DOM POST says - bikers should pay

[davereid]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...t-lets-be-fair

Editorial: Bikers should pay but let's be fair

OPINION: There's nothing like the feel of the wind on the face or the thrum of the tyres on the road to make a biker feel alive. There's nothing like the throb of 5000 engines to remind a politician of his mortality.

In the wake of Tuesday's "Bikoi" to Parliament, ACC Minister Nick Smith and Prime Minister John Key have become converts to the unfairness of the levy increases proposed by ACC to cover the increasing cost of motorbike injuries. Both say it is unlikely the proposed increases of up to $493.08 a motorcycle will be fully implemented.

The Key Government is nothing if not responsive to public opinion. However, the principle underpinning the proposed increases is sound.

Motorcycling is a dangerous activity. According to ACC, bikers are 16 times more likely to make an ACC claim than other road users. According to Dr Smith, compensation claims for motorcycle accidents have increased almost fivefold over the past decade. It is a decade during which there has been a massive increase in the number of large bikes ridden by older owners, and the change in the makeup of bike users is reflected in accident data.

Bikers dispute the way ACC and the minister interpret the statistics and point out that the official figures make no distinction between accidents caused by bikers and accidents involving bikers caused by other road users. They have a point.

However, there is no disputing the fact that a motorcyclist who hits a lamp-post with only clothing for protection is likely to do a great deal more damage to him or herself than the driver of a modern car equipped with crumple zones and airbags.

Motorcyclists should not be required to foot the bill for injuries caused by other road users, but they should collectively meet the costs of accidents for which they are responsible. It is not reasonable to expect those who use vehicles as a means of getting from one place to another to underwrite the expenses of those who use powerful motorbikes as recreational toys.

Some biker groups have argued that, if their premiums are risk-rated, so should be those of others who engage in risky activity, such as mountain climbers, rugby players and netballers. But there is a difference. Mountain climbers and sportspeople are engaging in activities that improve the general fitness of the population and provide a health benefit that offsets the cost of broken bones. Riding a motorbike is not an inherently healthy activity.

Motorcycle premiums should be increased; however, the increases should be fair. Surely it is not beyond the wit of ACC and biker organisations to establish the true cost of motorcycle accidents and to devise a formula that apportions cost according to responsibility?

Bikers should not have to bear the cost of crashes caused by careless motorists. But neither should they expect other road users to subsidise their pleasures.

[Str8 Jacket]

Interesting, well written editorial.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion but as long as we continue to stand as a collective then those 'others' won't be heard as clearly....

[yungatart]

It would be nice if the Dom Post would print the facts in the matter and give the public the correct information, from which they could form their own opinion.
In an ideal world, eh?

[Shaun]

ACC Statistics

I do NOT know if this is 100% True? Maybe some one on here does

I have been told, that any time some one has an ACC claim, that becomes 1 statistic, then when that same person needs more medical or finacuall help, it turns into the 2nd statistic, and so on and so on, IS that why the statistics have grown so much in the last 9 years?

[st00ji]

well written? that is horrendous. sports players shouldnt pay because their activities are inherently healthy? thats almost as laughable as bikes getting let off this ACC hike business because of a smaller carbon footprint or other nonsense.

NO FAULT BITCHES

how hard is it to understand? im honestly shocked by the number of people i've spoken to who dont realise what this means

[Taz]

It seems the Dominion Post is owned or sponsored by the government. Their Journalists are probably to scared to bite the hand that feeds them. What a crap 2nd rate newspaper anyway.

[zahria]

well written? that is horrendous. sports players shouldnt pay because their activities are inherently healthy? thats almost as laughable as bikes getting let off this ACC hike business because of a smaller carbon footprint or other nonsense.

NO FAULT BITCHES

how hard is it to understand? im honestly shocked by the number of people i've spoken to who dont realise what this means

Agree with you.
However, the article was written as a nicely worded lecture so show how unreasonable we will be when the protest escalates.
Factually, well, the facts quoted are not the facts I have heard, the figures quoted came from Nick Smith and his Bullshit spin doctors.

[MSTRS:Me]

OPINION: There's nothing like the feel of the wind on the face or the thrum of the tyres on the road to make a biker feel alive...

.... Mountain climbers and sportspeople are engaging in activities that improve the general fitness of the population and provide a health benefit that offsets the cost of broken bones. Riding a motorbike is not an inherently healthy activity.

Motorcycle premiums should be increased ...

But neither should they expect other road users to subsidise their pleasures.

The editor is entitled to his opinion. But most of his opinion is shaped by the propaganda that abounds (not coming from us, is it?)
As far as 'healthy' is concerned, has it escaped this drongo's notice that mountain climbers do it for the thrill? Very little to do with 'healthy'. And what is healthy, anyway? Mental/physical are just as important. Besides there's different kinds of fitness, aren't there?
And what's this 'premiums' bit? ACC is not insurance. This crap fucks me off no end. Terminology can be an insidiously dangerous thing.
And why should my employee levies subsidise that mountain climber?

And no right of reply available. Prick.

[Trudes]

well written? that is horrendous. sports players shouldnt pay because their activities are inherently healthy? thats almost as laughable as bikes getting let off this ACC hike business because of a smaller carbon footprint or other nonsense.

NO FAULT BITCHES

how hard is it to understand? im honestly shocked by the number of people i've spoken to who dont realise what this means

I agree, they are trying to cloud the general public's vision with numbers and stats etc, saying we're moaning that it's not us it's the other guy etc, when really the real issue here is that ACC is meant to be based on a no fault basis scheme, so all their stats and numbers and blame game is fucked really, it's not the real issue.

[Maki]

"Riding a motorbike is not an inherently healthy activity." A lot more healthy than thugby.

When will they get it into their thick heads that most bikers ALSO HAVE CARS AND PAY THE ACC LEVY ON THEM. This nonsense about "other" road users paying the bill for bikers has got to stop. Bikers are already paying.

[davereid]

I find the article interesting, particularly because it makes such a weak case for mountain climbers etc.

By bringing up the "healthy" idea, it introduces the concept of the greater social good.

Bikes of course score well here. Even fuel guzzling superbikes manage fuel economy equal or better than cars, and most bikes do waaay better than cars, particularly when the carbon footprint of actually building the vehicle is considered.

We create less congestion, and operate at high passenger efficiency levels - better than public transport and cars by miles.

While the tone of the article is a loss for us, the weakness of the message against us is most certainly a win.

[Okey Dokey]

Riding a motorbike not healthy? I read that years ago Aaron Slight was on a tv show where contestants from different sports were pitted against one another to find the fittest. He beat all the rugby, etc types, and only a pair of tri-athletes came ahead of him!

That's in addition to the psychological benefits.

Hate to see that 16x figure yet again.

[cheshirecat]

A recent Japanese study found that motorcycling increased intelligence, mental ability etc on a survey of middle aged men.
One could argue the converse with rugby.
Will try and dig it out.

[Kennif]

This was a terrible editorial. IMO just part of the demonising of motorcyclists. The suggestion that its ok to have no levies on mountain climbers and sportspeople because their pursuits are inherently healthy is just such nonsense. No recognition of the use of motorcycles as commuter vehicles.
Heres the quote:

"It is not reasonable to expect those who use vehicles as a means of getting from one place to another to underwrite the expenses of those who use powerful motorbikes as recreational toys."

Sorry - that is just arrogant arrant nonsense. There has been a huge upsurge of ridersusingmotorbikes forcommuting. And good on them too!

Prof Lamb was on National Radio yesterday afternoon - now that is a man who really does have the facts and figures at his fingertips. From memory (and it is failing I know but I am an old fart) he made two really important points:
1. Motorcycle levies make up 0.03% of the $$$ collected as levies by ACC (So increasing the levies will not make financial sense - just send a political message)
2. Despite their poor investment practices, ACC still have $11Billion (yes eleven BILLION) in reserves.

The interview is available on the National Radio website as a podcast. Well worth downloading and listening to.

The bottom line is - if we allow ACC to apply the fault policy across the board (as they already do with employer levies) then they stop running a compensation scheme and they start an insurance scheme. The litigation will begin right there. The lawyers will love it.

[Headbanger]

Bikers should not have to bear the cost of crashes caused by careless motorists. But neither should they expect other road users to subsidise their pleasures

Sweet, I guess that means the rego on my 2 cars will be reduced, as well as a reduction in all the other hidden fees ACC use.

And of course, to follow the logic through, I won't have to pay for anybody sporting injuries, household accidents or work injuries.

Now we are going to stop subsidizing everyone else I'll be getting a good sized refund then.




Wait, I forgot, Its only Bikers getting arse fucked.