Blockade and have sit ins at ACC offices. Or something along those lines.
Random to, dont tell them your coming.
It has to tie up resources.
But what is the basis of the protest? What's changed?
Have a range of changes to ACC been discussed and agreed by bikers? Has a submission been made to ACC or to its Minister that has been ignored? Has ACC changed the nature of the relationship its has with bikers or has it signalled that change is coming?
Those are largely rhetorical questions. The answer to each is no. On that basis there is no news here and it's going to be hard to get anybody interested, particularly given the timing during an election campaign.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
Has a submission been made to ACC or to its Minister that has been ignored?
I would think the answer to this one is YES Hitcher. I believe a good number of folk have made direct contact by way of letter, email etc with the Minister, ACC and MPs and all have been ignored or been replied to with the dreary blah, blah....we will not have car owners subsidize motorcyclist line...and none have really answered the question as to multiple bike rego being unreasonable.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
you think, you believe - but are you actually sure?
No..and am sure of that! But equally - I am not sure that a protest will not succeed.
Successful protests usually strike a chord because they champion a proposition that is reasoned, factual, compelling and articulate. There are exceptions, like those based on outrage. But any solution that successfully quells outrage has to be reasoned, factual, compelling and articulate.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
So I'm protesting that I should get less ACC levy reduction on my two cars so that I can get a bit of reduction on my one bike? I'm thinking I may be better off taking the full car reduction and putting it towards my bike rego. If I add the money I will save by not buying fuel or paying for accommodation for a ride to an empty parliament, I reckon that's my rego paid for another near.
I can tell you now that I am sick to fucking death of paying 420 bucks a year to register my GN250 when my folks have to pay half that, if that, to register their car. I am even more pissed off that the government is thinking of decreasing ACC levies based on 'vehicle safety' - meaning they would define 'vehicle safety'. This would mean that my crappy old 87 GN, even though it is low-powered and doesn't go very fast, would end up having to pay higher levies than almost all cars, and some higher-CC motorbikes, simply because they have better 'safety features' - and the fact that I have forked out for expensive gear, high vis vests, etc not taken into account at all.
From speaking to Ratti, Kim, Byron, etc, it's not as simple as "We're angry at ACC RAAAAHHHH!" BRONZ are here to promote bikers' rights. The government, in offering more ACC benefits for 'safer' vehicles like cars but not vehicles such as motorbikes - especially older ones, are being discriminatory. Motorbikes are more dangerous than cars, but a) car drivers (who have lower ACC levies) are not really educated to look out for motorbikes, so it's not always a biker's fault if they get into an accident, and b) lots of bikers, or so I'd hope, spend money on expensive gear to protect themselves.
"If you think you can do it, or think you can't do it, you're right." - Henry T Ford
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (1706-90)
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending to much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
"Motorcycling is not inherently dangerous. It is, however, EXTREMELY unforgiving of inattention, ignorance, incompetence and stupidity!" - Anonymous
"Live to Ride, Ride to Live"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks