The unpopular view

[FJRider]

but ACC isn't insurance

At least not as much as most people assume/believe a "Health" insurance company should be. Because a "health" insurance Company it is not.

[short-circuit]

Irrelevant - yes

Erroneous - no

Your first point was erroneous as well. As far as ACC goes you're not paying for other people's fuck ups in the same way that you do with inflated insurance premiums. As stated earlier - ACC is not an insurance scheme, it is a universal accident compensation scheme.

[Katman]

Your first point was erroneous as well. As far as ACC goes you're not paying for other people's fuck ups in the same way that you do with inflated insurance premiums. As stated earlier - ACC is not an insurance scheme, it is a universal accident compensation scheme.

The whole reason that ACC have decided to target motorcyclists stems from the fact that we are over-represented in the accident figures and they feel that they'll be able to count on public support for going after us.

So in that respect, I'm right.

The idiots have fucked it up for the rest of us.

[AD345]

As much as I agree with most of what you said, and why. There seem to be a few points I must disagree with.

Never have I seen, at the time of the original implmentation of ACC compensation being made available, that levys/fee's would not rise. EVER.

No fault is all persons in the event of an accident, are eligible for compensation. Not ... those in high risk activities would not be expected to pay a higher levy for that privilege.

As I understand it, under the current system/laws, the Goverment Legally can. And only requires the ministers signature to make it happen. The political repercussions of such an action however, are another story.

My personal dislike of the proposal, is based more what I percieve as an unfair method of determining from who, and how those extra fees are gained ...

This is not the first time the ACC levy has gone up in recent years, with little more than a murmur of protest.

The precedent was set then.

Good stuff and I'm pleased to see a robust alternative view on the issue.

"No Fault" means "No Blame" in the compensation/damages sense. However it does not mean "No Risk".

So.......if you choose a risky occupation then you pay more ACC. The problem arises in the context of non-work injuries. At present there is no distinction or levy imposed for high risk activities.

Personally I'm happy for that to continue and support the protest actions.

Excellent points from both of you around risk.

However, on this point, I must plead a certain amount of past hypocrisy because I believe that we are now reaping what we have sown.

ACC as a universal compensation scheme was never intended to have risk profile. INSURANCE schemes have risk profiles, COMPENSATIOn schemes don't. The funding for ACC should have always reflected its payments. Universal payments should mean universal levying.

As the poem goes (hugely abridged):

When they came for timber workers
I did nothing for I am not a timber worker

When they came for farmers
I did nothing for I am not a farmer

Now they have come for me.....

After an excellent meal (Only Seafood in Pahia serves the best seafood chowder I have ever had - and I've had it in New England, Fishermans Wharf in San Francisco and with Jaques Cousteau at Lombardos in Fremantle.........but I digress) and some thought I now realise that, for me at least, this is going to be the start of probably a long campaign.

ACC has strayed too far from it's original course. It is time to bring it back to the core idea.

Motorcyclists first

[FJRider]

The whole reason that ACC have decided to target motorcyclists stems from the fact that we are over-represented in the accident figures and they feel that they'll be able to count on public support for going after us.

So in that respect, I'm right.

The idiots have fucked it up for the rest of us.

ACC may believe they have public support ... and they may well have (well a majority of the public if it means THEY dont have to pay more)

The Minister (in/and the political party that approves it) may not be as fortunate.

you cant be right .... its not right that you could be right.

The idiots are those that approved assistance to those that should not have been allowed. They put ACC in the position it is in.

Not motorcyclists as a whole.

[98tls]

Excellent points from both of you around risk.

However, on this point, I must plead a certain amount of past hypocrisy because I believe that we are now reaping what we have sown.

ACC as a universal compensation scheme was never intended to have risk profile. INSURANCE schemes have risk profiles, COMPENSATIOn schemes don't. The funding for ACC should have always reflected its payments. Universal payments should mean universal levying.

As the poem goes (hugely abridged):

When they came for timber workers
I did nothing for I am not a timber worker

When they came for farmers
I did nothing for I am not a farmer

Now they have come for me.....

After an excellent meal (Only Seafood in Pahia serves the best seafood chowder I have ever had - and I've had it in New England, Fishermans Wharf in San Francisco and with Jaques Cousteau at Lombardos in Fremantle.........but I digress) and some thought I now realise that, for me at least, this is going to be the start of probably a long campaign.

ACC has strayed too far from it's original course. It is time to bring it back to the core idea.

Motorcyclists first

I wholeheartedly agree mate but sadly ACC is a lowly number of many things that have strayed far off course,so far in my 47 years ive yet to see evidence of money growing on trees so here we go embarking on robbing Peter to pay Paul.To cut a long story short i can only surmise if said robbing would be necessary if in order to gain parliamentary position the various candidates hadnt sent us to welfare-nana statedom.No doubt there will be a couple of hundy cut from the proposed levy to shut us up but then they will just move on to the next group of donators whoever they may be.

[Ixion]

ACC may believe they have public support ... and they may well have (well a majority of the public if it means THEY dont have to pay more)

The Minister (in/and the political party that approves it) may not be as fortunate.

..

No. I don't believe they do have public support. Of course, most of the public don't really care very much one way or the other. but, insofar as they support one side or other, they support us.

I'm sure that ACC expected to have public support. "Time those 1%ers were taxed off the road" "why should you subsidise tattooed troublemakers " etc.

Hasn't worked out that way.

The buzz I hear is (remembering again that it's not an excited buzz) that we are being picked on and the levy is a "kick in the teeth".

[FJRider]

ACC as a universal compensation scheme was never intended to have risk profile.

Just as motorcycles were never intended (originally) to be a "hobby" activity.

I remember when sex was safe and motorcycles were dangerous. Now ... even Big Mac's are dangerous ... apparently ...

After an excellent meal (Only Seafood in Pahia serves the best seafood chowder I have ever had - and I've had it in New England, Fishermans Wharf in San Francisco and with Jaques Cousteau at Lombardos in Fremantle.........but I digress) and some thought I now realise that, for me at least, this is going to be the start of probably a long campaign.

Try the chowder at "Fluers" in Moraki.... its good, and I dont even like sea food. (but I digress)

ACC has strayed too far from it's original course. It is time to bring it back to the core idea.

Motorcyclists first

I think every goverment that has been in power since the introduction of ACC, has changed it in some manner.

Motorcyclists CAN ... but WILL they ???

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Motorcyclists CAN ... but WILL they ???

thats what I am fighting for anyhow...

[AD345]

I think every goverment that has been in power since the introduction of ACC, has changed it in some manner.

Motorcyclists CAN ... but WILL they ???

Therein lies the rub.

When I was at the BRONZ meeting the other night there were too many motions and too many people wanting a chnce to vent for any sort of prolonged discussion about broader issues. (that's not a criticism of a very well run meeting BTW) Being a smoker I was out one side and able to just say a few things to people there, nothing dramatic or earthshattering, just some home truths about what ACC is, was and should be.

As a collective group we are finding out a lot more about ACC with every passing day. I daresay that most people reading this forum have learn't SOMETHING that they either did not know before or had forgotten - I know I have.

It is my hope that this sudden rise in knowledge, more than any protest ride, will lead on to more questioning of the powers-that-be around ACC and what it means.

IMO the best thing to come out of this will be informed discussion on a fundamental part of NZ society.

If evrry motorcyclist can tell just 2 other people something they didn't already know about ACC ........

who knows?

[FJRider]

No. I don't believe they do have public support. Of course, most of the public don't really care very much one way or the other. but, insofar as they support one side or other, they support us.

I'm sure that ACC expected to have public support. "Time those 1%ers were taxed off the road" "why should you subsidise tattooed troublemakers " etc.

Hasn't worked out that way.

The buzz I hear is (remembering again that it's not an excited buzz) that we are being picked on and the levy is a "kick in the teeth".

No doubt many will feel sorry for us, if it comes down to us or them paying the extra to make up a shortfall though ... which way would you expect them to lean.

The levy may have seemed an easy option for those that believe they can, but I'm guessing it is being discussed a lot higher up the political foodchain, than ACC management ever believed it would/could be.

[Brian d marge]

Good stuff and I'm pleased to see a robust alternative view on the issue.

"No Fault" means "No Blame" in the compensation/damages sense. However it does not mean "No Risk".

So.......if you choose a risky occupation then you pay more ACC. The problem arises in the context of non-work injuries. At present there is no distinction or levy imposed for high risk activities.

Personally I'm happy for that to continue and support the protest actions.

Sorry but,,,,,snippy snip...

The second event which forged New Zealand’s present
workers’ compensation system was the experience of soldiers
returning from World War One. During that war 45% of
New Zealand men of military age served in the armed forces
and nearly 17,000 were killed. The survivors returned to
find little preparation for their rehabilitation. Housing and
satisfactory employment were difficult to obtain, and war
pensions for disabled veterans, widows and orphans were well
below the basic wage.16

and.........

First, in the national interest, and as a matter of national
obligation, the community must protect all citizens
(including the self-employed) and the housewives who
sustain them from the burden of sudden individual losses
when their ability to contribute to the general welfare by
their work has been interrupted by physical incapacity.
The Brunner Mine disaster had a galvanizing effect on the debate about workers’ compensation. In the Legislative Council debate on the Workers Compensation for Accidents Act 1900, Hon John MacGregor raised the concept of the worker as an ‘industrial soldier’: The artisan and the mechanic is like the soldier, in that both run a risk of death or horrid maiming, and that in the interests of others – of the community at large.
The soldier has his pension, the industrial soldier should have his. The employer can insure his building against destruction by fire,his machinery against depreciation, and insurance forms a charge on the industry, one of the costs of production. Why should not the workman insure the only instrument of production he possesses – namely his life and limbs – against destruction by exploding firedamp, or unfenced machinery,from depreciation by lead poisoning or phossy jaw
‘Phossy jaw’ is a deadly
occupational hazard l for those who work with white phosphorus without safeguards. Chronic exposure to
white phosphorus vapour caused the jawbone to rot away and
ultimately could lead to organ failure and death.


sooooo.......... “Everyone was to be looked after – it was the community’s responsibility to do it. Beneath the idea lurked a definitely collectivist set of values”.

Lots more but

So you can see the risk factor was also included , just as a solder risks his life so does a mine worker for the common good of the community

Katmans argument is sound , the cost of the Scheme is over burdened by knobs who think they are Rossi and have the road craft of an Afghani peasant

The Alternative argument is possibly the most sound argument i have heard so far
the government has broken its agreement with the people AS LAID DOWN IN THE ACT ,

I will make ixon aware of this

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

Using unpopular in the sense that this view does not seem to be either the majority one being expressed nor will it sit well with some of those views that ARE being expressed. Nonetheless....

I will be joining in with the protest activities and contributing where I can in other areas. I am, however, doing so for reasons other than those expressed by some.
I'm not outraged by an apparent targeting of my favourite form of recreation.
I'm not hell bent on proving that motorcycling is just as valid a means of transportation as a car.
I could not give 2 shits about my carbon footprint either on my bike, or not.
I spend not one second raging about "other motorcyclists" giving "us" a bad name with their behaviour. Nor do I subscribe to the absurd view that levy hikes are a response to such behaviour.

Thats an excuse - not a reason.

There is only one reason that I am protesting:

The Government is betraying its citizens and breaking (explicitly breaking) a social compact that was formed 34 years ago and is intrinsic to the identity of this nation.

ACC is NOT an insurance scheme. For those morons that keep rabbiting on about comparisons to private insurance - learn what it means to be a citizen of this country you twats.

ACC is a 24/7 NO FAULT accident COMPENSATION scheme set in place so that the citizens of New Zealand should not be financially disadvantaged in the event of injury. In return for universal coverage of this compensation we forwent the ability to sue anyone who might have been deemed to have been liable for the injury

THAT'S IT

FULL STOP

This is only marginally about bikes, basically they are doing it to us because they think that they can.

For me this protest is to show the goverment that they cannot.

Don't ask me to be polite

Don't ask me to be "responsible"

Especially don't ask me to justify my recreational pasttime

I'm a citizen amd I'm fucked off

I'm going to stay fucked off until this gets fixed and I will do whatever I think is necessary to remind those in elected positions that they are there to carry out the duties of their office in the service of the citizenry.

and to this I add +1

Stephen

[Pedrostt500]

Sorry but,,,,,snippy snip...

The second event which forged New Zealand’s present
workers’ compensation system was the experience of soldiers
returning from World War One. During that war 45% of
New Zealand men of military age served in the armed forces
and nearly 17,000 were killed. The survivors returned to
find little preparation for their rehabilitation. Housing and
satisfactory employment were difficult to obtain, and war
pensions for disabled veterans, widows and orphans were well
below the basic wage.16

and.........

First, in the national interest, and as a matter of national
obligation, the community must protect all citizens
(including the self-employed) and the housewives who
sustain them from the burden of sudden individual losses
when their ability to contribute to the general welfare by
their work has been interrupted by physical incapacity.
The Brunner Mine disaster had a galvanizing effect on the debate about workers’ compensation. In the Legislative Council debate on the Workers Compensation for Accidents Act 1900, Hon John MacGregor raised the concept of the worker as an ‘industrial soldier’: The artisan and the mechanic is like the soldier, in that both run a risk of death or horrid maiming, and that in the interests of others – of the community at large.
The soldier has his pension, the industrial soldier should have his. The employer can insure his building against destruction by fire,his machinery against depreciation, and insurance forms a charge on the industry, one of the costs of production. Why should not the workman insure the only instrument of production he possesses – namely his life and limbs – against destruction by exploding firedamp, or unfenced machinery,from depreciation by lead poisoning or phossy jaw
‘Phossy jaw’ is a deadly
occupational hazard l for those who work with white phosphorus without safeguards. Chronic exposure to
white phosphorus vapour caused the jawbone to rot away and
ultimately could lead to organ failure and death.


sooooo.......... “Everyone was to be looked after – it was the community’s responsibility to do it. Beneath the idea lurked a definitely collectivist set of values”.

Lots more but

So you can see the risk factor was also included , just as a solder risks his life so does a mine worker for the common good of the community

Katmans argument is sound , the cost of the Scheme is over burdened by knobs who think they are Rossi and have the road craft of an Afghani peasant

The Alternative argument is possibly the most sound argument i have heard so far
the government has broken its agreement with the people AS LAID DOWN IN THE ACT ,

I will make ixon aware of this

Stephen

Well said, I have learnt more about ACC over the last couple of weeks than I have over the last 26yrs of my working life, thank you all who have contributed to my Education on ACC.
I think that, ACC and the Government thought that Bikers were just a Greasey bunch of Neanderthals, that the Public wouldn't care less about, the times have changed, Motorcycling in all its forms cuts accross a greater cross section of the comunity, we have plenty of bright people, to crunch the numbers, and add up the statistics, but we need to remeber that the Nos and statistics, is some ones life.
This is going to be a long fight, ACC and the Government are not going to roll over easily, because a few thousand bikers protest at Parliment, this fight will go on long past the 17th of November.
We have to be clear why we are protesting the ACC levy hikes, and why and what we want changed.
The things I'd like to see changed is ACC take a bigger part in Driver / Rider education, Prevention is better than the cure, & probably costs less.
The reason I,m taking 2 days off work is to protest against the fact that ACC and the Government, have decided to single out an activity that I enjoy for unfair treatment, by corrupting and distorting the facts about the risks of my choosen activity.
My understanding is ACC is a right for every New Zealand Citizen, to assist with the costs of treatment, and recouperation, after an accident, with out applying blame.

[Ixion]

No doubt many will feel sorry for us, if it comes down to us or them paying the extra to make up a shortfall though ... which way would you expect them to lean.

The levy may have seemed an easy option for those that believe they can, but I'm guessing it is being discussed a lot higher up the political foodchain, than ACC management ever believed it would/could be.

I'm thinking that there is a middle ground.

Firstly ACC is not broke. far from it. The claims that it is "in trouble" are an artificially created crisis. Assume a 20% rate of inflation and a 1% return on investments and you can make the figures into anything you want.

And in a couple of years when, surprise, inflation is less than assumed, and returns greater, ACC makes a massive surplus, which the government promptly hand over to their mates in the insurance companies.

In reality THERE IS NO NEED FOR MASSIVE HIKES. For anyone.

Longer term, motorcyclists DO have to get their shit together. No matte rhow the figures are shuffled the plain reality is that we are falling of our bikes far too often. And as I don't, you must be falling off a shit load.

How we deal with that I don't know.