Nick Smith Auckland Nat meeting open to public

[retro asian]

Wish they had some beers after

On the way out I overheard a cop say "I bet they are all going to the pub now"...

[TOTO]

On the way out I overheard a cop say "I bet they are all going to the pub now"...

well, he was wrong.

[Ixion]

Mr Smith is VERY angry! I spoke to him after the meeting, and got him to admit that he did indeed receive the BRONZ email agreeing to discuss his safety levy thing. (He says we set too many conditions - see the 'Ulysses' thred). He was very angry indeed. He says we are "not respectful"

He admitted that ACC is now an insurance company (and tacitly agreed it was done with his knowledge). He got VERY angry when challenged whether he had lost control of his protfolio to John Judge - and made a great point of assuring us he had "complete confidence " in JJ (you know what it means when a politician assures you he has complete confidence in someone!)

He admitted that he did not care about the submission process.

He got angry and rattled a numbe rof times - uncharacteristic in such an experienced politician. He's rattled.

[scissorhands]

The Royal Akarana Yauht Club with that broken window with the handee towel keeping it open and the pampas growing against some glass, with the weird retro 70's light fittings...the rape victim supporters with the big hairy bikers??? WTF? the nickster would have been turning a redder shade of pale if he had had time to let it all sink in

[Reckless]

Wish they had some beers after

Couldn't believe how the Nickster lied blatantly to our faces, he must thinks were drongos....

Whats with his bright red face? Is he a pisshead?

Mate he's a drinker and a heavy one I reckon!!

Now to the bullshit! I've never seen such a bullshitter in action. Things like I'm a hero for turning out and facing 5000 bikers at Parliament!! YEH right I thought, as if you had a choice! If you hadn't fronted to the biggest protest ever, your own leader and the press would have torn you to bits! Hero my Arse!
Secondly that scripted question thing he did before the floor was open to questioning what a pile of bullshit! "I'm glad you asked me that" he said a few times YEH right!
I did hear him defiantly say ACC was an insurance scheme, he defiantly stated the govt where not committed to the stepped levy on engine size saying it was only a recommendation by ACC, said he didn't care about the submission thing and it was gold when Hanne (I think??) had him stuffed with his own figures as on the TV3 article.

I think, he will think, he did quite well not unlike the debates in parliament.
It pretty much depends on how the media report it. The TV3 thing was quite good defiantly not on his side this time! I do think Nick sincerely believes his own bullshit but we got quite a few glimpses of what National think should be done with ACC. A no fault system and Woodhouse principles are long gone in their eyes. I wonder if Joe public really wants there ACC scheme turned into an Insurance company as with that must come the right to sue.

What a piss poor meeting it would have been without us there would have been bugger all people there if thats a National stronghold ?? Go figure??

And very lastly I'm gonna disagree a little with the good turn out comments here, I think 40 or so bikes is a bit low. Earlier here Ixion commented he wanted 100 bikes and for a city with a million people we should have been able to deliver for him. The only thing we have is our unity we must show it everytime or we are beaten. Other than that a damn good effort by all! Thanks to Ixion, Mom and all the speakers that had a go on our behalf 10 outa 10!
Just my 2c!

[idleidolidyll]

On the way out I overheard a cop say "I bet they are all going to the pub now"...

I heard that too, I must have been right beside you.

The mindset is obvious

[Chisanga]

Whats with his bright red face? Is he a pisshead?

Ummm... he was sitting right in front of a red nautical light However, I noted that his hands were shaking throughout the entire meeting.... seemed to very nervous.... perhaps not expecting the meeting to be so dominated by us.

Although Nick's performance left a lot to be decided, the personal low-point of the meeting for me was the National-party woman in front of me saying under her breath (sarcastically) "Oh poor you... now shut up" when the lady was speaking about the effect of the ACC cuts to victims of sexual abuse. Some people just have no clue..

[RiderInBlack]

Well done Dudes and Dudettes. Wish I could have been there. Haven't seen anything on the Breakfast News about last nights meeting, mores the shame. So what the next move? Is there a possibly of working in with Rape Victim Group? Are their goals in relation to ACC compatible with ours?

[idleidolidyll]

Mr Smith is VERY angry! I spoke to him after the meeting, and got him to admit that he did indeed receive the BRONZ email agreeing to discuss his safety levy thing. (He says we set too many conditions - see the 'Ulysses' thred). He was very angry indeed. He says we are "not respectful"

He admitted that ACC is now an insurance company (and tacitly agreed it was done with his knowledge). He got VERY angry when challenged whether he had lost control of his protfolio to John Judge - and made a great point of assuring us he had "complete confidence " in JJ (you know what it means when a politician assures you he has complete confidence in someone!)

He admitted that he did not care about the submission process.

He got angry and rattled a numbe rof times - uncharacteristic in such an experienced politician. He's rattled.

Yes indeed, he is very rattled and he handled the night very badly.

In his answer to the very first question he said he preferred to "focus on the facts not the spin" but went on to produce so much spin it became obvious to all that he knew he was screwed.

Thanks to all those speakers on the night who prepared questions; some were excellent and in particular the guy who ambushed him as a cyclist AND motorcyclist calling for levies on cycling.

I came straight from work just to support the crowd but decided to have a dig as well. My point wasn't well made last night but my intent was only to rattle the bastard anyway.
I was quite happy to have him dismiss my words as 'conspiracy theory' but then to hear the issue of road conditions for bikers raised again and again.

I dunno about you but I was also amused when one of the National Party Members in the front row said they WERE sweeping the roads around Auckland. I didn't get the chance to answer her but it would have gone like this:

"Yes perhaps maam, but we don't care that Remmers roads are being swept to prevent stone chips on your Merc; we are concerned with the health and safety of motorcyclists on public roads where the road works are left unsignposted and in atrocius and crimally negligent condition"."

[ital916]

Yes indeed, he is very rattled and he handled the night very badly.

In his answer to the very first question he said he preferred to "focus on the facts not the spin" but went on to produce so much spin it became obvious to all that he knew he was screwed.

Thanks to all those speakers on the night who prepared questions; some were excellent and in particular the guy who ambushed him as a cyclist AND motorcyclist calling for levies on cycling.

I came straight from work just to support the crowd but decided to have a dig as well. My point wasn't well made last night but my intent was only to rattle the bastard anyway.
I was quite happy to have him dismiss my words as 'conspiracy theory' but then to hear the issue of road conditions for bikers raised again and again.

I dunno about you but I was also amused when one of the National Party Members in the front row said they WERE sweeping the roads around Auckland. I didn't get the chance to answer her but it would have gone like this:

"Yes perhaps maam, but we don't care that Remmers roads are being swept to prevent stone chips on your Merc; we are concerned with the health and safety of motorcyclists on public roads where the road works are left unsignposted and in atrocius and crimally negligent condition"."

According to mr smith the increased severity of injuries with a larger capacity motorcycle is from the weight of the bike when it falls on you. Guess youre fucked if you own a heavy bike, the weight of the 18 wheeler parked on your head though doesnt add anything to the severity of the injuries from the crash.

I wonder if he has ever even ridden a motorcycle.

[short-circuit]

It is a mistake to engage with him over any kind of segmentation - whether it be on the basis of displacement (cc) within the motorcycle group or whether it is between road users (bike, car, truck, cycle etc).

There should be no differentiation, and risk / blame should not come into it.

Do not stray from Woodhouse Principles!

As soon as we engage in arguments about risk, blame, fault or comparative levy increases, we have accepted the Government's premise that ACC is an insurance scheme.

[Voltaire]

I was at last nights meeting and I listened to the minister rattle off his lines.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he say:

There are 3 funds within ACC...

1.Your employer pays levies for accidents at work, and there is a sliding scale depending on whether you are a forrestry worker or office worker based on risk. ( I am self employed and have this chart).

2.You as an employee pay workers levies to cover non work accidents.
( like skiing, sports, cycling, DIY...etc)

3.Motorists pay into the road fund.( the road fund gets seperated into who 'cost' the most to rehabilitate.
************************************************** ********

Rant bit

How come the road fund is user pays and the workers fund is not.
To claim that car drivers are cross subsidising motorcyclists yet let workers pay for every other non work , non road accident is discrimination against motorcyclists clear and simple.
In todays Herald in the Business Section John Judge is quoted as saying

" It is not an expensive scheme. The underlying idea of having a no fault scheme.....is excellent"

Its not a no fault scheme...you are singleing out a one group of legitimate road users and penalizing them.
If it was a true no fault scheme all road users would pay the same or better still do away with the road fund and just have a non work related fund.


ITS DISCRIMINATION!!!!!!

[Dodgyiti]

Thanks to the bikers there who showed some respect to the gutsy girl, who was quite clearly not a public speaker, and allowed her to have a say on the sexual abuse changes within ACC.
A few of the (rich) general public around where I was sitting were openly ridiculing her and telling her to shut up. One woman sitting behind her actually said 'shut up'. Unbelievable.

She showed more guts than any of them (and I) could have mustered given circumstances.

That actually pissed me off more than anything else at the meeting.

[Voltaire]

Thanks to the bikers there who showed some respect to the gutsy girl, who was quite clearly not a public speaker, and allowed her to have a say on the sexual abuse changes within ACC.
A few of the (rich) general public around where I was sitting were openly ridiculing her and telling her to shut up.
She showed more guts than any of them (and I) could have mustered given circumstances.

That actually pissed me off more than anything else at the meeting.

The old trout sitting in front of us looked like she had sucked a lemon....she gave one of the banner holding girls a ' bit of a talking to" on the way out.

I'm glad I have an interest in motorcycles as politics is a pretty sad way to spend your life....surrounded by shallow self serving self rightious suck ups wanting to control others.

[Kiwi Graham:Me]

It is a mistake to engage with him over any kind of segmentation - whether it be on the basis of displacement (cc) within the motorcycle group or whether it is between road users (bike, car, truck, cycle etc).

There should be no differentiation, and risk / blame should not come into it.

Do not stray from Woodhouse Principles!

As soon as we engage in arguments about risk, blame, fault or comparative levy increases, we have accepted the Government's premise that ACC is an insurance scheme.

Mate,

He does not recognise the Woodhouse principals! He never even responded to a question on the principals!!
He considers ACC an insurance company now! But isnt offering 'no claims' dicounts!!!
He does not belive car drivers are a risk! He see's it as our problem,but isnt funding training!!!
He cant answer a straight question if his life depended on it. Because he has been well trained in BULLSHIT!!!

He does belive heavy bikes are a risk? Austrailians have told him so???
He does belive his own data? Dr Judge has told him so???
He does belive we should pay a massive increase? Again Dr Judge told him so??

The man is unable to think for himself and see whats right under his nose. he thinks so what if I piss off tens of thousands of bikers the Nats are still doing ok in the polls so fuck em.
What he doesnt realise is we are not going to go away, this effects more people (voters) than just those that ride these 'heavy killing machines' but everybody else in the bikers family and extended family. Like most poloticians he lives in a world devoid of reality, surrounded by advisers feeding him information that suits their brief.

To be honest when this all blows up in his face he will just walk away, shrug his shoulders and become a chairman of some board somewhere and suck more of our air out of the atmosphere without a second thought to the damage and grief he has left in his wake.